Where London eats safely

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

See it on the mapEmbed this viewUpdated 16 Aug

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 Chelsea88.0044% rated 5
ValueMerton81.2207% rated 5
ValueGreenwich79.1038% rated 5
ValueWandsworth78.0538% rated 5
ValueHaringey77.7293% rated 5
ValueBromley77.5982% rated 5
ValueHammersmith and Fulham77.4229% rated 5
ValueSutton74.4482% rated 5
ValueBrent74.2458% rated 5
ValueHounslow72.6094% rated 5
ValueTower Hamlets72.1036% rated 5
ValueHavering71.7391% rated 5
ValueSouthwark71.7202% rated 5
ValueBexley70.9057% rated 5
ValueWestminster70.1728% rated 5
ValueHackney67.5275% rated 5
ValueRedbridge66.4426% rated 5
ValueIslington64.1909% rated 5
ValueCroydon64.0725% rated 5
ValueHillingdon63.7494% rated 5
ValueLewisham62.7255% rated 5
ValueHarrow61.4148% rated 5
ValueLambeth61.0995% rated 5
ValueBarnet60.6009% rated 5
ValueCamden59.1684% rated 5
ValueEnfield59.1038% rated 5
ValueEaling58.1689% rated 5
ValueBarking and Dagenham55.7789% rated 5
ValueWaltham Forest51.2326% rated 5
ValueNewham49.0902% 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