June’s CQC trade association meeting covered some useful topics. See slides: 20210616 ASC Trade Association meeting draft presentation – 30 June v2
Local Authority Assurance:
A brief update on the CQC work to develop their approach to Local Authority Assurance– Working to agree high level principles with LGA & ADASS
– Assuming it will take 2 years to get going, so 2023 as need to build up a baseline picture of current commissioning practice, focussed non Care Act duties about which they know very little currently; they also need to decide if they take an LA by LA approach or a topic based approach and the approach to ratings
– Expect to use the 5 KLOES in the LA assurance process and a focus on the ‘I’ statements in terms of people’s expectations
• Some reflections on the role of the CQC in assessing the activity and delivery of the ICSs
• Early thinking, informed by the learning from the last 5 years.
• Thinking about systems:
– their Beyond Barriers Report in 2018 looked at people’s experience of how systems work for people;
– they also started doing provider collaboration reviews in May 2020, with a focus on care for older people across 11 systems, which proved very helpful so they did more
– have now looked at all provider collaboration across all 42 ICS
• CQC anticipate that LA assurance will stay in the Health & Care Bill, so will use 2021 -22 to try out their approach and explore how to offer independent assurance to the public.
• CQC may have a role in assessing how well ICSs work; the chair of the Health & Care Select Committee, Jeremy Hunt, is keen to ask CQC to rate them & assess how well do ICSs deliver high quality care to people?
Difference between LA & ICS assurance: LA assurance will assess against the Care Act duties; ICS assessment would have to consider the role of the ICS Board & ICS Partnership, draw on what CQC knows already from provider regulation & LA assurance work plus info from other sources, eg health watch & NHSE&I assessments of the ICS, LGA etc.
Assessments would lead to published info & ratings being considered; mechanisms will also be needed to escalate concerns & arrange improvement support as it would be key to have some action in response!Assessing providers’ use of surveillance – Katie Boyle & Clair Brown
• The CQC has been looking at this issue as they are seeing an increase in the use of this. There has been no research on the value, benefit & risks of surveillance; when used well, helps to protect from the risk of unsafe care & GPS can promote independence; but also seeing it can be open to misuse & abuse.
• CQC is looking at this from the human rights perspective; remember that the CQC is entitled to access & take copies of recordings from surveillance tech if concerns are raised
• CQC is looking to shape guidance for inspectors and ensure it being used properly.
• Aiming for an inclusive public listening services & an accessible information service
Public listening service: Providers have primary responsibility for listening to people & acting on the issues; need to encourage a speaking out culture – check out the example on the slide called what this will look like; testing & embedding new sources of experiencesPublic information service: need to redesign website & profiles to provide the info they need; making info accessible & relevant
Note: It is critical that care providers engage fully with the development of this strategy
; 
