During an assessment under our new approach
Date of Assessment: 8 July 2025 to 9 July 2025. Garforth Medical Practice is a GP practice which delivers services to around 14,500 patients under a contract held with the NHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board. The main practice site is situated on Church Lane, Garforth, LS25 1HB, which is located on the eastern outskirts of Leeds. There is a separate building a short distance from the main practice where most of the management and administration team are located. In addition, there is a branch site, Elmwood Surgery, which is located at Elmwood Lane, Barwick-in-Elmet LS15 4JX and which has a dispensary. The National General Practice Profiles states that the practice serves a population which is predominantly White (96%, with 4% other). Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 9th decile (9 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted upon service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report. The practice is accredited as a training practice, and supports qualified doctors training to become GPs, and undergraduate medical students. In addition, the practice also supports the training and mentoring of nursing students. Services are delivered by 5 GP partners, 5 salaried GPs, 2 advanced nurse practitioners, 6 nurses, 3 health care assistants, 1 phlebotomist, and 6 dispensing staff, as well as clinical staff undergoing training. The clinical team is supported by a management team including a practice manager, and administration, and secretarial teams.
The service had a positive learning culture and both staff and patients could raise concerns about care. People were protected and kept safe, and we saw that the provider understood and managed risks well, and worked closely with others to achieve this. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience to deliver services to patients. We saw that management processes were in place to ensure staff received training and regular appraisals to assess and maintain high-quality care. Overall, the provider managed medicines safely, although we identified some areas which required improvement.
Patients reported being involved in consultations and assessments relating to their health needs. Those who needed additional support regarding communication had this taken into account to enable effective consultations. Overall, we found that care delivered was based on the latest evidence and good practice, with only minor areas which needed improvement. The provider closely monitored patient outcomes, and had put in place measures to improve performance when this was required.
Patients were treated with kindness and compassion, and had their privacy and dignity respected. Staff treated patients as individuals, and supported their preferences whenever possible, including continuity of care. Feedback we received from patients, and from patient surveys indicated that patients felt that the service was caring.
Patients were involved in decisions about their care. The staff provided information in ways patients were able to understand. We saw that the provider was working to develop improved ways of working to meet increased patient demand, and had services in place to meet the specific needs of patients such as the frail elderly.
We saw evidence that the leadership, management and governance within the practice assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted a supportive culture.