Where London eats safely

The share of rated premises scoring top marks, borough by borough.

See it on the mapEmbed this viewUpdated 16 Sept

Data access

Use the machine-readable JSON record or the flattened CSV download or the compact Markdown version.

Preview the latest 30 observations
SeriesPeriod or categoryValueUnit
ValueKensington and Chelsea87.897% rated 5
ValueMerton81.939% rated 5
ValueGreenwich79.3703% rated 5
ValueWandsworth78.3162% rated 5
ValueHaringey77.9587% rated 5
ValueHammersmith and Fulham77.5578% rated 5
ValueBromley77.2059% rated 5
ValueSutton75.2137% rated 5
ValueBrent73.8149% rated 5
ValueHounslow72.4231% rated 5
ValueTower Hamlets72.1204% rated 5
ValueHavering71.6937% rated 5
ValueSouthwark71.6583% rated 5
ValueBexley70.7407% rated 5
ValueWestminster70.2723% rated 5
ValueHackney68.6209% rated 5
ValueRedbridge66.5749% rated 5
ValueIslington64.3568% rated 5
ValueCroydon64.2933% rated 5
ValueHillingdon63.4921% rated 5
ValueLewisham62.777% rated 5
ValueBarnet61.4899% rated 5
ValueLambeth61.4845% rated 5
ValueHarrow61.3419% rated 5
ValueEnfield59.176% rated 5
ValueCamden58.4647% rated 5
ValueEaling57.9604% rated 5
ValueBarking and Dagenham55.8272% rated 5
ValueWaltham Forest50.3759% rated 5
ValueNewham49.0535% rated 5

Methodology

Every rated premises in each London borough from the Food Standards Agency register, counted locally because the API advertises a rating filter and ignores it. Only numerically rated premises are counted: awaiting-inspection and exempt are roughly a fifth of the register and would penalise a borough for having a backlog rather than for being dirtier.

Provenance

Cadence
monthly
Engine
comparison

Keep going