search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
FEATURE


can result in non-compliance and risk penalties – or even closure.


Employee vetting and background checking is increasingly named as one of the core components of any organisation across all sectors. This is even more apparent in the care sector where people’s physical and psychological needs are the core component of service. Basic checks, such as ensuring new and current staff have the right to work in the UK, no disqualifying criminal background, and legitimate qualifications are some of the basic measures that need to be taken.


Re-vetting existing employees every 18 months is also important to retain the trust of current and future residents, and their families.


Putting a monetary perspective on it, employers are legally bound to check the eligibility of staff and failure to do so could cost a penalty of up to £20,000 per employee.


Compliance is of course the primary reason why employers conduct background checks. Where a role involves personal care and an enhanced level check, the business must register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) for each of the regulated activities undertaken. CQC inspections are routine and as part of their inspection process, the CQC ensures that the organisation complies with all regulations. As part of this process they can request evidence that a suitable disclosure was obtained when an employee was appointed to a role, and prior to being allowed to work unsupervised with children and/or vulnerable adults.


Simple good business practice and ethics mean most care facilities want to use the very best staff and ensure residents get the care they need and the business is protected by great staff – but the compliance factor is there to ensure it is front of mind.


Putting a Cost on Time Recent research discovered that a little under half of employers have reduced the length of the hiring process, because they want to hire


- 12 -


faster. However, they still must hire the right people and then retain that talent. The types of screening and the process and candidate journey when recruiting significantly affects these results. A separate survey found that HR directors average a whole month (27.59 days) recruiting before they find the right employee.


“Getting the right


workforce in place and then retaining them, when competition is set


to increase, will not only support the cared-for


residents but also support the organisation’s growth.”


It’s easy to understand why time and money tend to be the biggest barriers for performing administrative tasks like background checks. With a changing labour market, the competition for roles will only become fiercer and getting the right processes in place which protect residents, existing employees, the company and at the same time provide return on investment is crucial.


With recruitment high on the agenda of businesspeople, there is a temptation for providers to limit, or skip, steps that properly and accurately vet candidates in order to speed up the process when they see an opportunity. But given the risks of litigation in the event it’s found that a candidate lied about qualifications, the costs of non-compliance are grave. It’s not inconceivable that a candidate might not inform a prospective employer of previous offences which could affect their ability to work in the role.


According to The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, the average recruitment cost of filling a vacancy is £4,000, increasing to £6,125 when the associated staff turnover costs are included. This is a significant investment on an


individual who may be, until vetted, potentially much more trouble than they are worth, if the worst comes to pass. Prevention is better than cure, as the well-worn medical saying goes.


Employers therefore want to employ only those staff who will deliver good results for the business in the long-term, offering true value as the industry grows.


Checking Methods In-house checks can be a good way of identifying candidates for a role. Not only does the interview help a manager assess an individual and their personal suitability to the role in question, but it can also help leaders to select and on-board a workforce in a very detailed way.


However, in-house checks can be time consuming and even limiting. When done too fast they might cost more in the long run through inadequate levels of sourced information.


In contrast, more organisations are moving towards a complete end-to- end solution whereby the candidate, upon acceptance, is managed through to contract and throughout their employment. This takes the burden away and ensures the business remains compliant, has quality assured employees, and maintains a process specifically tailored to its needs and ends up being more cost effective and efficient. For some, simple integration of data and checks outsourced can add incremental value – as can access to online tools that process required information.


So, with more and more parents, elderly and dependants poised to need more care in the future, the well-prepared care home needs to have a long term strategy in place. It needs to quality assure, comply and ensure that the right candidates come through and remain in the industry to make a big impact in shaping the organisation of the future. There is a prosperous future ahead for the care industry, but only those organisations that properly plan and execute to ride the long-term trends will see the maximum return on this future.


www.experian.co.uK www.tomorrowscare.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40