FEATURE
such subjectivity. For example, some inspectors may take an ‘accepting’ view of local care homes, whereas others may adopt a more fastidious approach when applying the assessment criteria.
To guard against inspector subjectivity, we recommend that the CQC carries out investigations to ensure the consistency of its assessments. For example, even greater steps may need to be taken to check that ratings are moderated and fair, together with an analysis of how inspectors have followed the whole inspection process, not just the mechanical steps of the CRM system.
When the current inspection regime was introduced, many care home operators who were previously classed as ‘satisfactory’, found themselves rated as ‘requiring improvement’. Whilst, for some, the change could have been due to inspector subjectivity, it is also likely that some operators were simply not ready for the new regime. The CQC has reported that many operators have now moved to ‘good’. However, further changes are planned and the CQC is currently consulting on proposals to adjust the ‘key lines of enquiry’ (KLOE) to provide a greater focus on human rights and ‘protected characteristics’, which includes anti-discrimination measures. Operators need to make sure that they are ready for any changes that might be introduced and prepare accordingly.
At a time when the CQC is facing year- on-year budget cuts, it is difficult to see how the organisation can protect itself from allegations of inspector subjectivity in the future. If it fails to address this issue, however, its ratings could begin to lose credibility. More time and resources must be committed to solving the problem.
In the meantime, operators should analyse inspection reports thoroughly and be prepared to challenge them where necessary. They should do this by keeping documentation to demonstrate how specific criteria have been met. To retain a ‘good’ rating, they may also need to keep detailed plans for continuous improvement and show that they are being implemented. Preparation is always key – have the evidence ready.
www.shma.co.uk twitter.com/TomorrowsCare - 39 - “The marked differences in the ratings given to care
homes in neighbouring local authority areas, could be evidence of subjectivity.”
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 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48