• Doctor
  • GP practice

The Penrhyn Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2a Penrhyn Avenue, London, E17 5DB (020) 8527 2563

Provided and run by:
Penrhyn Surgery

Important: The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 04 July 2025 to 15 August 2025. We conducted this assessment as a result of concerns shared with the Care Quality Commission. We assessed all quality statements across the safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led key questions.

The Penrhyn Surgery is a GP practice that delivers a service to 8,580 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The service is part of Forest 8 primary care network (PCN). The National General Practice Profiles states that 51.84% people are white, 20.29% are Asian, 14.98% are Black, 6.96% Mixed and 5.94% Other. Information published by the 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.

SAFE: 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 any risks mitigated. 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.

EFFECTIVE: 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 and 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 supported staff wellbeing.

RESPONSIVE: 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. 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.

WELL-LED: 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. 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.

 

 

15 November 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced targeted assessment of the responsive key question at The Penrhyn Surgery on 15 November 2023. The assessment took place remotely. As part of the assessment we have reviewed the rating for the responsive key question. As a result, the responsive key question rating has been changed to requires improvement.

Safe – not rated, the rating of good was carried over from the previous inspection.

Effective - not rated, the rating of good was carried over from the previous inspection.

Caring - not rated, the rating of good was carried over from the previous inspection.

Responsive – Requires Improvement.

Well-led - not rated, the rating of good was carried over from the previous inspection.

Following our previous inspection on May 2022, the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions. Following this assessment the overall rating remains good and the rating for the responsive key question has been changed to requires improvement.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Penrhyn Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities to complete targeted assessments of the responsive key question to better understand the experience of patients and providers.

Outline focus of inspection to include:

  • Responsive Key question inspected

How we carried out the inspection

This assessment was completed remotely.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using teleconferencing.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • Reviewing the data we hold on this provider.
  • Reviewing patient feedback reported directly to us, verified patient reviews and patient experience evidence supplied by the provider.

Our findings

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 found that:

  • The practice was aware of poor patient satisfaction for access to the service. They had taken action to improve patient access, the changes had not yet provided verified data of patient satisfaction improving.
  • Patients had difficulty accessing care and treatment in a timely way.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to review and improve patient satisfaction around access to the service.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care

04 May 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at The Penrhyn Surgery on 05/05/2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Set out the ratings for each key question

Safe – Good

Effective – Good

Caring – Good

Responsive – Good

Well-led – Good

Following a new provider registration in 2019, this was the first inspection of the location under the new provider. Following this inspection on 04 May 2022, the practice was rated Good overall and for all key questions.

The full report for this inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Penrhyn Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection and included the key questions: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A site visit

Our findings

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;

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed, and care and treatment was delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Although the lead GP had reviewed systems and processes, Childhood immunisation uptake rates were below the World Health Organisation (WHO) targets. Uptake rates for the vaccines given were below the target of 95% in five areas where childhood immunisations are measured.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The practice had not demonstrated it had an effective strategy to improve its performance for cervical screening which was lower than the national average.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • The practice had an active patient participation group.
  • There was evidence of systems for learning, continuous improvement and innovation. For example, during the COVID19 pandemic, the practice started a wellbeing gardening project at the practice in conjunction with a local gardening group. Staff worked with external partners and patients to develop and deliver a gardening project to support people experiencing loneliness and social isolation during the pandemic.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening and childhood immunisations.
  • Review monitoring of patients on high risk medicines to ensure all patients have lithium levels checked.
  • Review action plans to ensure housebound patients receive required blood pressure monitoring.
  • Review coding of patients diagnosed with asthma or COPD and ensure staff document when appropriate medicine review takes place.
  • Review systems to ensure scheduled staff appraisals take place when due.

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