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.