Ampleforth Surgery Also known as Ampleforth & Hovingham Surgeries

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.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to Good governance.

This service scored 82 (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 was exceptional at making 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.

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 patients 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 knew its patients extremely well and could quickly identify and describe their needs without relying solely on clinical records. Friends and Family data and feedback received into CQC by patients supported this, with extremely positive comments from patients about person-centred 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.

The practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population and had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider. For example, one of the GP partners was chair of the integrated neighbourhood Team and met monthly with community services.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

We were informed that a member of staff had been allocated to review the way the practice managed the Accessible Information Standard. A wide range of information was available to patients on the practice website. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people who used the service to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. For example, people could provide feedback and complain online, by email, letter or verbally. People were also encouraged to give feedback online, through the NHS Friends and Family Test. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Complaints were managed in line with the practice’s complaints policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made because of patient feedback.

The practice had a Patient Participation Group. Feedback was extremely positive about the way the practice engaged with them and how they promoted and responded to feedback.

The service was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had equal access to care, treatment and support because the provider allocated resources and opportunities as needed to tackle inequalities and achieve equity of access. Home visits and a medicine delivery service were available to patients assessed as needing this service. The provider ensured equitable access to healthcare by delivering additional GP consultations at Ampleforth College during school lunch breaks under its standard GMS contract, reducing barriers such as rural location, transport limitations, and academic commitments. These clinics helped address the higher incidence of mental health concerns and sports-related injuries among pupils, ensuring timely and responsive care. Pupils could also access nurse-led services at the main surgery for vaccinations and long-term condition reviews.

A range of services were offered at the practice and measures put in place to bridge the gap due to restrictions in services due to the rurality of the practice.

People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who responded positively to the overall experience of contacting their GP practice was 95%, which was above the national result of 70%. The percentage of respondents who responded positively to how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone was 97% which was above the national result of 53%.

Patient feedback from a variety of sources was exceptionally positive about access to timely appointments and services. Our review of appointment availability confirmed this. Systems were in place to review appointment availability and to adjust when needed.

The physical environment was accessible to patients.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was extremely positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. For example, patients reported being helped to use the NHS app and the PPG and the practice informed us of plans to provide drop-in sessions to support patients with using the NHS app and to increase uptake of usage.

National GP Patient Survey data was extremely positive, and above national averages, about confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to.

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.