Care standards "slipping"

[wornout53]

Because that's what the manager of the care home my dad was in said. It also costs them "thousands" per bed to be assessed. Obviously as its a yearly assessment you can roughly guess when the cqc will turn up anyway.

 

That said, the manager in question was, as it turned out, a deceitful bully who shouldn't have been allowed to run a bath unsupervised let alone a nursing home. Still got 3 out of 3 though !

 

I've just checked on the report of the home my dad was in, and apparently the following was used in every criteria

 

"As part of our planning for routine inspection of 3 April 2012 , our inspector reviewed the information in our central database and concluded that no inspection of this standard was required.

 

Our previous check of this standard was based on declarations and evidence given by this care service when they registered with CQC on 30 June 2010."

 

I can tell you, and am in the process of telling the cqc "an inspection of this standard" and all the others mentioned is definately required and not based on something 2 years ago.

 

I agree with this.....a care home I have knowledge of was allowed to get away with operating without an inspection being done and the CQC report said it was based on information given when the home registered.

It was not until a formal complaint was made about the standard of care at this home and fully investigated that anything was done about the neglect and abuse taking place there.

[francypants]

Well, seeing as poppins gives her location as the USA..................

 

Yes I know that, the reason I was asking her is that this thread is about NHS standards slipping and she keeps piping up. I wanted to know how she could argue her point living in the USA, we're on about NHS standards not USA !!

For some reason though she just won't answer me !!!!!

[erebus]

The care industry is just that, a business that makes money from our tax money, and wants to make a profit, at our expence. In oder to make money out of the helpless, one needs to employ as few people as possible, and even fewer people with qualifications. One then bullies them into work practices that would normally need more people, so it get the job done as quickly as possible as ther is lots more to do. Thus feeding and medicating people who will die anyway, is not a priority, as one just wants their money, not their problems. If they complain then ther are subtle ways of dealing with then, its called neglect, and it works a treat, they get ill, and are easier to handle, and its all about money, not care. One sells the concept of care, one needs to get the suckers in, and then one exploits the situation as bonuses for management is a great motivational incentive.

[poppins]

Yes I know that, the reason I was asking her is that this thread is about NHS standards slipping and she keeps piping up. I wanted to know how she could argue her point living in the USA, we're on about NHS standards not USA !!

For some reason though she just won't answer me !!!!!

 

Sorry, answer is...yes I do live in the USA,

[francypants]

Sorry, answer is...yes I do live in the USA,

 

 

Then how can you comment on PRESENT NHS standards ?

 

By the way, thanks for replying.

[libuse]

Because that's what the manager of the care home my dad was in said. It also costs them "thousands" per bed to be assessed. Obviously as its a yearly assessment you can roughly guess when the cqc will turn up anyway.

 

That said, the manager in question was, as it turned out, a deceitful bully who shouldn't have been allowed to run a bath unsupervised let alone a nursing home. Still got 3 out of 3 though !

 

I've just checked on the report of the home my dad was in, and apparently the following was used in every criteria

 

"As part of our planning for routine inspection of 3 April 2012 , our inspector reviewed the information in our central database and concluded that no inspection of this standard was required.

 

Our previous check of this standard was based on declarations and evidence given by this care service when they registered with CQC on 30 June 2010."

 

I can tell you, and am in the process of telling the cqc "an inspection of this standard" and all the others mentioned is definately required and not based on something 2 years ago.

 

Thanks for replying. You don't exactly answer the question I asked, as I'd asked why you thought care and nursing homes had "months to prepare" for inspection, when in fact they are invariably inspected on an unannounced basis.

 

That aside, it's interesting that you've found a home that apparently hasn't been inspected since its registration under the new act. I hope you are going to do what you say and complain to cqc as they say they inspect every care/nursing home at least once a year. You don't mean that some outcomes weren't inspected, do you? CQC's inspection guidance shows that they don't inspect every outcome every year

 

What do you mean by "3 out of 3", by the way?

[tinfoilhat]

Thanks for replying. You don't exactly answer the question I asked, as I'd asked why you thought care and nursing homes had "months to prepare" for inspection, when in fact they are invariably inspected on an unannounced basis.

 

That aside, it's interesting that you've found a home that apparently hasn't been inspected since its registration under the new act. I hope you are going to do what you say and complain to cqc as they say they inspect every care/nursing home at least once a year. You don't mean that some outcomes weren't inspected, do you? CQC's inspection guidance shows that they don't inspect every outcome every year

 

What do you mean by "3 out of 3", by the way?

 

I'll try and find out specifics about the "months" bit but certainly layers of dust that had been there for a while were removed in the few weeks on the run up to the inspection. I made a mistake on the 3 out of 3 stars bit it was 2 under the old rating - I checked that. I'm sure it talks about announced checks on the cqc website as well. I'll check that too.

 

The home in question has been inspected on the date in question. My mum was there as it happened on the above date, which is why I'm somewhat perplexed myself on the outcomes listed out of every category.

 

Do you work in the industry or are you a concerned relative ?

 

EDIT - cqc says they are unannounced. Have I got it wrong (probably !!) or was there a tip off - that said if its a yearly thing you could get a rough idea when it's due.

[libuse]

I'll try and find out specifics about the "months" bit but certainly layers of dust that had been there for a while were removed in the few weeks on the run up to the inspection. I made a mistake on the 3 out of 3 stars bit it was 2 under the old rating - I checked that. I'm sure it talks about announced checks on the cqc website as well. I'll check that too.

 

The home in question has been inspected on the date in question. My mum was there as it happened on the above date, which is why I'm somewhat perplexed myself on the outcomes listed out of every category.

 

Do you work in the industry or are you a concerned relative ?

 

EDIT - cqc says they are unannounced. Have I got it wrong (probably !!) or was there a tip off - that said if its a yearly thing you could get a rough idea when it's due.

 

I work in an aligned industry. The yearly thing is moved around so it wouldn't be very easy for a home to predict when their inspection is likely to be. I have to say, though, I'm struggling to understand your answer as in your earlier post I thought the home you're concerned about hadn't been inspected, but now it looks like it had?

 

The star rating is what they used to do when they were csci, they don't do it now as cqc.

 

Hope you are going to complain to cqc if the unannounced inspection was leaked as they really should address that.

[poppins]

Then how can you comment on PRESENT NHS standards ?

 

By the way, thanks for replying.

 

Because I can, don't worry about it

[francypants]

Because I can, don't worry about it

 

 

OK, I won't worry !