►
Description
To support the delivery of our new strategy we're looking at potential changes to our assessment frameworks.
In this episode of CQC Connect, the podcast from the Care Quality Commission, we hear some of our early thinking on these changes and how you can get involved to help shape them.
For more information and to feed back now, visit our digital engagement platform - https://cqc.citizenlab.co/en-GB/projects/developing-an-assessment-framework-for-our-future-direction
Listen to more podcasts from the CQC: https://soundcloud.com/carequalitycommission
Find out more information about the CQC and how it regulates health and social care in England: https://www.cqc.org.uk/
A
C
A
B
Yeah
sure
so
so
the
assessment
framework
is
basically
the
framework
that
we
use
for
making
judgments
about
the
quality
of
care
and
they
sit
at
the
center
of
our
ratings
approach.
They
set
out
what
good
care
looks
like
and
what
we're
looking
for
in
in
our
assessments.
So
so
what?
What
does
it
look
like
to
be
a
good
provider
of
care?
B
B
The
current
thinking
at
the
moment
is
that
we're
not
going
to
change
the
five
key
questions.
So
is
it
safe?
Is
it
effective?
Is
it
caring
is
it
responsive?
Is
care
well
led,
but
we
are
looking
at
the
structure
beneath
that
and
starting
to
think
about
how
we
can
make
it
clearer,
more
accessible
and
make
sure
the
content
is,
is
up
to
date
and
relevant
and
and
understandable
to
everyone
who
uses
the
framework.
A
Thanks
amanda,
that's
really
helpful
dave.
Can
I
come
to
you
next
and
maybe
talk
a
bit
more
about
why
we're
exploring
changes
to
the
assessment
framework
and
maybe
talk
a
bit
about
what
what
we
think
is
maybe
not
commonly
quite
right
about
them
and
and
maybe
talk
a
bit
more
about
some
of
the
ambitions
for
the
new
framework.
Certainly.
C
Yeah
so,
as
amanda
said,
we
we've
had
these
frameworks
now,
since
first
introducing
them
back
in
2015
and
have
learned
a
lot
about
what
what
works
and
what
perhaps
needs
attention.
We
were
due
to
do
a
relatively
small
refresh
just
before
covered.
Actually
we'd
done
some
work.
We've
done
some
engagement
around
that
and
we
were
looking
at
making
some
small
scale
changes
and
then
the
pandemic
happened,
so
that
obviously
put
paid
to
that.
So
there's
part
of
what
we're
looking
to
do
now
really
is.
C
Is
I
guess
a
kind
of
I
know.
Would
you
look
at
some
of
the
content
that
amanda's
mentioned
and
and
and
actually
taking
the
opportunity
to
look
look
at
the
structure
as
well
in
terms
of
the
content,
I
should
say
we
have.
We
have
two
frameworks
at
the
moment.
We
we
have
one
for
health
and
one
for
social
care.
We
used
to
have
11.
C
I
think
it
was
we
and
we
reduced
those
back
in
back
in
2017
there's
a
lot
of
repetition
within
within
both
frameworks
that
they
are
quite
long.
For
instance,
we
describe
we
our
ratings
characteristics
which
describe
the
different
kind
of
levels
of
rating
for
which,
under
each
key
question
and
spanned,
to
some
70
pages,
and
we
wanted
to
explore
whether
or
not
we
could
reduce
that
amount
of
information
within
each
key
question
and
also
across
key
questions.
The
same
topics
can
crop
up.
C
We
kind
of
so
we
wanted
to
see.
Is
it
possible
to
to
rationalize
that
structure?
Can
we
actually
have
topics
which
sit
under
a
specific
key
question
rather
than
different
aspects
appearing
in
different
places
and
in
terms
of
the
key
lines
of
inquiry
and
and
the
prompts
across
the
two
frameworks
we've
got
335
of
those?
And
again
that's
that's
quite
an
our
watering
number.
C
So
there's
that
part
of
it,
which
is
we
know
we
needed
a
bit
more
here.
We
know
when
it's
time
to
look
again
and,
as
amanda
said,
that's
also
partly
about
what
what
what
topics
and
are
now
needed
that
are
perhaps
weren't
there
before.
Where
do
we
need
to
raise
the
bar
on
certain
areas,
but
our
strategy
signals
some
some
quite
significant
changes,
and-
and
that's
the
other
side
of
this,
really
is
getting
us
onto
the
right
footing
for
for
the
coming
years.
C
How
can
we
do
that
in
a
way
which
could
potentially
be
applied
regardless
of
the
lens
which
we're
taking,
regardless
of
whether
we're
talking
about
provider
regulation,
a
small
service,
a
large
nhs
trust,
a
local
authority?
An
integrated
care
system
or
or
some
some
other
kind
of
way
of
looking
at
quality.
C
A
B
B
And
then
the
other
way
is
as
a
framework
for
collecting
and
assessing
information
about
people
and
their
experiences
of
of
of
care.
So
when
we're
doing
our
assessments,
we're
kind
of
really
clear
what
are
the
things
about
people's
experiences
that
are
most
relevant
at
particular
times
and
in
particular
settings
and
how
we
make
sure
that
we're
collecting
and
getting
enough
evidence
about
about
about
that
experience.
A
C
Certainly,
yes,
so
in
essence,
quality
statements
are
another
way
of
fulfilling
the
role
that
our
ratings
characteristics
currently
deliver.
So
really
the
characteristics
are,
are
the
most
important
part
of
our
current
frameworks.
They
describe
each
level
of
writing.
They
describe
what
care
looks
like
for
that
rating
and
I
suppose
the
most
important
parts
of
that
really
are
how
we,
how
we
define
good
and
outstanding.
C
I
mentioned
earlier
that
we
take
70
pages
to
do
that
across
all
the
different
ratings
and
and
also
that,
there's
a
real
mixture
of
of
some
very
specific
information
within
those
characteristics
and
and
more
kind
of
general
aspirations
and
kind
of
outcomes.
So
the
the
idea
behind
quality
statements
is.
Can
we
extract
the
real,
the
real
kind
of
value
from
those
those
richness
characteristics?
C
Can
we
pull
out
the
parts
that
are
that
are
really
singing
about
what
good
and
outstanding
looks
like
and
and
move
the
rest
of
the
material
to
other
parts
of
the
framework,
so
the
more
detailed
stuff
sitting
at
a
different,
a
different
level
and
frame
those
as
as
clear
statements,
then,
as
amanda
said,
a
really
important
part
of
our
strategy
is
is
reflecting
the
needs
of
people
in
communities
and
we
think
there's
more.
We
can
do
to
make
our
definition
of
good
care
much
clearer.
C
Can
we
actually
define
good
and
then
measure
variation
from
that,
and
that
would
include,
of
course,
when
providers
are
exceeding
that
level,
and
that's
that's
a
really
important
part
of
this
work.
In
particular,
we
we've
never
really
cracked
what
we
mean
by
outstanding,
and
I
think
it's
a
very
difficult
thing
to
do.
Personally,
I
don't
expect
we'll
ever
nail
that
down
and
I
don't
actually
think
we
probably
should.
I
think
we're
talking
about
what
are
the
principles.
What
are
the?
C
What
kind
of
thing
is
it
that
we
would
expect
to
see
in
an
outstanding
service,
and
so
we
really
want
to
come
out
and
engage
with
with
people
on
on
that
and
get
their
thoughts,
but
yeah.
A
big
part
of
quality
statements
is
something
shorter,
more
compelling
something
that
really
speaks
to
everybody
very
clearly
and
that
we
pitch
at
good
and
that
we're
able
then
to
measure
what
it
looks
like
to
exceed
or
to
perhaps
fall
below
that
level.
A
B
And
what
we
are
looking
at
is
is
is
how
we
can
kind
of
take
those
categories
of
evidence
and
really
be
much
clearer
about
about
the
evidence
that
we
would
look
for.
The
particular
pieces
of
evidence
and
the
roots
to
gathering
that
evidence
and
that
that
will
really
help
us
to
focus
the
information
that
we're
looking
for
in
order
to
make
our
judgments
and
also
the
the
kind
of
focus
of
our
activity,
the
focus
of
our
on-site
activity.
B
So
so
this
is
very
much
in
the
strategy
talks
about
about
smarter
regulation
and-
and
we
see
this
is
a
really
kind
of
important
part
of
that-
that
we're
able
to
kind
of
give
that
clarity
around
what
we're
looking
for.
And
what
are
the
really
key
things
that
we
need
to
know.
In
order
to
make
our
judgments.
A
Thanks
amanda-
and
I
guess
building
on
that
and
some
of
the
other
areas
we're
looking
at,
we
also
recognize
that
we
do
regulate
a
lot
of
quite
varied
providers
in
varied
circumstances.
So
dave
is
there
anything
we
can
say
about
some
of
the
sector
and
context
specific
work,
we're
doing
around
evidence
and
quality
indicators.
C
C
We
want
to
to
look
at
so,
for
instance,
a
keynote
inquiry
would
maybe
ask
what
what
does
systems
and
processes
tell
us
about
how
how
it
provides
delivers,
safe
care
in
terms
of
safeguarding,
rather
than
perhaps
a
more
generic
question
falling
off
equality
ambition
around
safe
guarding?
What
that
then
does
with
those
two
nice
simple
categories
of
quality
statements
followed
by
the
routes
to
evidence.
C
So
if
you
picture
a
kind
of
a
hierarchical
pyramid
with
the
five
key
questions
at
the
top
and
these
other
layers
that
we've
described
to
the
quality
statements
and
routes
to
evidence,
then
at
the
bottom
of
that
is
the
largest
part
of
that
pyramid,
which
is
this
specific
set
of
evidence
and
what
we
know.
We
need
to
look
at
and
and
to
and
to
assess,
and
that
will
all
be
continually
kept
alive
by
making
sure
we
align
this
structure
to
best
practice,
standards
and
guidance,
and
that
helps
everybody
have
clarity
on.
A
B
The
focus
of
attention
for
the
next
few
weeks
and
months
is,
is
increasingly
to
engage
on
that
to
test
out
the
ideas
to
start
to
to
to
test
and
pilot
some
of
the
concepts
that
we've
talked
through,
and
this
is
really
important,
both
externally
and
internally,
as
as
as
well,
because,
obviously
there
are
a
lot
of
kind
of
systems
that
we
need
to
build
and
test
within
cqc
as
well,
but
absolutely
about
coming
out.
Sharing
this
talking
through
and
understanding
people's
feedback.
On
on
what
we've
set
out
here,.
A
C
Thanks
tim
yeah,
I
think
just
just
to
make
the
point
really
that
in
this
early
thinking,
we've
been
really
careful
to
ensure
that
we
are
safeguarding
the
continuity
with
our
current
approach.
We
do
need
to
be
ambitious
to
deliver
our
strategy,
but
at
the
same
time
we
need
to
build
on
on
the
baseline
that
we
that
we've
got
in
terms
of
our
ratings
across
the
sectors
and
really,
importantly,
for
providers.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
we're,
not
disruptive
here
that
we
need
to.
C
We
need
to
bring
providers
on
this
journey
with
us
and
to
see
how
how
what
we're
moving
to
actually
relates
back
to
what
we've
been
doing
since
since
2015,
since
the
5k
questions
came
in.
So
our
hope
is
that
that
is.
That
is
clear
when
we
start
to
have
these
conversations
and
start
to
share
our
thoughts.