• Doctor
  • GP practice

Eden Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Cavendish Road, Ilkeston, Derbyshire, DE7 5AN (0115) 944 4081

Provided and run by:
Eden Surgery

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 21 August 2025 to 27 August 2025. Eden Surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to 4,804 people under a contract held with NHS England. We carried out an assessment because the service had not been inspected since 2016. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 96.2% White, 1.4% Asian, 1.4% Mixed, 0.6% Black and 0.5% other. The age distribution of the practice population indicates the practice had a slightly higher number of younger people than the national average and similar numbers of working age and older people. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 5th decile (5 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. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. 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 and the majority of risks had been mitigated. Following our assessment the provider forwarded information confirming action had to been taken to address identified risks. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. However, record keeping in relation to prescription stationary needed to improve.

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 ensured the involvement of appropriate professionals and/or people important to the patient in any best interest decisions where patients lack 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 wellbeing was fully embedded within the working practices and ethos of the service.

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. The service worked 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 spoke positively about the leaders, felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

8 December 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Eden Surgery on 26 January 2015. We found that effective recruitment procedures were not in place and the governance systems in place were not operating effectively in respect of ensuring risks were mitigated against in respect of infection control, health and safety, medicines management and using feedback to continually improve services.

We carried out an announced focussed inspection at Eden Surgery on 8 December 2015 to check that improvements had been made to meet the legal requirement following our

comprehensive inspection. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management who identified and mitigated risks. The practice proactively sought feedback from its staff which it acted on.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

26 January 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Eden Surgery on 26 January 2015. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

Specifically, we found the practice to require improvement for providing safe and well led services. It was rated good for providing effective, caring and responsive services. All the population groups inspected were rated requires improvement overall.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Systems were generally in place to keep patients safe and to protect them from harm. However, robust procedures were not followed in respect of staff recruitment, the management of controlled medicines and infection control.
  • Improvements were required to the operation of systems designed to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service provision.
  • Most staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. However, the practice had not proactively sought feedback from staff and as a result some were not fully aware of the practice vision and values.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance.
  • Most patients said they found it easy to make an appointment and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • Performance management data showed patient outcomes were good and mostly above average for the locality.
  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a consequence of feedback from the Patient Participation Group (PPG).
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure robust systems are in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of services provided. This includes arrangements for infection control, medicines management, staff training and development.
  • Ensure documentary evidence of appropriate recruitment checks on staff is maintained.

In addition the provider should:

  • Ensure audits complete their full audit cycle in order to demonstrate improvements made to practice.
  • Ensure that staff are aware and identify with the practice vision and values.
  • Ensure a register for all equipment used in the practice is kept for auditing purposes.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice