Lepton & Kirkheaton 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 the service met people’s needs, and 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 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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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

Both urgent (same day) and pre-bookable appointments were available. The service offered extended access appointments which included evening and weekend appointments. Home visits were also offered to patients where appropriate.

Staff received training to enable them to efficiently direct people to the most appropriate clinician or service.

The service regularly reviewed data on access and waiting times through, for example, patient survey data, complaints, and telephone data. This information was summarised to identify trends, understand patient concerns, and assess appointment demand and capacity, helping to inform ongoing discussions and planning around patient access and service delivery.

The service recognised that some patients, particularly older people and those with limited digital confidence, benefited from being able to contact the service directly by telephone and speak with a member of staff. By maintaining this route of access rather than relying solely on online systems or total triage, the service aimed to reduce barriers to care for these patients.

The service performed better than the national average in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs. For example, 79% of respondents to the survey were positive about their overall experience of contacting the service, compared to local and national averages of 70%.

All rooms were located on ground level, and the service was accessible to patients with disabilities. Dedicated parking for people with disabilities was available at the main site. Accessible toilet facilities were available at both sites, however emergency pull-cords had not been fitted in these toilets. The service had taken steps to get these installed as soon as possible.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. They understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made reasonable adjustments where possible.

The service took steps to promote equity by identifying and supporting patients who may be at increased risk of poorer experience, for example those with a learning disability or severe mental illness. The service held registers of these patient groups, and patient records were also flagged to easily highlight any additional needs. Staff had completed relevant training in learning disability and autism.

The service recognised that it served a predominantly older population and therefore prioritised telephone contact over written communication where possible. Telephone invitations, reminders and follow-up calls were used to support engagement with reviews and health checks, helping to reduce barriers to access and promote a more equitable patient experience.

The service aimed to maximise each patient contact by completing key physical health checks, such as blood pressure, smoking status, and medication reviews where appropriate. This ensured that patients who attended less frequently had additional opportunities to receive appropriate monitoring.

The service was recognised as a ‘Safe Surgery’, demonstrating its commitment to providing a welcoming and inclusive environment for all patients. As part of this commitment the service worked to remove barriers to healthcare access and ensure that a lack of identification, proof of address, or immigration status, would not prevent patients from registering there.

The service had achieved Veteran Friendly accreditation, recognising its commitment to supporting the needs of military veterans. This ensured veterans were appropriately identified and able to access tailored support and services.

The service achieved the LGBTQ+ Pride in Practice silver award, recognising its commitment to creating a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment for LGBTQ+ patients and staff, and demonstrating that the service had gone beyond basic expectations for LGBTQ+ inclusion. The service told us that progress was being made towards achieving the gold award.

The service had systems in place to capture and review feedback from people who used the service. For example, the service had an active patient participation group (PPG) which met regularly. These meetings were also attended by a GP and the practice manager.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.