• Doctor
  • GP practice

The Grove Medical Centre

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

103-105 Grove Road, Walthamstow, London, E17 9BU 0844 445 2221

Provided and run by:
The Grove Medical Centre

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 13 January 2026 to 13 March 2026. The Grove Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 6,421 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The service is part of Walthamstow West primary care network (PCN) in Waltham Forest. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the fourth decile (4 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report. This is the first assessment for this provider under our new ways of reporting.

The service has been rated requires improvement overall, as well as in the key questions safe and well-led. This rating reflects concerns that care and treatment were not consistently delivered in line with evidence-based guidelines, and systems were not effective in identifying, mitigating and monitoring risk related to patients and staff including health and safety.The provider has been issued with an action plan and is required to inform us of the steps taken to address these areas for improvement.

SAFE:There had been efforts to promote a proactive and positive safety culture, supported by openness and honesty. Incidents had been investigated and reported. Lessons learned were used to inform practice. However, we identified areas where systems and processes had not always been reliable or appropriate to keep people safe.Safety risks to people using the service had not always been identified and/or mitigated. This included ensuring that the premises were safe for use. Managers had not always made sure staff had received training or annual appraisals to support high-quality care. Medicines were generally well managed, and people were involved in decisions about changes. However, staff did not always complete required blood tests and physical health checks before reviews or issuing prescriptions.The provider acknowledged these findings and stated that key processes have been reviewed and reinforced since the assessment.

EFFECTIVE: Staff had not always followed prescribing protocols and guidance to ensure assessments were up-to-date and people’s care needs were routinely reviewed. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving between services. Staff mostly made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

CARING: People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service leaders had not always recognised and supported staff wellbeing.

RESPONSIVE: Peoples feedback demonstrated the practice was accessible and they were supported to make informed decisions about their care. The service had developed accurate and up-to-date information to ensure patient access and that their specific needs were met. People were given support to plans for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

WELL-LED: Leadership was visible, knowledgeable, and supportive. Staff felt safe to give feedback. Roles and responsibilities were well understood. Managers engaged with the local community to improve care and welcomed innovation. Leaders used reliable data on risk, performance, and outcomes. However, processes, and systems to support good governance were in place but not fully embedded into practice. The leaders had not ensured that staff always followed prescribing policies and evidence-based guidelines. Systems were not effective in identifying, mitigating and monitoring risk related to patients and staff including health and safety. Managers had not met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. Since this assessment, the provider informed us of improvements they were making in response to our findings. We will review these at our next assessment.

2 August 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Grove Medical Centre on 25 August 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. Specifically they were rated as requires improvement for safe, caring and well-led, and good for effective and responsive. The full comprehensive report on the August 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Grove Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 2 August 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 25 August 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as good and the provision of safe, caring and well-led services are now also rated good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The recruitment process for all staff had been reviewed and all necessary employment checks were now being carried out.
  • Robust checks were now in place in accordance with requirements noted in the Legionella risk assessment.
  • Information was available to advise patients on how to make a complaint.
  • Complaints were now being investigated and learning outcomes shared with all relevant staff.
  • Fire training had now been competed by staff at a level appropriate to their role.
  • A comprehensive and up to date business continuity plan was now in place.
  • Carers were now being actively identified and supported where necessary.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

25 August 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Grove Medical Centre on 25 August 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

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

  • Risks to patients were not effectively managed for example a legionella risk assessment was completed but the associated actions as a result had not been carried out.

  • Reception staff who acted as a chaperone did not have a disclosure and barring check (DBS) and there was no risk assessment carried out to mitigate risks associated with this, we did however see that these checks had recently been applied for.

  • There was an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • One reception staff member and one agency nurse did not have a reference on file.

  • The practice did not have a defibrillator on the premises at the start of our visit; however, we saw that one was purchased before the end of the inspection.

  • Staff had not received fire training.

  • The practice had low GP Survey Patient Survey scores and were not aware of the survey so plans were not put in place to improve the satisfaction scores.

  • There was no information displayed around the practice to inform patients of how to make complaints and learning from complaints was not systematically shared with staff members.

  • The practice had a business continuity plan, but this was not comprehensive or complete and did not include staff contact details.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available on the 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include all necessary employment checks for all staff.

  • Mitigate risk associated with not carrying out the actions highlighted in the legionella risk assessment.

  • Put plans in place to improve GP Patient Survey scores.

  • Display information advising patients on how they can make a complaint and ensure the learning and outcomes from complaints are shared with all relevant staff members.

  • Ensure all staff members complete fire training appropriate to their role.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Maintain a comprehensive and up to date business continuity plan, with copies available off site.

  • Review systems for identifying carers to ensure appropriate support is provided to them.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice