Judgement framework - Care Quality Commission

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Stage 4: Outcome 13 Outcome 13 (Regulation 22) Staffing Outcome 13 Compliance The provider has met all aspects of this safety and quality regulation as the outcome described in the guidance about compliance is fully met (refer to the guidance about compliance for detail). Case study 1 A domiciliary care service provides care to a range of clients. The registered manager ensures that the staffing mix is suitable to meet the range of assessed needs of the people who use the service. When there are changes to a person’s care plan, this is always reviewed to ensure that the allocated staff are able to continue to meet their needs. Whenever new staff members start or any new agency staff used, there is always an induction to ensure they are competent for the role they need to do and that they know how to seek advice and report concerns. 112 Care Quality Commission: Guidance about compliance Judgement framework March 2010
Stage 4: Outcome 13 Outcome 13 Minor concern Where minor concerns are identified, people who use the service are safe, but the provision of care may not always meet this safety and quality regulation. There is an assessment of the needs of people who use services and the skills, qualifications and experience that are needed in order for staff to provide care that is safe and effective, and which meets those needs, protects people’s rights and promotes independence. Generally, there is sufficient staffing levels with an appropriate skill mix, such as at weekends or outside regular working hours. Although there is insufficient cover for staff rotas, periods of annual leave, sick leave, maternity leave, parental and carer leave. Care Quality Commission: Guidance about compliance Judgement framework March 2010 113
Page 1 and 2:
Guidance about compliance Judgement
Page 3 and 4:
Contents A new system of registrati
Page 5 and 6:
The judgement framework The judgeme
Page 7 and 8:
Section Outcome Regulation* Title I
Page 9 and 10:
Taking account of other influencing
Page 11 and 12:
Putting the judgement framework int
Page 13 and 14:
Stage 2: Checking whether the evide
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Stage 3: Determining the impact on
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Stage 4: Validating the judgement S
Page 37 and 38:
Stage 4: Validating the judgement O
Page 39 and 40:
Stage 4: Outcome 1 Case study 4 Peo
Page 41 and 42:
Stage 4: Outcome 1 Case study 5 Cas
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Stage 4: Outcome 2 Outcome 2 Minor
Page 47 and 48:
Stage 4: Outcome 2 Outcome 2 Modera
Page 49 and 50:
Stage 4: Outcome 2 Outcome 2 Major
Page 51 and 52:
Stage 4: Outcome 4 Outcome 4 (Regul
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Stage 4: Outcome 5 Outcome 5 Minor
Page 61 and 62:
Stage 4: Outcome 5 Outcome 5 Modera
Page 63 and 64: Stage 4: Outcome 5 Outcome 5 Major
Page 65 and 66: Stage 4: Outcome 6 Outcome 6 (Regul
Page 67 and 68: Stage 4: Outcome 6 Case study 2 Cas
Page 73 and 74: Stage 4: Outcome 7 Outcome 7 Minor
Page 75 and 76: Stage 4: Outcome 7 Outcome 7 Modera
Page 79 and 80: Stage 4: Outcome 8 Outcome 8 (Regul
Page 87 and 88: Stage 4: Outcome 9 Outcome 9 Minor
Page 89 and 90: Stage 4: Outcome 9 Outcome 9 Modera
Page 93 and 94: Stage 4: Outcome 10 Outcome 10 (Reg
Page 95 and 96: Stage 4: Outcome 10 Case study 2 Ca
Page 101 and 102: Stage 4: Outcome 11 Outcome 11 Mino
Page 103 and 104: Stage 4: Outcome 11 Outcome 11 Mode
Page 105 and 106: Stage 4: Outcome 11 Outcome 11 Majo
Page 113: Stage 4: Outcome 12 Case study 8 Ca
Page 127 and 128: Stage 4: Outcome 14 Case study 10 A
Page 149 and 150: © Care Quality Commission 2010. Pu
show all

Judgement framework - Care Quality Commission

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?