The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Dr Liliya Burrett

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2 Lower Sloane Street, London, SW1W 8BJ

Provided and run by:
Dr Liliya Burrett

Assessment report published 2 September 2026

Contents

On this page

Safe

Good

24 July 2026

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC under this provider. This key question has been rated as Good.

This service scored 69 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Learning culture

Score: 3

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding.

The service encouraged staff to raise concerns when things went wrong. During staff meetings, the whole team discussed and learnt from clinical issues. Systems were in place for staff to record and investigate safety events, near misses, and complaints. However, no incidents or complaints had been reported in the last 12 months.

Safe systems, pathways and transitions

Score: 3

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

There were systems in place for processing information relating to new patients. Referrals and test results were managed in a timely way.

Many patients were not registered with an NHS GP and thus the service was not able to share consultation details with them. However, the provider stated that for patients registered with an NHS GP, they would actively encourage them to give consent so their consultation details and relevant health information could be shared appropriately.

Safeguarding

Score: 3

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place and were known to staff. Staff had received appropriate safeguarding training and were able to describe the procedures to follow if they had safeguarding concerns. The service provided treatments to both children and adults. Systems were in place to verify patients’ identities. Where children attended the service, processes were in place to ensure that any accompanying adult had appropriate parental responsibility.

Involving people to manage risks

Score: 3

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Emergency equipment was available and maintained, though it was shared with other services on the premises. The practice was equipped to respond to medical emergencies and staff were suitably trained in emergency procedures. There was an Automated External Defibrillator (AED) available, which was checked regularly.

Staff could recognise a deteriorating patient and knew of action to take. Patients were advised on risks related to their condition and actions to take if their condition deteriorated. The provider gave patients after-care information once treatment had been given and ensured the patient knew who to contact if there were any concerns.

Safe environments

Score: 3

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

There were contracts in place to ensure the premises were maintained. Health and safety risk assessments and audits had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed.

Fire safety control measures were in place, and regular checks had been completed. A formal documented fire risk assessment was carried out on 28 May 2026 by an external contractor. The fire system and fire extinguishers were inspected regularly; with comprehensive records maintained for all fire alarm checks. The service carried out regular fire drills. Fire safety training had been completed.

Staff had completed fire safety training.

Portable appliance testing was carried out in October 2025.

Calibration of medical equipment was carried out on 23 April 2025 and was overdue at the time of our assessment. However, the service informed us that the appointment had been scheduled to resolve this.

A Legionella risk assessment had been completed on 23 January 2025, and records showed that water temperatures were monitored regularly.

There was a business continuity plan in place which was monitored and reviewed.

Safe and effective staffing

Score: 2

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

There were a locum GP and a secretary employed by the service. We found training was up to date, learning needs and development of staff was managed appropriately, and staff were working within their agreed areas of competence. Recruitment checks were carried out in accordance with regulations prior to employment. However, we found some gaps. For example, the 1 staff file we reviewed showed that references (satisfactory evidence of conduct in previous employment) had not been undertaken prior to employment. Interview notes were not kept in staff file. Appropriate health checks (satisfactory information about any physical or mental health conditions) had not been undertaken prior to employment.

Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were undertaken and appropriate to the role where required. DBS checks identify whether a person has a criminal record or is on an official list of people barred from working in roles where they may have contact with children or adults who may be vulnerable.

Infection prevention and control

Score: 3

Feedback from people who use the service, was positive in relation to the cleanliness of the environment.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The practice had a designated infection, prevention and control lead and all staff had received relevant training. Cleaning schedules were in place and followed. Risk assessments and audits were completed, and actions taken to mitigate risks. The environment was noted to be clean and tidy during our onsite visit, and all appropriate personal protective equipment was available for staff to use. Additionally, regular hand hygiene and infection prevention and control (IPC) audits were conducted to ensure safe care environments.

The service displayed hand washing poster after the inspection and had implemented a stricter rotation for the disposal of sharps bins.

Medicines optimisation

Score: 2

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

We reviewed 8 clinical records, which were stored electronically on a secure network. While records were complete, accurate, and up to date, some consultation notes lacked detail and contained limited information.

Staff followed established prescribing protocols and ensured medicines were prescribed safely. People knew what to do and who to contact if they experienced any unexpected symptoms.

Staff received regular training, were competency-assessed on medicines optimisation, and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of medicines.

Medicines were stored appropriately. Fridge temperature recordings were taken in line with the provider’s cold chain protocol, and no concerns had been identified.

Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines including emergency medicines.

The medical gases, such as oxygen, were stored safely. The service had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and medicine recalls.

Page top