Cumberland House Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We assessed all the quality statements in this key question. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. The rating remains good following this assessment.

The service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness and respect. People’s individual needs and preferences were understood and reflected in their care, treatment and support. Staff we spoke with or received feedback from demonstrated a caring and patient centred approach to their work. The practice received positive feedback for patient satisfaction in the National GP patient survey for questions relating to this key question. CQC received positive feedback from people about how a caring service was delivered by the clinical and non-clinical team. The provider had arrangements in place to promote staff welfare. Overall, staff felt well supported in their roles.

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.

Feedback from people who used the service was positive for being treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We received feedback from 34 people as part of this assessment. The majority (33) were very positive about the service provided and described the staff as supportive, understanding and kind. The experience of people who used the service as indicated in the National GP Patient survey showed 83% of patients (compared to 85% nationally) felt that during their last appointment the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern and 86% of patients (compared to 87% nationally) felt healthcare professionals were good at listening. Results from the NHS Friends and Family Test showed from June 2024 – April 2025 there had been 3,869 responses with 95% reporting that the service was very good or good. The provider requested feedback directly from patients and these results were in line with the feedback to CQC and Friends and Family Test results and showed out of 127 responses, 92% of patients said their overall experience was good or very good. NHS website reviews (these reviews were unvalidated by CQC) described the care provided as kind and caring. Staff displayed understanding and a non-judgemental attitude towards people. Staff told us they gave people appropriate and timely information to understand their care, treatment, or condition. There were arrangements to ensure confidentiality and privacy at the service, for example, if people wanted to speak to reception staff in confidence, away from the reception desk.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. Feedback from patients through NHS website reviews (these reviews were unvalidated by CQC) indicated that the service considered their communication needs and preferences and that they were made to feel included. People's individual needs and equality characteristics were understood, and services were provided to meet these. People's communication needs were identified and met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. Staff had been provided with training in equal opportunities and staff we spoke with told us how they ensured the individual communication needs of people were known and accommodated. For example, a translation service was used to support people if required, and information was available in different formats. Services had been set up by the practice or together with the Primary Care Network to meet peoples individual needs. For example, holistic reviews of frail, housebound people and people who had frequent accident and emergency admissions to establish the support they required, creating an individualised approach to the care received. Also, a perinatal clinic and a women’s health clinic had been set-up.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The result of the National GP patient survey showed that 91% of patients (compared to 91% nationally) felt that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. Patient feedback shared directly with CQC was also positive about their involvement in decisions about care and treatment. Feedback through the NHS website (these reviews were unvalidated by CQC) indicated people felt listened to and that their health concerns were taken seriously. People were supported to digitally access services. The provider worked with the social prescribing team to support people’s independence through various programmes and in signposting to other services such as food banks, housing, finances and benefit agencies.
 

The annual National GP Patient Survey indicated people felt their needs were met, felt listened to and were treated with care and concern. Staff and leaders told us how they responded to people’s immediate needs. Training and guidance were in place to ensure that people’s needs were prioritised and to identify people who required urgent attention or referral. A GP triaged requests for appointments which ensured people with immediate needs were identified. The duty GP managed all appointment requests and could direct people to a range of alternatives to meet their immediate needs. Members of the team had been provided with training in basic life support including the signs and symptoms of sepsis and warning signs and protocols were displayed in treatment rooms. People’s records reflected how their needs were to be met and indicated people who may need an immediate response from the service, such as people who were receiving care at the end of their lives. Urgent referrals were followed up to ensure that people had received an appointment. Care-coordinators provided a direct link to the practice for people who may need additional support, for example due to illness or vulnerability.

The provider promoted the wellbeing of their staff to enable staff to deliver person-centred care. This included providing the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Reasonable adjustments were made to support staff and requests for flexible working were considered. Following COVID-19 psychological support sessions were offered to staff. Well-being activities and social events were provided to support staff and promote team working. Staff development was promoted and staff told us how they had been supported to develop their skills and experience. There were processes for staff to give feedback on how the service operated and we were given examples of changes made as a result of listening to staff. Staff surveys were carried out with the last survey being October 2024. This survey identified that staff would like to see improvements to the management of tasks, guidance, the appointment system and the work environment. The provider had introduced changes to address the issues raised and had plans to implement further changes. We received feedback from14 staff. Overall, staff told us they were positive about working at the practice. They felt valued and supported by colleagues and leaders. They felt able to contribute to decision making about how the service operated and that their opinions would be listened to. A minority of staff told us improvements could be made to communication from the management team and to the premises and equipment.