St John & St Elizabeth Hospital · prepared for Nellie Ndaba, Lead Clinical Duty Manager · 16 Aug 2026
Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth · St John's Wood, London
Good on every question — and four of six service ratings predate 2022
On the public register today the hospital reads Good overall, Good on all five key questions, report published 28 March 2024. That report came from an October 2023 inspection of part of the service. Underneath the headline, the six service-level ratings were earned at three different inspections — the oldest published in June 2017, from fieldwork in late 2016. This read sets out what the register actually shows, what changes as hospitals move onto their own assessment framework, and the part no outside document can answer.
The 30-second read
Position
Good overall and on all five key questions (published 28 Mar 2024). Only critical care and surgery have been inspected since 2021; medical care and outpatients & diagnostic imaging still carry ratings dated 7 June 2017.
What's changing
Hospitals get their own draft Hospital Assessment Framework — piloting June–October 2026, in force by the end of 2026 — built on evidence CQC reads continuously from your systems, not a visit every few years.
The pattern
The 2021 inspection held the rating at Good while recording that audits were "not always carried out in a systematic and meaningful way" and that record systems across the hospital were not integrated. The services it examined have had no published inspection since.
The 30 minutes
We map what your systems could show an inspector on an ordinary shift against the framework now being written for hospitals — and you leave with the three gaps worth closing first.
30 minutes with Alexey Litvin, GreenM's CEO. Nothing to prepare — we bring the analysis.
Overall rating
Good
Report published 28 Mar 2024, from an inspection of part of the service.
Key questions Good
5of 5
Safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led all read Good.
Service ratings pre-2022
4of 6
Dated 15 Nov 2021 and 7 Jun 2017 on the live register.
Registered with CQC
201115 yrs
Current registration dates from 11 January 2011.
9.2 yrs
Age of the oldest service ratings. Medical care and outpatients & diagnostic imaging were last rated in the report published 7 June 2017, from fieldwork in October–November 2016.
3 focused
Published inspections since the 2016 comprehensive visit — 2019, 2021 and 2023. Each looked at part of the service; none re-examined the whole hospital.
98%
Of services rated below Good under the current framework, the share whose well-led key question is also below Good (safe: 95%). Ratings rarely fall on the care itself. Re-derived from the register, 16 Aug 2026.
Your published position
LIVE CQC REGISTER · VERIFIED 16 AUG 2026
A rating is only as current as the evidence behind it — and this hospital's evidence base spans three inspection generations. The last routine (comprehensive) inspection ran on 18–19 October and 1 & 3 November 2016. Everything published since has been an inspection of part of the service.
OCT–NOV 2016
Last comprehensive inspection — the whole hospital examined. Rated Good; report published 7 June 2017. Medical care and outpatients & diagnostic imaging still carry ratings from this visit.
21 MAR 2019
Unannounced focused inspection, responding to two concerns raised with CQC. Unrated; no regulation breached; improvement points named, including incident-investigation practice and shared learning.
AUG–SEP 2021
Inspection of part of the service (published 15 Nov 2021). Rating stayed Good, with specific observations recorded — see below. End of life care and urgent & emergency services have had no published inspection since.
10 OCT 2023
Inspection of part of the service (published 28 Mar 2024) — critical care and surgery ratings refreshed. This is the report behind today's headline rating.
JUN–OCT 2026
CQC pilots its sector frameworks with providers, hospitals included — targeting 9,000+ reports by September, with the new frameworks in force by the end of 2026.
Critical care
GOOD28 Mar 20242.4 yrs
Surgery
GOOD28 Mar 20242.4 yrs
End of life care
GOOD15 Nov 20214.8 yrs
Urgent and emergency services
GOOD15 Nov 20214.8 yrs
Medical care (including older people's care)
GOOD7 Jun 20179.2 yrs
Outpatients and diagnostic imaging
GOOD7 Jun 20179.2 yrs
Service-level ratings and dates as displayed on the live CQC register for location 1-115480780, verified 16 August 2026. Ages computed against 16 August 2026. No breaches and no enforcement action are recorded against the hospital on the public register.
The six shifts from the guide you downloaded are the rules this read is scored against. Independent hospitals sit inside the draft Hospital Assessment Framework — consultation closed 12 June 2026, pilots running June–October, in force by the end of the year. For a hospital whose rating was assembled from focused visits, the shift that bites is continuous, intelligence-led evidence: statutory notifications, complaints, workforce returns and PHIN data, read from your systems between visits. Silence between inspections stops reading as a clean record.
Outcomes over processContinuous, intelligence-led monitoringInequalities & resource efficiency in scopeWorkforce elevated within well-ledDescriptor-led, not score-ledOne framework becomes four
Where the record actually stands
3 STRENGTHS · 3 WATCH ITEMS · FROM THE INSPECTION REPORTS
There is no peer score table on this page — deliberately. The hospital's Good was earned under CQC's legacy inspection methodology, which produced no statement-level scores, and too few independent hospitals carry a comparable current-framework rating to make a league table honest. So this read is built entirely from the hospital's own published record — and the per-statement flip analysis we run for scored providers cannot be computed here. Under the draft framework, the exposure to name is not a score: it is the age and continuity of the evidence behind each service rating.
STRENGTH · 2023 INSPECTION
Governance ran well where inspectors looked
The report published 28 March 2024 records that "leaders operated effective governance processes" and identified, escalated and acted on risks in a timely manner — in the parts of the service examined.
WATCH · 2021 INSPECTION
Audit discipline was uneven
Inspectors recorded that "not all audits were carried out in a systematic and meaningful way", and that action plans arising from findings were not always clear.
STRENGTH · 2023 INSPECTION
Safety management and learning
The service "managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them", with staffing sufficient to keep patients safe and risks assessed and acted on.
WATCH · 2021 INSPECTION
Record systems were not integrated
The report notes "IT systems and records across the hospital were not integrated" — hospice community and inpatient teams on different patient record systems, urgent care records un-integrated — causing duplication and delays. The hospital was working on integration at the time.
STRENGTH · 2021 INSPECTION
Safety information used to improve
Inspectors recorded that staff "collected safety information and used it to improve the service", managed medicines well and controlled infection risk well.
WATCH · 2021 INSPECTION
Incident learning did not always reach staff
In end of life care, staff "did not always receive feedback from investigation of incidents", and responsible people were not always assigned to ensure learning was implemented. No published inspection has returned to this service since.
Observations are the inspectors' own, quoted from the published summaries of the reports dated above — they are what CQC recorded, not our verdicts. The 2023 inspection examined critical care and surgery; the 2021 observations on end of life care and urgent care, and the 2017-dated ratings for medical care and outpatients, have no later published inspection revisiting them.
The honest blind-spot
Everything above is visible from outside: the register, the published reports, the dates. What no outside document can see is whether the 2021 observations read as closed in today's records — and what the two services last examined in 2016 would show an inspector who arrived tomorrow. Those answers live in your audit trails, incident logs and record systems, and they are precisely what the new framework reads continuously. That gap — between what is published and what your systems would show on an ordinary day — is what the 30 minutes is for.
What we'd work through together
SIX ITEMS · COVERED LIVE ON THE CALL
The two services still rated on 2016 evidenceNOW
Whether the 2021 observations read as closed todayNOW
Well-led against the descriptors written for hospitalsNOW
The record systems the 2021 report called un-integratedONGOING
What a duty manager could evidence on an ordinary shiftONGOING
The signals CQC already reads between visitsONGOING
Show what each item turns on
01
The two services still rated on 2016 evidence. Turns on what medical care and outpatients records would show today — something only visible from inside the service.
02
Whether the 2021 observations read as closed today. Turns on your audit programme and incident-learning trail since that report — whether the loop from finding to owner to action is visible in the records.
03
Well-led against the descriptors written for hospitals. Turns on how governance evidence connects across your systems on the day it is asked for — the dry-run the guide's first moves point at, made specific to this hospital.
04
The record systems the 2021 report called un-integrated. Turns on which systems now hold CQC-relevant evidence, and who owns each — the integration work the report noted was already underway.
05
What a duty manager could evidence on an ordinary shift. Turns on what is retrievable without preparation — staffing, escalation, deterioration response — because continuous assessment reads the ordinary day, not the prepared one.
06
The signals CQC already reads between visits. Turns on what your statutory notifications, complaints, workforce returns and PHIN submissions currently look like as a body of evidence.
Inspection-ready before the inspector
GreenM are data and AI specialists: we connect the evidence a hospital already generates — clinical systems, audits, incident logs, workforce data — so it reads cleanly against the framework it will next be judged by, rather than being assembled the week before a visit. The pilots are running now and the framework is in force by the end of 2026; four of this hospital's six service ratings already predate 2022. In 30 minutes we take the six items above and narrow them to the three that matter first for St John & St Elizabeth.
30 minutes with Alexey Litvin, GreenM's CEO. Nothing to prepare — we bring the analysis.
Prepared for Nellie Ndaba, Lead Clinical Duty Manager, Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth — following the CQC framework guide downloaded on 15 August 2026. Questions before booking? Just reply to the email this page arrived with.
Source: live CQC register for Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth (location 1-115480780), verified 16 August 2026 — overall and key-question ratings, service-level rating dates, and inspection report summaries quoted verbatim. Registration date from GreenM's copy of the CQC register dataset, same day. National figure re-derived 16 August 2026 from the 7,471 locations carrying a published rating under the current framework (1,741 below Good; among those, well-led below Good in 98%, safe in 95%). No peer cohort is asserted for this hospital. Framework status per CQC's published Better Regulation, Better Care programme: draft sector frameworks, consultation closed 12 June 2026, pilots June–October 2026, in force end of 2026. This page describes the draft frameworks as published; it does not predict CQC's decisions about any provider.
