- GP practice
Spring Gardens Group Medical Practice
Assessment report published 20 April 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 03 March 2026 to 10 March 2026. Spring Gardens Group Medical Practice is a large GP practice based in Worcester City Centre. It delivers service to over 20,000 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The practice covers some of the more deprived areas in Worcester including a hostel and day service for homeless people and a large hotel for asylum seekers. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation within the practice population group is in the 5th decile (5 out 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.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Leaders investigated incidents thoroughly and learning was shared with staff. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Leaders made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.
People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people when taking decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.
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. Staff were extremely effective in ensuring people from marginalised areas of their community such as the homeless received care in a positive and timely way. The service supported staff wellbeing.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. Leaders and staff worked with local organisations to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Leaders and staff worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to the latest ideas. There was an exceptional culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try innovative ideas and undertake research projects which benefited people using the practice and the wider local community.
People's experience of this service
CQC received over 65 feedback comments from people. The majority of these (58) were positive about the practice. People said they received a good level of service from staff who cared about their health and wellbeing. Those who were less positive felt they had not received a satisfactory level of response when they had raised a concern or had difficulty accessing an appointment when they needed one. The practice has an active Patient Participation Group (PPG) who were incredibly positive about the role they play within the surgery in helping to identify where improvements can be made. For example, the PPG trialled the use of a feedback form in the waiting area to gain feedback on people’s experience of the practice.