The Brimington Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. All of the patients had a named GP they could go to.

Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. The service had identified 78 people over 14 years old with a learning disability. Of these, 53 had received an annual and health action plan review. The remaining 18 reviews were planned to take place in February and March 2026. Longer appointments were offered at quieter times to support this group of people.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community, for example, support for the LGBTQ+ community and veterans. The service was a registered veteran friendly practice accredited by the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and NHS England to provide better healthcare to those who had served in the armed forces. It was also a registered safe place GP surgery that was committed to welcoming and providing healthcare to everyone in the community, regardless of their immigration status or nationality.

We received positive feedback from care homes where the service provided care and treatment. They told us the practice and the aging well team worked well together to provide continuity of care for people living in the homes.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, easy read material for people with a learning disability and large print letters for people with a visual impairment.

Information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes was available in the reception area. Health promotion information leaflets were readily available in the reception areas. For example, mental health support and antibiotic usage.

The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. People were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

The service routinely asked people to complete Friends and Family Test feedback forms and reviewed the feedback for any trends or themes with the Patient Participation Group (PPG). The PPG also carried out surveys on behalf of the service. Changes made as a result of feedback included rearranging the layout of the chairs in the reception area to enable people to clearly see the call screen and the development of a PPG leaflet.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Data from the National GP Patient Survey showed that 72% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of contacting the GP practice. This was comparable with the national average of 70%. It showed that 66% of respondents were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone. This was comparable with the national average of 53%.

The Patient Participation Group (PPG) had carried out a survey to identify what people liked about the practice and what they thought the practice could improve upon. There was a trend in requests to improve access to appointments. In response to this, the provider had acted on their plan to improve online access to appointments, to employ more GPs and invest in a new electronic triage system. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor with level access to the practice entrance. Automatic doors had been fitted to the entrance. There was a lift for people to use to the 1st floor.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.