Kirkgate Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with advice and support. 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.

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

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.

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.

The practice supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The practice's website and environment offered patients access to information on a range of health conditions and support services, including information on national screening programmes. The practice had 68 carers identified on their clinical system, representing approximately 1.9% of the practice population. Carers were coded on the system and supported by a designated carers champion. Information and support for carers was available within the reception area.

The practice maintained a register of patients with a learning disability and had identified 22 patients. Annual health checks had been completed for 19 patients during 2025/26, with information provided to demonstrate follow-up arrangements for those outstanding. Patients with a learning disability were offered longer appointments where required to support their individual needs.

Staff focused on identifying risks to people's health and supporting national programmes aimed at improving population health. The practice used a proactive patient recall system to support the uptake of NHS health checks and targeted health reviews. The practice also promoted bowel and breast cancer screening and contacted eligible patients who had not responded to screening invitations to encourage participation. Information displayed in the reception area promoted awareness of different cancers and signposted patients to available screening programmes and support services.

The practice hosted mental health professionals on site, providing appointments for both the practice population and patients registered with other local practices. This supported timely access to mental health services and promoted joined-up care for people experiencing mental health concerns.

The practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The practice had processes in place to identify, recall and review patients requiring screening, immunisations and long-term condition monitoring. Staff described how they used a digital patient recall and population health management system to identify eligible patients and support timely follow-up. The practice met the minimum 90% standard for 4 of the 5 childhood immunisation indicators. The remaining indicator, relating to primary immunisations for children aged one year, was 88.6%, and leaders described actions being taken to improve uptake.

Cervical screening uptake was 79.4% for patients aged 25 to 49 years and 75.6% for patients aged 50 to 64 years. Staff promoted screening through recall systems, opportunistic discussions and targeted patient engagement. The practice also encouraged participation in national bowel and breast screening programmes, including contacting patients who had not responded to screening invitations. We saw a dedicated health promotion display within the reception area which provided patients with information about different cancers, national screening programmes and health checks. We saw evidence that the practice routinely reviewed performance data and implemented actions to support improved health outcomes for its population.

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.