Skip to main content

Fundamental Change to the Regulation of Adult Social Services and Health - TAKE NOTE!

There is a change which measures 8 on the Richter scale coming to Health Services and Adult Social Care. Heading this change is the Care Quality Commission which has drawn up stringent standards and values that every health trust, local authority adult social services and commissioned independent or private organisations will have to meet to register their practice. Those not registered will NOT be able to practice.

The Date for this change is just under ten weeks away - on April 1st 2010.

The Care Quality Commission says:

“The regulation of health and adult social care is changing. Subject to legislation, all health and adult social care providers who provide regulated activities will be required by law to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. The new registration system comes into force on 1 April 2010 for NHS trusts (including primary care trusts as providers) and on 1 October 2010 for adult social care and independent healthcare providers (registration under the Care Standards Act 2000 continues until 30 September 2010).”

The tome containing the standards, values and outcomes required to meet the registration criteria are in “Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety” and it can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/ya86tjo

This change undoubtedly promises a good deal (anyway you like to read that) for service users and carers and there is surely a role for service users and carers in monitoring CQC’s performance because, as a QUANGO, they are not accountable to anyone more than the general public (technically they are accountable to the Secretary of State but when have you known that to happen).

And I am already picking up anomalies!

I ordered a hard copy of the above Guidance - which hasn’t yet arrived after a good week. In addition I also ordered what I thought to be another companion publication report entitled “Encouraging Improvement and Stopping Poor Care.” This has arrived - one A4 sheet folded to make an A5 leaflet. OK, so what’s your problem? The first problem is: it arrived rattling around in a large A4 sized envelope with a hard cardboard backing - it must have been somewhat extravagant to post. And singly, whereas it could have been bundled with the main tome. Multiply this a few times and you have just one source of inefficiency and misused finance.

Worse that that, when I started to read the leaflet the first words are: “We know that as a provider of care services, you want to improve the quality of care that you give people.“ YUK! Is the CQC a collection of lickspittles or are they all ineffably naive in there? (Who doesn’t know that providers’, especially private providers which are in the majority, primary aim is to improve the quantity of their profits).

The plus side is that the rest of the leaflet is straightforward and blunt: ”You are responsible for making any improvements needed to ensure that there are good outcomes for people using your service and that people are safe...If we think that people who use your service are at immediate risk, we will take quick and urgent action within our powers.“ The ‘outcomes’ required are detailed in Ministerial Regulations and the above Guidance.

The message for service users and carers is clear and plain: if you see poor standards, don’t hesitate to report them to CQC and then monitor how CQC deals with the problem. Huge improvement in service delivery? It’s in our hands.

Mike

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...

Mental Health Labels?

I read this valuable little report yesterday. It presents issues and dichotomies around disability labels, models of disability and rejections of the disability label by mental health service users/survivors. The report makes positive recommendations about furthering the debate but, in my opinion, the user contributions muddy rather than clarify matters. The subjects are seminal to the work being carried out to integrate physically, sensory, mental health and intellectual disabilities - essential if we are to progress further in our strivings for human and statutory rights. For me, the report is enormously helpful in providing a foundation for discussions of what are important questions and perhaps, if properly distributed, it could bring a better focus towards some resolution. Heddwch. Mike.