[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]October 22, 2018

By Caring Times editor GEOFF HODGSON

A recent report commissioned by the Kings Fund and Alliance Manchester Business School has found that a CQC rating has little or no bearing on the future performance of a provider, which reinforces my long-held belief that ratings are a humbug, and that CQC has no business to be awarding them.

All operators love to have their care homes rated ‘outstanding’ but ratings are not uppermost in people’s minds when they are choosing a care home; in talking to people I have found that price, location and a subjective judgement made on personal inspection are what swings it for most families who are looking for a care home on behalf of their loved one. Many have no idea what their chosen home’s rating is.

Perhaps at the high end, where people can afford to be choosy, an ‘outstanding’ rating might give a luxury provider an intangible marketing edge over their nearby luxury competition, but that’s about as far as it goes.

At the other end, a home rated ‘requires improvement’ is likely to be already struggling. The poor rating certainly isn’t going to help recovery but it’s unlikely to be a causative factor. Whoever awards them, ratings have little practical relevance in the care home arena.

Tell me I’m wrong to see CQC quality ratings as an expensive sideline of dubious utility, and to believe that the regulator could deploy its resources more constructively by adopting a more supportive and collegiate approach to its relationship with care providers.

• The CT Blog is written in a personal capacity – comments and opinions expressed are not necessarily endorsed or supported by Caring Times.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/2″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row] ')}