One of the care homes in our small group has come under serious scrutiny and Enforcement Notices for what is essentially minor errors in care plans, yet the following have been ignored by CQC in previous inspections with the previous owner:
1. We have found no evidence of Gas Safety Certificates prior to the present owner taking over.
2. No evidence of 5 year electrical safety certificates prior to the present owner taking over.
3. Last Fire Risk Assessment in 2010 with no updates or reviews.
4. In 14 years CQC inspectors have missed that the previous owner had been in breach of the Care Standards by not providing a safe lockable place in residents bedrooms.
5. Boilers had not been maintained, one boiler did not even have the outer safety cover.
6. Boilers in such a poor state of repair had to be instantly condemned and replaced.
This home has echoes of Copthorne, it was getting continual good inspections despite not being full and not meeting safety standards in many areas. Since the present owner has taken over, the boilers have been replaced and the home has a gas safety certificate, the home has a five year electrical certificate after extensive work has been completed. There is a new Fire Risk assessment in place and the Fire Officer inspected the home at the inspectors request and found only minor problems all which have been rectified within two weeks. All the residents have a lockable place for their valuables.
Prior to the home being purchased by the present owner, it was in such a poor state of repair that it was an accident waiting to happen. The boilers were turned on just after the new owner took over and instantly there was a serious electrical short which could have turned into a major fire, this was rectified at a cost of over £2,000 and the boilers made safe to run until they could be shut down for the summer and replaced. At least two fuse boxes had to be replaced and major electrical work completed before we could achieve the 5 year electrical safety certificate, so the obvious question is, 'Why was this inspected and found to be either adequate or good?'
Wednesday 6 August 2014
Wednesday 16 July 2014
Medication Competency Checklist
My Deputy and myself have designed a form for staff to check their competency to give medication, if anyone is interested in having this please let me know.
The Cost of Care?
In my care home we get the Social Services top rate which equates to £66.90 per day per resident.
For this cost we have to provide:
With an ageing population I know this will be a major problem, but care homes will go bankrupt and then places that are needed will be lost. The cut backs are not efficient because instead of cutting services they should increase financial efficiency which the NHS and the government seem unable to do, one major cut would be to put a cap on managers and their wages some of whom get massive salaries, yet fail to provide a good service.
For this cost we have to provide:
- Three meals, two of which must be hot and a choice of meals,
- Personal care if required,
- All heating,
- Lighting,
- Water for washing and bathing,
- Endless drinks throughout the day,
- Snacks,
- Biscuits,
- Activities,
- Escorts to appointments
- Laundry service
With an ageing population I know this will be a major problem, but care homes will go bankrupt and then places that are needed will be lost. The cut backs are not efficient because instead of cutting services they should increase financial efficiency which the NHS and the government seem unable to do, one major cut would be to put a cap on managers and their wages some of whom get massive salaries, yet fail to provide a good service.
Wednesday 9 July 2014
Question, Is There Any Body CQC or a CQC Inspector Hasn't Pissed Off?
I was told today that in Eastbourne a senior executive of CQC managed to piss off nurses by telling them, 'Look after my Inspectors and give them lots of drinks'. I do not know if this is true or accurate, but it sounds perfectly plausable.
So my question is in the title, 'Is there any body CQC or a CQC inspector hasn't pissed off?' I think this is a good question as I know they have a very low standing in the Social Care Sector, and now they are doing the same to the NHS and Dentists.
I have yet to meet an inspector who doesn't have serious issues, by that I mean they personally have serious issues. Many seem to be egotists and have let power go to their heads. Having worked in care for excess of 40 years I know that regulation is needed, after all I will be honest and say not every care home, care home manager or proprietor is passionate about care, but most are, like any business it takes a few rotten apples to spoil the barrel.
Saying that though, I have yet to find or work with an inspector who understands what it is to run a care home, who understands what was initially proposed under the 'Fit for the Future' banner and the spirit in which regulation was supposed to work as helping and guiding along with regulation.
CQC has proved itself over and over again as 'Not Fit for Purpose' after all its own mistakes far outweigh those of individual care homes or hospitals and a brief history of abject failure is sad reading,
Basildon and Thurrock University hospital where possibly hundreds of people died yet was passed as good by CQC.
Winterbourne View another case of major failure by CQC where abuse was widespread.
Ash Court again another home with serious abuse.
Copthorne the latest in a long line of failures by CQC, again passed as good, and many unexplained deaths.
These are just the ones that hit the press, and each time CQC has an excuse, with Copthorne Andrea Sutcliffe wrote a long piece defending CQC and this was sent to everyone who has a listed email with CQC, she stated there were lessons to be learned, but how many more have to die or be abused because CQC inspectors have no first hand knowledge of the areas they inspect in. For example, I have had inspectors who have been, primary school teacher, a relative carer, a nurse and not one inspector in the past 14 years who has first hand experience of running a care home or first hand experience of seeing the effects of neglect or abuse and has had to help pick up the pieces.
Those who have read my previous blog know I was upset by the way our sister home was inspected, by an ex-nurse and her colleague. There were inconsistencies and she was able to show herself to be biased and admitted that she had inspected the home before under the previous owner and knew of medication failures, poor fire sign-age, poor policies and procedures and poor care planning yet consistently passed the home until the new owner came along and started to correct everything we found wrong, and that wasn't all we found.
There were no safety certificates in place, the boilers had to be replaced as they were dangerous, the rooms had no safe lockable place for residents valuables, the list goes on and on and we could prove this at least once by referring to an inspection report from 2010. The poor medication practise was observed by three outside members of staff, and the new deputy manager, but the inspector knew of this and knew the practise was dangerous but continued to allow this to go on unchecked. No wonder CQC inspectors have a lowly standing in the caring community.
This will never change until CQC don't just change their name, but change their whole ethos. Homes, managers and owners who try to right the wrongs seem to be targeted as easy prey, yet as long as this is allowed to happen by our politicians we can expect more abuse, more deaths and continued failure by this runaway juggernaut.
Amendment
In the news today CQC have admitted they have taken 126 inspectors in 2012 who are not of a good standard, but they cannot dismiss them for fear of claims of unfair dismissal!!!! In my estimation evey inspector in CQC should be completely re-evaluated and any or all who do not have relative experience and skills to complete these inspections should be discharged or dismissed as not 'Fit for Purpose'. This is another example of the crazy way CQC are being run, and they are the regulators??????
This should be debated at the highest level as CQC have such a massive history of failure and yet it still rumbles on like a runaway train with no control, no clear leadership and no real commitment.
So my question is in the title, 'Is there any body CQC or a CQC inspector hasn't pissed off?' I think this is a good question as I know they have a very low standing in the Social Care Sector, and now they are doing the same to the NHS and Dentists.
I have yet to meet an inspector who doesn't have serious issues, by that I mean they personally have serious issues. Many seem to be egotists and have let power go to their heads. Having worked in care for excess of 40 years I know that regulation is needed, after all I will be honest and say not every care home, care home manager or proprietor is passionate about care, but most are, like any business it takes a few rotten apples to spoil the barrel.
Saying that though, I have yet to find or work with an inspector who understands what it is to run a care home, who understands what was initially proposed under the 'Fit for the Future' banner and the spirit in which regulation was supposed to work as helping and guiding along with regulation.
CQC has proved itself over and over again as 'Not Fit for Purpose' after all its own mistakes far outweigh those of individual care homes or hospitals and a brief history of abject failure is sad reading,
Basildon and Thurrock University hospital where possibly hundreds of people died yet was passed as good by CQC.
Winterbourne View another case of major failure by CQC where abuse was widespread.
Ash Court again another home with serious abuse.
Copthorne the latest in a long line of failures by CQC, again passed as good, and many unexplained deaths.
These are just the ones that hit the press, and each time CQC has an excuse, with Copthorne Andrea Sutcliffe wrote a long piece defending CQC and this was sent to everyone who has a listed email with CQC, she stated there were lessons to be learned, but how many more have to die or be abused because CQC inspectors have no first hand knowledge of the areas they inspect in. For example, I have had inspectors who have been, primary school teacher, a relative carer, a nurse and not one inspector in the past 14 years who has first hand experience of running a care home or first hand experience of seeing the effects of neglect or abuse and has had to help pick up the pieces.
Those who have read my previous blog know I was upset by the way our sister home was inspected, by an ex-nurse and her colleague. There were inconsistencies and she was able to show herself to be biased and admitted that she had inspected the home before under the previous owner and knew of medication failures, poor fire sign-age, poor policies and procedures and poor care planning yet consistently passed the home until the new owner came along and started to correct everything we found wrong, and that wasn't all we found.
There were no safety certificates in place, the boilers had to be replaced as they were dangerous, the rooms had no safe lockable place for residents valuables, the list goes on and on and we could prove this at least once by referring to an inspection report from 2010. The poor medication practise was observed by three outside members of staff, and the new deputy manager, but the inspector knew of this and knew the practise was dangerous but continued to allow this to go on unchecked. No wonder CQC inspectors have a lowly standing in the caring community.
This will never change until CQC don't just change their name, but change their whole ethos. Homes, managers and owners who try to right the wrongs seem to be targeted as easy prey, yet as long as this is allowed to happen by our politicians we can expect more abuse, more deaths and continued failure by this runaway juggernaut.
Amendment
In the news today CQC have admitted they have taken 126 inspectors in 2012 who are not of a good standard, but they cannot dismiss them for fear of claims of unfair dismissal!!!! In my estimation evey inspector in CQC should be completely re-evaluated and any or all who do not have relative experience and skills to complete these inspections should be discharged or dismissed as not 'Fit for Purpose'. This is another example of the crazy way CQC are being run, and they are the regulators??????
This should be debated at the highest level as CQC have such a massive history of failure and yet it still rumbles on like a runaway train with no control, no clear leadership and no real commitment.
Thursday 3 July 2014
CQC Still Not Getting IT
One of the care homes in our small group was inspected in April, not unusual, but this was very unusual and shows that despite all the hype from Andrea Sutcliffe in her blogs and email updates, CQC still hasn't got a clue.
Just prior to this inspection we had to investigate and dismiss the registered manager for numerous failures, this was completed correctly with a complete investigation, proper disciplinary and once completed all reports and evidence were sent to CQC, DBS and Safeguarding. Also prior to this inspection the homes previous inspector spoke with the Acting Manager who explained everything to him and he agreed to give the home three months grace to put everything right.
About three weeks later this inspector turns up, who has no knowledge of the report that had been sent to CQC by 1st Class recorded delivery, had no knowledge of the phone call and agreement from the previous inspector, had no knowledge of the Safeguarding Alert that had been raised and then proceeded to show a complete lack of understanding or empathy backed up by an obvious bias towards the present owner compared to the previous owner. Let me explain more so you can judge for yourself.
The inspector came along unannounced as expected, but only about 3 - 4 weeks after we had the agreement to a three month state of grace. The Acting manager was totally transparent, open and honest and explained what had happened, I also went across and brought with me copies of all the main evidence and paperwork. We were able to demonstrate that things were being corrected and being put in place to rectify all the failings we had found (not an outside agency), and on the surface, despite admitting she knew nothing of what had happened, appeared to accept that we had things under control and were moving forward and planning how to tackle the massive task we had.
She left stating that she would have to take this up with her manager and the next day we were informed that another inspection was to take place with both this inspector and her manager on Friday, a day later. This was a far more aggressive inspection which also included inappropriate comments by the inspector, 'you don't get a second chance' etc. We were also told that the inspector had contacted Safeguarding and they had no evidence this had been reported and she was unable to get a P number.
The owner rang me and I said leave this with me and I rang Safeguarding immediately and within 30 seconds of being connected had the P number, which I then phoned across to the owner. Now this is where the bias starts to slip in. During the inspection the Policies and Procedures were looked at, but the Acting manager also showed the inspector the templates we had to produce personalised Policies for the home. The Policies and Procedures the owner inherited he was told were, 'barely adequate', yet these were the same policies and procedures that CQC had passed with the previous owner and the templates were not accepted. The owner was also asked to produce the safety certificates electricity and gas etc, again this gets interesting. On the day of the 1st inspection our electrician turned up to complete the work that he had been commissioned to do to achieve the electrical certificate and he was questioned by the inspector who was suspicious we had just called him in.
When the owner purchased the home there were no safety certificates we could find, no gas, electricity and the pat testing certificate was over two years old, also the residents rooms had no lockable place for residents to use as safekeeping, the rooms did not have privacy locks, the office had no safe and to top this off when we asked British Gas to inspect the boilers they raised major concerns of the safety of these boilers and the temperature in the boiler room.
Immediately the owner replaced the boilers, put lockable safe boxes in each room, privacy locks on the doors and put a safe in the office, but the previous owner had been receiving consistent good reports, because she was maternal and cared for her residents, but obviously not enough to keep them safe!
Despite everything that had been done and the plan to correct all the errors we found that the registered manager had failed to do and was dismissed for, and the fact that this was not another Winterbourne or Copthorne where poor practise was being ignored, the home was put on special measures.
I wrote to Mr Bxxxx to raise concerns at the way the inspector and her manager had conducted these inspections without appearing to be aware of the reports I had submitted with evidence. I got a response from the manager who I had raised a concern about! It had been handed to her!
There are many concerns and issues here:
1. Why was the inspector not aware of the report I had submitted?
2. Why had she not discussed the home with the previous inspector and was aware of what he had agreed with the Acting Manager by phone?
3. Why was it felt necessary to say, 'you don't get a second chance'?
4. Why was the home getting good inspection reports, under the previous owner, when it had no safety certificates in place?
5. Why was the home, under the previous owner, getting good inspection reports when there was no safe lockable place for the residents or even in the office?
6. Why were the Policies and Procedures accepted as adequate under the previous owner and suddenly 'barely adequate' with a new owner?
7. I told the new owner that the existing care plans under the previous owner were not suitable, they were outdated, outmoded and poorly written yet were accepted by CQC.
8. The inspector told the Acting Manager that she must have consent forms in place, but under the previous owner there had been no evidence of consent having ever been put in place, yet she was still getting good inspections!
I could make this list double I would think, but this gives a flavour, where CQC have, suddenly, with a change of ownership, decided that everything that wasn't completed under the previous owner and they had let slide now had to be completed yesterday.
Double standards are being exercised by CQC. They have failed in their duty of care to keep residents safe by not checking on safety certificates until change of ownership. The Policies and Procedures in my experience which they passed as adequate I saw as substandard and the same with the care plans.
As a final note to this sordid tale, the inspector rang the Acting manager yesterday (02/07/14) and during the conversation made the statement, 'its a shame Mrs XXXXX had to sell as she had such a maternal way with the residents and its a shame the home had to change'!!!!!!!!
WHAT THE F**K AND SHE IS AN INSPECTOR!!!!!
ADDITIONAL COMMENT
As a final note to this tale, it appears that being open, honest and transparent with CQC is not something to be recommended. If you are a Winterbourne or Copthorne you can get away with things until its hits the national press! CQC have never had an audit themselves or been inspected to show that they are meeting their own standards and yet they have constantly been found to be failing, often with serious results as I mentioned Winterbourne and Copthorne are only two of the most infamous of their failures, there have been more, but these haven't made the press or if they have have managed to slip under the net of public scrutiny.
I agree whole heartedly that care homes should be inspected, but I do not think that CQC should themselves not be inspected and audited as 'Fit for Purpose' as they appear to be able to make some catastrophic errors and just get away with a slap on the wrist, whereas they will make threats to care homes to improve or be shut, again another double standard.
Update
Acting manager going through another inspection today is petrified by the way she is being inspected, the owner feels this is a vendetta because concerns were raised over previous inspections. Now a resident is at risk of being given notice as with him there the home cannot be compliant, the move could bring his life to an early end as moves are extremely traumatic, but what can be done? The owner is also concerned that he may now have to close the home as it is impossible to work with the current inspector and to have an Acting Manager in her first position absolutely petrified is not good for the residents or the home.
16.50 still going on attacking the poor acting manager, moving goal posts and sniggering in corners, become silent when the acting manager is within earshot, but she has seen them sniggering. One member of staff failed to attend training so possibly being made non compliant for that!!!! Now pointing out poor fire signage that was inherited from previous owner and trying to claim this is only since the new owner took over, they are trying to cover their own backs for the fact that they missed the fact that the previous owner was completely non compliant and CQC did nothing!
Today has not been of any credit to CQC, they have ignored the fact they have failed in their duty of care when it came to this home under previous ownership, and have shown themselves to be biased, petty and carry a grudge because concerns were raised about the initial inspection. CQC promised to work with providers to assist them to be compliant, but in this instance the evidence has been that CQC haven't changed, they still do not advise and help, but were aggressive, lacking in empathy, understanding or even being aware of what had passed in the home and what was being completed at a fast pace to correct what we had originally found.
Do not trust CQC under Andrea Sutcliffe, it is still the same, no change, in fact I would have to say that the message given in blogs and updates is totally misleading. This is only a personal opinion as I watched from afar and was kept up to date with text messages and phone calls, but it seems a prospective good manager has been crushed by inspectors, and I wouldn't blame her for throwing in the towel. So how do we nurture prospective good managers when CQC do their best to undermine them, God help us in the future, as at this rate we will run out of people who have the skill, ability and willingness to take on the massive challenge of running care homes.
Just prior to this inspection we had to investigate and dismiss the registered manager for numerous failures, this was completed correctly with a complete investigation, proper disciplinary and once completed all reports and evidence were sent to CQC, DBS and Safeguarding. Also prior to this inspection the homes previous inspector spoke with the Acting Manager who explained everything to him and he agreed to give the home three months grace to put everything right.
About three weeks later this inspector turns up, who has no knowledge of the report that had been sent to CQC by 1st Class recorded delivery, had no knowledge of the phone call and agreement from the previous inspector, had no knowledge of the Safeguarding Alert that had been raised and then proceeded to show a complete lack of understanding or empathy backed up by an obvious bias towards the present owner compared to the previous owner. Let me explain more so you can judge for yourself.
The inspector came along unannounced as expected, but only about 3 - 4 weeks after we had the agreement to a three month state of grace. The Acting manager was totally transparent, open and honest and explained what had happened, I also went across and brought with me copies of all the main evidence and paperwork. We were able to demonstrate that things were being corrected and being put in place to rectify all the failings we had found (not an outside agency), and on the surface, despite admitting she knew nothing of what had happened, appeared to accept that we had things under control and were moving forward and planning how to tackle the massive task we had.
She left stating that she would have to take this up with her manager and the next day we were informed that another inspection was to take place with both this inspector and her manager on Friday, a day later. This was a far more aggressive inspection which also included inappropriate comments by the inspector, 'you don't get a second chance' etc. We were also told that the inspector had contacted Safeguarding and they had no evidence this had been reported and she was unable to get a P number.
The owner rang me and I said leave this with me and I rang Safeguarding immediately and within 30 seconds of being connected had the P number, which I then phoned across to the owner. Now this is where the bias starts to slip in. During the inspection the Policies and Procedures were looked at, but the Acting manager also showed the inspector the templates we had to produce personalised Policies for the home. The Policies and Procedures the owner inherited he was told were, 'barely adequate', yet these were the same policies and procedures that CQC had passed with the previous owner and the templates were not accepted. The owner was also asked to produce the safety certificates electricity and gas etc, again this gets interesting. On the day of the 1st inspection our electrician turned up to complete the work that he had been commissioned to do to achieve the electrical certificate and he was questioned by the inspector who was suspicious we had just called him in.
When the owner purchased the home there were no safety certificates we could find, no gas, electricity and the pat testing certificate was over two years old, also the residents rooms had no lockable place for residents to use as safekeeping, the rooms did not have privacy locks, the office had no safe and to top this off when we asked British Gas to inspect the boilers they raised major concerns of the safety of these boilers and the temperature in the boiler room.
Immediately the owner replaced the boilers, put lockable safe boxes in each room, privacy locks on the doors and put a safe in the office, but the previous owner had been receiving consistent good reports, because she was maternal and cared for her residents, but obviously not enough to keep them safe!
Despite everything that had been done and the plan to correct all the errors we found that the registered manager had failed to do and was dismissed for, and the fact that this was not another Winterbourne or Copthorne where poor practise was being ignored, the home was put on special measures.
I wrote to Mr Bxxxx to raise concerns at the way the inspector and her manager had conducted these inspections without appearing to be aware of the reports I had submitted with evidence. I got a response from the manager who I had raised a concern about! It had been handed to her!
There are many concerns and issues here:
1. Why was the inspector not aware of the report I had submitted?
2. Why had she not discussed the home with the previous inspector and was aware of what he had agreed with the Acting Manager by phone?
3. Why was it felt necessary to say, 'you don't get a second chance'?
4. Why was the home getting good inspection reports, under the previous owner, when it had no safety certificates in place?
5. Why was the home, under the previous owner, getting good inspection reports when there was no safe lockable place for the residents or even in the office?
6. Why were the Policies and Procedures accepted as adequate under the previous owner and suddenly 'barely adequate' with a new owner?
7. I told the new owner that the existing care plans under the previous owner were not suitable, they were outdated, outmoded and poorly written yet were accepted by CQC.
8. The inspector told the Acting Manager that she must have consent forms in place, but under the previous owner there had been no evidence of consent having ever been put in place, yet she was still getting good inspections!
I could make this list double I would think, but this gives a flavour, where CQC have, suddenly, with a change of ownership, decided that everything that wasn't completed under the previous owner and they had let slide now had to be completed yesterday.
Double standards are being exercised by CQC. They have failed in their duty of care to keep residents safe by not checking on safety certificates until change of ownership. The Policies and Procedures in my experience which they passed as adequate I saw as substandard and the same with the care plans.
As a final note to this sordid tale, the inspector rang the Acting manager yesterday (02/07/14) and during the conversation made the statement, 'its a shame Mrs XXXXX had to sell as she had such a maternal way with the residents and its a shame the home had to change'!!!!!!!!
WHAT THE F**K AND SHE IS AN INSPECTOR!!!!!
ADDITIONAL COMMENT
As a final note to this tale, it appears that being open, honest and transparent with CQC is not something to be recommended. If you are a Winterbourne or Copthorne you can get away with things until its hits the national press! CQC have never had an audit themselves or been inspected to show that they are meeting their own standards and yet they have constantly been found to be failing, often with serious results as I mentioned Winterbourne and Copthorne are only two of the most infamous of their failures, there have been more, but these haven't made the press or if they have have managed to slip under the net of public scrutiny.
I agree whole heartedly that care homes should be inspected, but I do not think that CQC should themselves not be inspected and audited as 'Fit for Purpose' as they appear to be able to make some catastrophic errors and just get away with a slap on the wrist, whereas they will make threats to care homes to improve or be shut, again another double standard.
Update
Acting manager going through another inspection today is petrified by the way she is being inspected, the owner feels this is a vendetta because concerns were raised over previous inspections. Now a resident is at risk of being given notice as with him there the home cannot be compliant, the move could bring his life to an early end as moves are extremely traumatic, but what can be done? The owner is also concerned that he may now have to close the home as it is impossible to work with the current inspector and to have an Acting Manager in her first position absolutely petrified is not good for the residents or the home.
16.50 still going on attacking the poor acting manager, moving goal posts and sniggering in corners, become silent when the acting manager is within earshot, but she has seen them sniggering. One member of staff failed to attend training so possibly being made non compliant for that!!!! Now pointing out poor fire signage that was inherited from previous owner and trying to claim this is only since the new owner took over, they are trying to cover their own backs for the fact that they missed the fact that the previous owner was completely non compliant and CQC did nothing!
Today has not been of any credit to CQC, they have ignored the fact they have failed in their duty of care when it came to this home under previous ownership, and have shown themselves to be biased, petty and carry a grudge because concerns were raised about the initial inspection. CQC promised to work with providers to assist them to be compliant, but in this instance the evidence has been that CQC haven't changed, they still do not advise and help, but were aggressive, lacking in empathy, understanding or even being aware of what had passed in the home and what was being completed at a fast pace to correct what we had originally found.
Do not trust CQC under Andrea Sutcliffe, it is still the same, no change, in fact I would have to say that the message given in blogs and updates is totally misleading. This is only a personal opinion as I watched from afar and was kept up to date with text messages and phone calls, but it seems a prospective good manager has been crushed by inspectors, and I wouldn't blame her for throwing in the towel. So how do we nurture prospective good managers when CQC do their best to undermine them, God help us in the future, as at this rate we will run out of people who have the skill, ability and willingness to take on the massive challenge of running care homes.
Thursday 20 June 2013
CQC in The NewsAgain as NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
Well what a surprise (not) that CQC are yet again back in the news and its own Chairman David Prior has admitted this.
I wrote to David Cameron expressing long term concerns about CQC in all its various guises (CSCI, NCSC etc) and whilst Cynthia Bower was in charge, questioning the type of person they were employing as Inspectors, and he just passed the letter on until it was sent to CQC, now Cameron and Hunt are sticking their heads in the sand and reacting as if no one told them what was going on!!!!
CQC is NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE and is carrying on as normal. Their own house is just as corrupt and dirty as it has always been, and as taxpayers we are paying for the privilege.
For over 10 years I have been saying openly that CQC or in one of its guises, should stop all inspections, until they have gone through their own books, rooted out those who are failing (I know of one inspector who was complained about weekly and had no experience of care, outside of her family), and had a clear strategy that was open to everyone who they are inspecting.
Instead we have an unclear strategy, muddled inspections, where it seems the good homes are penalised for being, good, open and caring, and the poor homes and owners manage to get away with poor practise.
That now includes the Health Service. Unless Cameron and Hunt have the balls to tackle CQC and its core workings, whilst they are allowed to continue to inspect with all this fallout going on, no one will trust them.
Shut it down for one year, give it clear goals to be achieved every three months, strategy, recruiting and training, inspection and feedback, then when they pass these goals and can prove that everyone is on the same page let everyone who they inspect know what they will be inspecting for each year.
The best plans are those that are simple, but Cameron and Hunt have to take some of the blame I can't have been the only person who has written to Cameron to have his concerns brushed aside, and that was only a year or two at most ago.
I wrote to David Cameron expressing long term concerns about CQC in all its various guises (CSCI, NCSC etc) and whilst Cynthia Bower was in charge, questioning the type of person they were employing as Inspectors, and he just passed the letter on until it was sent to CQC, now Cameron and Hunt are sticking their heads in the sand and reacting as if no one told them what was going on!!!!
CQC is NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE and is carrying on as normal. Their own house is just as corrupt and dirty as it has always been, and as taxpayers we are paying for the privilege.
For over 10 years I have been saying openly that CQC or in one of its guises, should stop all inspections, until they have gone through their own books, rooted out those who are failing (I know of one inspector who was complained about weekly and had no experience of care, outside of her family), and had a clear strategy that was open to everyone who they are inspecting.
Instead we have an unclear strategy, muddled inspections, where it seems the good homes are penalised for being, good, open and caring, and the poor homes and owners manage to get away with poor practise.
That now includes the Health Service. Unless Cameron and Hunt have the balls to tackle CQC and its core workings, whilst they are allowed to continue to inspect with all this fallout going on, no one will trust them.
Shut it down for one year, give it clear goals to be achieved every three months, strategy, recruiting and training, inspection and feedback, then when they pass these goals and can prove that everyone is on the same page let everyone who they inspect know what they will be inspecting for each year.
The best plans are those that are simple, but Cameron and Hunt have to take some of the blame I can't have been the only person who has written to Cameron to have his concerns brushed aside, and that was only a year or two at most ago.
Wednesday 2 May 2012
Managers Beware of Evil Staff
Try as you might, there is evil in care homes that goes far beyond physical abuse.
I have always made sure that I have been scrupulously fair with staff and have always tried to assist staff and watched their backs, but there is always one who cannot see the good you have done, and is arrogant enough to think that they can get you back,by being the homes unofficial lawyer.
I have one such member of staff who has been extremely conservative with the truth. I know why she has done it, the owner knows why she has done it, and the irony is that she is lucky to still be employed at the home due to many of the complaints from seniors and from some other staff about her attitude, but me being me felt I could work with her and teach her.
The owner has always been kept aware of what is happening in the home and the staff and he has on at least one occasion asked me why she was still there, but I wanted to teach her and get her to see how things could be done.
Now I am left with only 6.5 years left before I can retire and this 19 year old has decided to make sure I cannot work again. She has worked, I believe, in collusion with other staff to make a mistake she and another member of staff made, where I had to pick up the pieces, into a complaint about my handling of the situation. Yes I was sharp with the resident, but a tough love, type of sharp where I was trying to motivate her back to her room. Had a wheelchair been used in the instance that she couldn't walk even 15 feet across the dining room, then this incident wouldn't have happened, but she nor the other staff involved have been honest about their involvement, instead choosing to lay all blame on me.
There was no physical abuse, no verbal abuse, no swearing only a firm sharp tone to try and keep this resident on her feet to hopefully get her to her room without incident. I know hand on heart that I have done nothing wrong, but I feel I have been set up, and I get the impression so does my employer. All my good work over the past 42 years or so is now under the microscope and I feel gutted.
If I loose my job I have requested that the owner employ the toughest manager he can find to knock this home back into shape as if not things could go from bad to worse. This member of staff has now had power that she is unready and unable to deal with and this makes her very dangerous in any care environment, she could destroy everything that has been built up over the past 2.5 years just for some personal self gratification, not for as she would have everyone believe because she was concerned or because she thought she was working in the best interest of a resident. After all this is a girl who had no compunction of coming into my office and telling me that she was the best carer at my care home, as I said arrogant.
I have always made sure that I have been scrupulously fair with staff and have always tried to assist staff and watched their backs, but there is always one who cannot see the good you have done, and is arrogant enough to think that they can get you back,by being the homes unofficial lawyer.
I have one such member of staff who has been extremely conservative with the truth. I know why she has done it, the owner knows why she has done it, and the irony is that she is lucky to still be employed at the home due to many of the complaints from seniors and from some other staff about her attitude, but me being me felt I could work with her and teach her.
The owner has always been kept aware of what is happening in the home and the staff and he has on at least one occasion asked me why she was still there, but I wanted to teach her and get her to see how things could be done.
Now I am left with only 6.5 years left before I can retire and this 19 year old has decided to make sure I cannot work again. She has worked, I believe, in collusion with other staff to make a mistake she and another member of staff made, where I had to pick up the pieces, into a complaint about my handling of the situation. Yes I was sharp with the resident, but a tough love, type of sharp where I was trying to motivate her back to her room. Had a wheelchair been used in the instance that she couldn't walk even 15 feet across the dining room, then this incident wouldn't have happened, but she nor the other staff involved have been honest about their involvement, instead choosing to lay all blame on me.
There was no physical abuse, no verbal abuse, no swearing only a firm sharp tone to try and keep this resident on her feet to hopefully get her to her room without incident. I know hand on heart that I have done nothing wrong, but I feel I have been set up, and I get the impression so does my employer. All my good work over the past 42 years or so is now under the microscope and I feel gutted.
If I loose my job I have requested that the owner employ the toughest manager he can find to knock this home back into shape as if not things could go from bad to worse. This member of staff has now had power that she is unready and unable to deal with and this makes her very dangerous in any care environment, she could destroy everything that has been built up over the past 2.5 years just for some personal self gratification, not for as she would have everyone believe because she was concerned or because she thought she was working in the best interest of a resident. After all this is a girl who had no compunction of coming into my office and telling me that she was the best carer at my care home, as I said arrogant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)