The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Norcross & Partners

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Ansdell Medical Centre, Albany Road, Lytham St Annes, Lancashire, FY8 4GW (01253) 657300

Provided and run by:
Dr Norcross & Partners

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr Norcross & Partners 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 Dr Norcross & Partners, you can give feedback on this service.

7 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Norcross & Partners on 7 August 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

1 December 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ansdell Medical Centre on 1 December 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 and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • 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.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same 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.

We saw an area of outstanding practice:

  • The GPs and practice staff supported a number of charities including regular donations to a local food bank. Staff also made donations to the food bank rather than buying Christmas cards and gifts for each other. The GPs were able to refer patients, if needed, to the food bank for support.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Make improvements to the system to review how significant events are actioned and recorded to help better identify trends.

  • Review the child safeguarding register to ensure all patients included on the register are of the appropriate age.

  • Review the recruitment policy to include obtaining Disclosure and Barring Service checks for all posts requiring such checks.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

30 January 2014

During a routine inspection

During the time we spent at the practice we spoke with a number of people about the service. We spoke with patients either before or after their treatment, three GP's, the practice manager, nursing staff, and administration/reception staff. We also spoke with the commissioning department of NHS England. This was in order to gain a balanced overview of what patients experienced using this practice.

The practice ensured patients were respected and involved in their treatment. Patients we spoke with felt they were given enough information about treatment options. One patient said, "The staff are very good at identifying who needs extra support. The GP has been absolutely amazing, they thoroughly explained everything.'

Patients spoke highly of the way they were treated by staff and were happy with the treatment and support shown to them. Comments from patients included, "The whole team are amazing. Staff here go the extra mile. We are very lucky with the practice we have."

There were systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. When we spoke with patients using the service some comments included, "I have no concerns about hygiene. The building is always so clean." Staff had individual responsibilities to maintain a hygienic environment.

The practice had a range of audits and systems in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided. This included taking into account people's views and experiences. This meant the practice effectively monitored the quality of its service provision.