The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Lawson Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

St Leonards, 85 Nuttall Street, London, N1 5HZ (020) 3538 6044

Provided and run by:
The Lawson Practice

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

The Lawson Practice is a GP practice that provides a range of primary medical services. It is registered with the Care Quality Commission under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 to provide the following regulated activities: diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning, midwifery and maternity services, surgical procedures, and treatment of disease, disorder, or injury. We conducted an assessment that comprised of two elements: an on-site assessment carried out on 7 February 2024 and an off-site assessment, which started on 8 February 2024 and ended on 21 February 2024. We examined five quality statements: learning culture, medicine optimization, assessing needs, equity in experiences and outcomes, governance, management, and sustainability.

21 August 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Lawson Practice on 21 August 2017. 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients we spoke with 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 and the option to use a new online service (WebGP), to communicate with a GP.
  • 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance, although did not use an assistant when fitting intra-uterine contraceptive devices (IUCDs).

  • The practice had lower than average rates for breast, bowel and cervical cancer screening uptake but were taking action to address this.
  • Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment, although we found that the practice had a higher than average inadequate rate for cervical smear taking and were taking action to address this.
  • The practice had a quality improvement programme although most audits were one cycle.
  • The practice provided three clinics a week with an in-house Turkish or Kurdish speaking interpreter / advocate.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Review the programme of clinical audits to develop continuous cycle audits with improvement after each cycle.
  • Review the training needs of staff who undertake cervical cancer screening.
  • Review the low screening uptake for breast, bowel and cervical cancer and how targeting of patients can be improved.
  • Review the need for an assistant to be present when fitting IUCDs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

11 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection 11 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. It was also good for providing services for the six population groups - Older people, People with long-term conditions, Families, children and young people, Working age people (including those recently retired and students), People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • 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.
  • 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice