- GP practice
The Warren Practice
Assessment report published 9 April 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: Remote Clinical searches were carried out on 25 February 2026 and the site visit took place on 26 February 2026.
The Warren Practice is a sole provider GP practice since its CQC registration in October 2016. The practice was last assessed in December 2017. This comprehensive assessment was undertaken because of the length of time since the last assessment.
The Warren Practice is a GP Practice that delivers General Medical Service (GMS) to approximately 6,840 patients in the London Borough of Hillingdon under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profile stated that the population make up for this location is 48.9% Asian, 26.8% White, 11.1% Black, 3.4% Mixed and 9.8% other non-white ethnic groups.
Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population is in the 5th decile (5 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This practice is in the fifth decile indicating it is in a more deprived area on the national scale. 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 assessment process findings are as follows:
Safe: People and staff were kept safe and protected from harm and abuse. The practice recorded significant events and shared learning with staff to support ongoing improvement. Risks were understood and managed appropriately by the team. However, the Infection Prevention and Control policy was not specific to the practice and regular audits had not been completed. There was also no evidence that routine audits of emergency medicines and emergency equipment were carried out. In addition, there were gaps in staff training and in monitoring the safety of the environment. For example, a legionella risk assessment was not available during the CQC visit.
Effective: People were involved in the assessment of their needs. Patients were invited for their health checks reviews. The practice delivered services in line with good practice. The practice worked with relevant stakeholders to achieve best outcomes for the patient population. Information was shared with the patients to ensure they made an informed decision about their health care needs. There was a system of recall for cervical screening and childhood immunisations among the patient population who did not engage with the health offers, however, the impact of the system of recall was not yet known in some areas.
Caring: People were treated with kindness and compassion by the clinical staff. The dignity and privacy of patients were respected. Staff felt valued and appreciated. Staff wellbeing was treated with the utmost importance by the service.
Responsive: People received services that were in line with the Equality Act. Interpreting services were made available to patients who needed them. Complaints were handled appropriately and in a timely manner.
Well-led: The leadership and the management of the practice operated an open-door policy and shared vision of the practice with the staff. The leadership and management had a clear understanding of equality, human rights and safe compassionate care. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and felt supported. However, there were gaps in governance and oversight arrangements. In particular, there was insufficient monitoring of maintenance checks undertaken by the building owner, and a lack of formal auditing of emergency medicines and emergency equipment within the practice.
We found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment (Regulation 12) and good governance (Regulation 17). We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Recent survey results, including from the National GP Patient Survey 2025 and the NHS Friends and Family Test, showed people were satisfied with services. Feedback from experience of care online forms was not received by CQC. We contacted patient participation group (PPG) members who represented the views of people using the service and the feedback was positive. However, there were issues with how patients access services through the phone and practice website. Patients we spoke to during the site visit informed CQC that they experienced difficulty obtaining appointments at the practice, but they were usually referred to the local enhanced service locations for appointments when required. The patients were generally happy with the service received at this location.