• Doctor
  • GP practice

The Leven and Beeford Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

29 High Stile, Leven, Beverley, Humberside, HU17 5NL (01964) 542155

Provided and run by:
The Leven and Beeford Medical Practice

Assessment report published 26 August 2026

On this page

Effective

Good

19 August 2026

We looked for evidence that staff monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Assessing needs

Score: 3

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Delivering evidence-based care and treatment

Score: 3

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

How staff, teams and services work together

Score: 3

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Supporting people to live healthier lives

Score: 3

The practice supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The practice supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The practice was able to signpost patients to a social prescriber who were able to provide services to help people access services within the community such as, financial support, caring arrangements and citizens advice. We saw success stories from patients who had accessed social prescribing services. This included helping patients find suitable housing in a new area and then transition to a new GP practice. We also saw how social prescribers were able to liaise with community services to supply specialist equipment to a patient’s house.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.

Monitoring and improving outcomes

Score: 3

The practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves. There was a programme of regular clinical audit that focused on improving patient outcomes. For example, the practice conducted regular searches on their clinical system to improve the monitoring patients received and to ensure that patients were compliant with their medicine. The practice had recently completed a medicine review audit looking at how many patients were overdue a medicine review by at least a month. After repeating this process over approximately 3 months, they had reduced the number of patients overdue a medicine review by 185. This reduced the risk of patients receiving medicines without appropriate review and helped ensure treatment remained safe and effective.

The practice met national targets for the uptake of childhood immunisations. The service performed better than the England average in relation to several cancer screening programmes, including screening for breast and bowel cancer. For example, the practice rate for breast screening was 83.2% compared to the England average of 70%. Similarly, they had an 80.2% uptake for bowel screening compared with the national average of 72%. For cervical cancer screening the target is 80%. The latest data available (2024) showed the 25- to 49-year-old age group they had achieved 78.5% and in the 50- to 64-year-old group they had achieved 77.9%. Through feedback received directly from patients to CQC a significant number of patients told us they had received an early potential cancer diagnosis and had been referred to secondary care rapidly by the practice as a result.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.