The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Collingham Church View Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

School Lane, Collingham, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS22 5BQ 0844 477 8609

Provided and run by:
Collingham Church View Surgery

All Inspections

15 January 2024

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a targeted assessment of Collingham Church View Surgery in relation to the responsive key question. This assessment was carried out on 15 January 2024 without a site visit. Overall, the practice is rated as Good. We rated the key question of responsive as Good.

Safe – Good (carried forward from previous inspection in May 2019)

Effective – Good (carried forward from previous inspection in May 2019)

Caring – Good (carried forward from previous inspection in May 2019)

Responsive – Good

Well-led – Good (carried forward from previous inspection in May 2019)

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for the Collingham Church View Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet demand for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers.

We recognise the work that GP practices have been engaged in to continue to provide safe, quality care to the people they serve. We know colleagues are doing this while demand for general practice remains exceptionally high, with more appointments being provided than ever. In this challenging context, access to general practice remains a concern for people. Our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. These assessments of the responsive key question include looking at what practices are doing innovatively to improve patient access to primary care and sharing this information to drive improvement.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out remotely.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • According to the National GP survey the practice had performed above national ‘access’ averages.
  • Since the National GP Survey the practice had made improvements to their appointments system, this had resulted in an increase in appointments offered.
  • The practice used performance data to target and improve access.
  • The practice understood the needs of its local population and had carried out an in-depth analysis of their patient population and developed services accordingly.
  • The practice had worked collaboratively within its primary care network and GP federation to ensure additional types of appointments and extended hours were available.
  • The practice dealt with complaints in a timely manner and learned from them.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to develop solutions to provide better access to their patients.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Healthcare

22 Feb to 22 Feb 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Collingham Church View Surgery on 22 February 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups. The practice was previously inspected in July 2015 and were given an overall rating of good.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • The practice was aware of the challenges of working at a larger scale within the locality and had taken steps to improve systems and processes to support this work.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Improve the identification of carers to enable this group of patients to access the care and support they need.
  • Continue to review and improve exception reporting rates for people experiencing poor mental health.
  • Review and improve systems in place for transportation of vaccines to ensure adherence to appropriate Department of Health standards.
  • Review and improve processes for signing prescriptions prior to medication being dispensed.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

23 July 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Collingham Church View Surgery on 23 July 2015. The practice achieved an overall rating as good.

Specifically, we rated the practice as good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services and care for all of the population groups of people it serves.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Feedback from all patients we spoke with and comments we received were overwhelmingly positive about the practice and the care they received. Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in care and decisions about their treatment. Information was provided to help them understand the care that was available.
  • The practice worked closely with other organisations and local care providers in planning how services were provided to ensure they met the needs of patients.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. The practice used the Year of Care approach to provide personalised care planning for patients who had a long term condition.
  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed. Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • The practice had a clear vision and direction, with quality service delivery, patient care and safety as its priority.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

We found two areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had purchased a slit lamp (specialised equipment used to microscopically examine the eye for any abnormalities). This enabled one of the GPs, who was trained in ophthalmology (specialism in eye problems), to undertake eye screening on appropriate patients. This had reduced the need for referral of these patients to hospital.
  • The practice had purchased a dermatoscope (specialised equipment used to examine skin lesions more closely). This had been used in early detection of malignant and benign skin lesions It had also reduced unnecessary hospital referrals and skin surgery.

However, there were two areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • The practice should ensure all clinical and non-clinical staff are involved in practice meetings and clinical meetings, as relevant, to support learning, integration and a cohesive approach to service delivery and patient care.
  • Review the process for the dispensary accepting medicines ordered from suppliers to ensure the medicines they received were in date and thereby effective.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice