The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Grosvenor Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Grosvenor Street, Crewe, Cheshire, CW1 3HB (01270) 256348

Provided and run by:
Grosvenor Medical Centre

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Grosvenor Medical Centre on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Grosvenor Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

25/11/2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Grosvenor Medical Centre on 9 December 2019. We carried out an inspection of this service as a result of an annual regulatory review which indicated that there could be a change to the overall rating for this service. Following our review of the information available to us, including information provided by the practice, we focused our inspection on the following key questions:

  • Effective
  • Responsive
  • Well Led

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 the population groups.

We rated the practice as Good for providing effective, responsive and well-led services because:

  • Patients’ needs were assessed, and care and treatment were delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance.
  • Staff worked together and with other organisations to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • The practice understood and met the needs of the population groups.
  • There was good communication between staff and staff told us they felt well supported.
  • The practice sought the views of patients and staff and acted on them.
  • There was a focus on continuous improvement.

We identified an area of outstanding practice:

The practice was innovative and continuously looked to improve the services offered to patients through independent and collaborative initiatives. For example, the nurses had developed a wound care clinic in response to patients’ needs. This enabled the practice to assess the issues underlying the wounds and to offer a full holistic assessment. An advanced nurse practitioner co-ordinated a supervision group for advanced nurse practitioners to meet the needs of this often-isolated role. The practice maintained a register of potentially vulnerable and isolated patients. The practice had developed searches to identify these patients. A template was then developed and used during consultations or a specific telephone call was made to identify areas the patient may need help with and a referral made based on the needs identified.

The areas where the provider should make improvements:

  • Record how concerns are investigated and any learning that has arisen from the investigation.
  • Continue to work towards improving uptake of cancer screening.
  • Ensure that patients’ experiences of accessing services are monitored to make sure that improvements made have been effective.

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

3rd March 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Grosvenor Medical Centre on 3 March 2016. Overall 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. The practice had a system in place to report significant events. Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed for example, arrangements to safeguard vulnerable patients, keep medicines safe and manage infection control.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment. Staff retention at the practice was good offering stability and continuity of care to patients.
  • Patients were positive about the practice and the staff team. They said they were treated with dignity and respect and felt involved in decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and displayed prominently in the patient waiting area.
  • Patients were mostly positive about accessing appointments with a named GP and said that there was continuity of care. However around half the patients we spoke with or filled out comment cards said they found difficulties in getting through on the telephone or accessing a pre bookable appointment.
  • 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 an experienced management team.

However, there are areas where the provider should make improvements:

  • Review the management and availability of patient appointments.
  • Ensure updated training is provided for all staff in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.


Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

At a previous inspection we examined a sample of staff records and noted that Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were not in place for the nursing staff employed by the practice. The provider had made a risk assessment and decided that administrative staff who did not have access to treatment areas did not require DBS checks. However this risk assessment had not been recorded for each person in writing so it was not possible to check what criteria had been applied.

20 August 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited the Grosvenor Medical Centre we inspected the surgeries both on Grosvenor Street and at the branch surgery at Gresty Brook.

We spoke with five patients who had attended for appointments that day. They all told us that they were happy with the treatment they received at the practice. They said '(The doctors) are very good' and 'They treat you with respect' and that the practice was 'very good' and 'fantastic'. Patients also told us that 'the staff at reception are very helpful'. One patient said 'I once arrived early and observed the interaction between staff and patients ' I'd call it 'traditional north of England' ' very friendly and relaxed. I saw them going out of their way to help people'. Patients said that they felt that they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment 'They explain ' they tell me everything ' tell me what things are for and what they do ' complete understanding'.

We talked to three of the doctors who practised at the surgeries as well as the practice manager and surgery staff. We also talked to district nursing staff. We looked at the arrangements for safeguarding patients from abuse and found that the practice had put arrangements in place to ensure that they met the requirements for this. However when we looked at the procedures for recruiting staff we were not satisfied that these were effective or that they conformed to the relevant requirements.