The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Dr Mark Hancocks Also known as Hallgate Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Hallgate Surgery, 123 Hallgate, Cottingham, Humberside, HU16 4DA (01482) 845832

Provided and run by:
Dr Mark Hancocks

All Inspections

18 & 19 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Mark Hancocks (also known as Hallgate Surgery) on 18 & 19 January 2016. The practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows;

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

4 February 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

When the provider first registered with the Commission they told us they were not compliant with the regulation regarding safety and suitability of premises. We were told that some building work and refurbishment was due to take place and would be completed by March 2013. At our inspection in June 2013 we found that work to the building had been delayed due to the building being 'listed', and funding being made available for the refurbishment to go ahead. We also had concerns that in the event of a fire people could be put at risk of harm as procedures for the prevention and control of fire were not adequate.

At this inspection we visited the surgery and spoke with a GP and the two practice managers about the improvements that had been made. We inspected the premises to check the building work was completed and that procedures for the prevention and control of fire were now adequate. We also checked the overall safety, suitability and maintenance of the building and looked at other relevant documentation.

We saw the provider had taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained.

24 June 2013

During a routine inspection

At the announced inspection we spoke with patients, the registered provider the practice manager, and four other members of staff.

We carried out this inspection because the provider had told us when they were first registered with the Commission they were not compliant in some outcome areas.

We also talked to some patients and asked about their experiences when visiting the practice. They told us they were satisfied with the care, support and advice they had received. One person said "Very thorough in resolving problems". Another "He is very understanding and helpful". We saw that patients were given information and support with regards to treatment options and that staff maintained patients' privacy and confidentiality.

Overall the safety of people using the service was protected, however steps need to be taken to ensure that fire training for all staff takes place and that the arrangements for testing the fire alarm and updating the fire risk assessment are place and checked regularly. We have asked the provider to take action to ensure they provide a safe environment for patients to use.

There was a policy and procedure in place regarding the control of infection and we saw that the communal waiting room and consultation rooms were clean and tidy.

We saw that steps had been taken to encourage patient feedback by inviting people to join a patient participation group, and by placing comments and a suggestion box in the waiting areas of the practice.