DOCSLIB.ORG

NHS Deficits

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NHS Deficits House of Commons Health Committee NHS Deficits Sixth Report of Session 2005–06 Volume II Written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 8 June 2006 HC 1204-II Published on 28 June 2006 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £20.50 The Health Committee The Health Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department of Health and its associated bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) (Chairman) Mr David Amess MP (Conservative, Southend West) Charlotte Atkins MP (Labour, Staffordshire Moorlands) Mr Ronnie Campbell MP (Labour, Blyth Valley) Jim Dowd MP (Labour, Lewisham West) Sandra Gidley MP (Liberal Democrat, Romsey) Anne Milton MP (Conservative, Guildford) Dr Doug Naysmith MP (Labour, Bristol North West) Mike Penning MP (Conservative, Hemel Hempstead) Dr Howard Stoate MP (Labour, Dartford) Dr Richard Taylor MP (Independent, Wyre Forest) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/healthcom Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Dr David Harrison (Clerk), Eliot Wilson (Second Clerk), Christine Kirkpatrick (Committee Specialist), Ralph Coulbeck (Committee Specialist), Duma Langton (Committee Assistant) and Julie Storey (Secretary). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Health Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6182. The Committee’s email address is [email protected]. List of written evidence Page 1 Department of Health (Def 01) Ev 1 2 Adur, Arun and Worthing PCT (Def 51) Ev 9 3 Advanced Medical Solutions (Def 34) Ev 10 4 The American Pharmaceutical Group (Def 29) Ev 12 5 Amicus (Def 11) Ev 15 6 Audit Commission (Def 25) Ev 18 7 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire SHA (Def 52) Ev 26 8 British Medical Association (Def 33) Ev 27 9 Dr Peter Carter (Def 15) Ev 32 10 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (Def 16) Ev 37 11 Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health (Def 28) Ev 41 12 County Councils Network (Def 37) Ev 46 13 Deltex Medical Group plc (Def 32) Ev 48 14 Diabetes UK (Def 30) Ev 51 15 Finance and Leasing Association (Def 09) Ev 53 16 Healthcare Commission (Def 45) Ev 55 17 Patient & Public Involvement Forum, Hull & East Yorks Hospital Trust (Def 17) Ev 59 18 Improving Surgical Outcomes Group (Def 41) Ev 62 19 Kensington and Chelsea PCT (Def 57) Ev 64 20 Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Health, The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (Def 14) Ev 67 21 King’s Fund (Def 49) Ev 68 22 KPMG (Def 56) Ev 73 23 Local Government Association and the Association of Directors of Social Services (Def 42) Ev 75 24 Macmillan Cancer Support (Def 43) Ev 77 25 Monitor (Def 46) Ev 79 26 NHS Confederation (Def 36) Ev 84 27 North East London Strategic Health Authority (Def 26) Ev 87 28 University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust (Def 58) Ev 91 29 Parkinson’s Disease Society (Def 44) Ev 98 30 PricewaterhouseCoopers (Def 59) Ev 101 31 Rethink (Def 24) Ev 103 32 Royal College of Midwives (Def 39) Ev 105 33 Royal College of Nursing (Def 27) Ev 107 34 Royal College of Psychiatrists (Def 08) Ev 120 35 Socialist Health Association (Def 21) Ev 121 36 South East Hertfordshire PCT and Royston, Buntingford and Bishop’s Stortford PCT (Def 35) Ev 123 37 Chairmen of local-authority NHS Overview and Scrutiny Committees in the South East (Def 31) Ev 128 38 Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (Def 54) Ev 135 39 UNISON (Def 18) Ev 136 40 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust (Def 55) Ev 141 41 West Sussex County Council Health Scrutiny Select Committee (Def 38) Ev 145 42 Anonymous GP (Def 05) Ev 152 43 Professor Sheena Asthana and Dr Alex Gibson (Def 12) Ev 152 44 Ken Cunningham (Def 50) Ev 160 45 David Drew MP (Def 23) Ev 162 46 David Dufty, Health Management Consultant (Def 20) Ev 162 47 Mrs Jane Galbraith, Honorary Research Fellow, Dept of Statistical Science, University College London (Def 06) Ev 164 48 Andrew Lansley MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Health (Def 48) Ev 166 49 Robert Lapraik (Def 10) Ev 174 50 Peter Mellor (Def 19) Ev 175 51 Laura Moffat MP (Def 40) Ev 178 52 Professor Calum Paton, Centre for Health Planning and Management, Keele University (Def 03) Ev 179 53 Dr Jillian Pritchard (Def 04) Ev 181 54 Chris Reynolds (Def 22) Ev 181 55 Mervyn Stone, University College London (Def 07) Ev 183 56 Glynden Trollope (Def 13) Ev 192 3404742001 Page Type [SO] 28-06-06 03:43:09 Pag Table: COENEW PPSysB Unit: PAG9 Health Committee: Evidence Ev 1 Written evidence Evidence submitted by the Department of Health (Def 01) NHS DEFICITS ENQUIRY The memorandum of evidence for the enquiry into NHS deficits is enclosed. This addresses the specific questions your Committee directed to the Department of Health. As stated in Question One of the memorandum, I will be making an oral statement to the House on 7 June with the provisionaloutturn position for the NHS in 2005–06. I willa lso make available the figures for individualNHS organisations. This information willbe passed to the H ealth Committee at the same time. To coincide with my statement to the House, we are publishing a report on NHS performance by Sir Ian Carruthers, and a detailed finance report by the Department’s Finance Director. The Committee may also find it helpful to consider the detailed analysis in these reports as part of their deliberations, so we will also make these available to you as soon as they are published. Year End Figures 1. Based on the unaudited accounts, what was the outturn financial position for the PCTs, NHS Trusts and SHAs as at 31 March 2006? 1.1 The Secretary of State for Health will inform Parliament of the position on 7 June. This additional information will be provided to the Health Select Committee on the same day, along with a report from the Department’s Finance Director to the Secretary of State for Health providing supporting detailand analysis. 1.2 The figures have been subject to additionalchecking, but they have not y et been audited and are still subject to change. 2. Based on the latest data available from Monitor, what is the projected financial position for all Foundation Trusts as at 31 March 2006? 2.1 The Health Committee have requested this information directly from Monitor. Movements between Month 12 and Final Audited Accounts 3. What steps has DH taken to assure itself that the discrepancy between the 2004–05 FIMS data and the audited outturn figures will not recur in 2005–06? 3.1 The following paragraphs explain the changes in 2004–05 and the action taken on by the Department of Health to prevent a recurrence. 3.2 2004–05 was the first year in which there was a significant movement between the finalin-year monitoring information collected by the Department of Health (based on the draft accounts) and the final audited accounts (see answer to question 4 below). 3.3 The Department became aware of the movements in early August 2005 following submission of final accounts. Each of the Strategic Health Authorities was contacted by the Department to ascertain the reasons for the changes and the action that was being taken. The changes can be broadly categorised as: (i) diVerence of opinion between Boards and auditors on accounting treatment and estimates. The main areas here were: (a) the underestimation of prescribing creditors—as PCTs do not receive confirmation of their actualexpenditure from the Prescription Pricing Authority untilafter d raft accounts are prepared, they must make provision for expenditure for the final2–3 months of the year. (b) the understating of the provision for the costs of implementing agenda for Agenda for Change (AfC). The new AfC pay system was rolled out from 1 December 2004, backdated to 1 October 2004. During 2004–05 NHS bodies had the task of assimilating staV onto the new pay system, and making provision for the expenditure. Some organisations incorrectly disclosed a contingent liability in their draft accounts instead of a provision. (c) capitalisation and asset valuation—this relates to expenditure which had been classified as capital in draft accounts and subsequently reclassified as revenue, and also understating charges relating to the down revaluation of assets. (ii) diVerences between organisations concerning the amount of income due—including within this category adjustments made to service level agreements and levels of support. 3404742001 Page Type [E] 28-06-06 03:43:09 Pag Table: COENEW Ev 2 Table 2 3.4 Details by Strategic Health Authority are given in Table 2 below: Health Committee: Evidence CHANGES FROM DRAFT TO PUBLISHED ACCOUNTS BY STRATEGIC HEALTH AUTHORITY Reasons Explaining the diVerences between Month 12 FIMS data and the Final Accounts Changes 2004–05 to Income/ Final 2004–05 Agenda Expenditure Primary Accounts Month 12 for Changes involving Changes Care surplus/ surplus/ Change Prescribing Other in levels non NHS Changes to Asset SLA GMS Organisation Name (deficit) (deficit) Change Provisions Creditors Provisions of Support Capitalisation Bodies to Stock Values Adjustments Changes Other Total £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The NHS in Wales: Structure and Services (Update)
    The NHS in Wales: Structure and services (update) Abstract This paper updates Research Paper 03/094 and provides briefing on the structure of the NHS in Wales following the restructuring in 2003, and further reforms announced by the First Minister in 2004. May 2005 Members’ Research Service / Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau Members’ Research Service: Enquiry Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau: Ymholiad The NHS in Wales: Structures and Services (update) Dan Stevenson / Steve Boyce May 2005 Paper number: 05/ 023 © Crown copyright 2005 Enquiry no: 04/2661/dps Date: 12 May 2004 This document has been prepared by the Members’ Research Service to provide Assembly Members and their staff with information and for no other purpose. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information is accurate, however, we cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies found later in the original source material, provided that the original source is not the Members’ Research Service itself. This document does not constitute an expression of opinion by the National Assembly, the Welsh Assembly Government or any other of the Assembly’s constituent parts or connected bodies. Members’ Research Service: Enquiry Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau: Ymholiad Members’ Research Service: Enquiry Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau: Ymholiad Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 2 Recent reforms of the NHS in Wales................................................................... 2 2.1 NHS reforms in Wales up to April 2003 ................................................................. 2 2.2 Main features of the 2003 NHS organisational reforms ......................................... 2 2.3 Background to the 2003 NHS reforms ................................................................... 3 2.4 Reforms announced by the First Minister on 30 November 2004........................... 4 3 The NHS in Wales: Commissioners and Providers of healthcare services ....
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Health Systems of the United Kingdom: How Do They Compare?
    The four health systems of the United Kingdom: how do they compare? Gwyn Bevan, Marina Karanikolos, Jo Exley, Ellen Nolte, Sheelah Connolly and Nicholas Mays Source report April 2014 About this research This report is the fourth in a series dating back to 1999 which looks at how the publicly financed health care systems in the four countries of the UK have fared before and after devolution. The report was commissioned jointly by The Health Foundation and the Nuffield Trust. The research team was led by Nicholas Mays at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The research looks at how the four national health systems compare and how they have performed in terms of quality and productivity before and after devolution. The research also examines performance in North East England, which is acknowledged to be the region that is most comparable to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in terms of socioeconomic and other indicators. This report, along with an accompanying summary report, data appendices, digital outputs and a short report on the history of devolution (to be published later in 2014), are available to download free of charge at www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/compare-uk-health www.health.org.uk/compareUKhealth. Acknowledgements We are grateful: to government statisticians in the four countries for guidance on sources of data, highlighting problems of comparability and for checking the data we have used; for comments on the draft report from anonymous referees and from Vernon Bogdanor, Alec Morton and Laura Schang; and for guidance on national clinical audits from Nick Black and on nursing data from Jim Buchan.
    [Show full text]
  • Frontiers of Health Report V9.Indd
    Social Research Institute Frontiers of performance in the NHS II “Stop looking up to the Department... and start looking out to your local populations and patients” David Nicholson NHS Chief Executive About Ipsos MORI Ipsos MORI is the sum total of two successful research companies, Ipsos UK and MORI, which joined together in October 2005 to create the second largest research company in the UK. We offer a full range of quantitative and qualitative research services, as well as extensive international research capacity. The Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute works closely with national government, local public services and the not-for-profit sector. We help policy makers understand what works in terms of service delivery, and we provide robust evidence to bridge the gulf between the public and politicians — we also provide a host of background information for clients on key policy challenges. The NHS and Public Health research team is a leading provider of research on attitudes of public service users, staff and other stakeholders. The team works extensively with the Department of Health and many Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities on a wide range of issues, from communications approaches to patient satisfaction, using the full range of research techniques. 2 Ipsos MORI: Frontiers of performance in the NHS II Contents Foreword 2 Executive Summary 4 Introduction 6 How is performance measured in the NHS? 6 Structure of the report 9 Part 1 – PCTs 11 1. What factors are associated with positive patient ratings of PCTs? 12 A. The effect of objective performance measures 12 B. Local population factors 16 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2007-08 Adobe PDF Document 559Kb
    Health Professions Council Annual report and accounts for the year ending 31 March 2008 HC 986 Health Professions Council Annual report and accounts 2007_08 Presented to Parliament pursuant to Articles 44(3) and 46(7) of the Health Professions Order 2001. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 21 July 2008 HC 986 London: The Stationery Office £12.85 © Crown Copyright 2008 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] ISBN:978 010 295742 6 Contents Part one The Council 4 President’s statement 8 Chief Executive and Registrar’s report 9 Part two Statutory committee reports 10 Conduct and Competence Committee 10 Education and Training Committee 11 Health Committee 13 Investigating Committee 14 Non-statutory committee reports 15 Audit Committee 15 Communications Committee 16 Finance and Resources Committee 17 Part three Communications 18 Campaigns and media 18 The web 19 Events 20 Publications 22 Public affairs and stakeholder communications 23 Policy and standards
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2008-09
    DRIVING IMPROVEMENT THROUGH INDEPENDENT AND OBJECTIVE REVIEW ?\Xck_ZXi\@ejg\ZkfiXk\NXc\j 8eelXcI\gfik)''/$)''0 AXelXip)'(' ?\Xck_ZXi\@ejg\ZkfiXk\NXc\j 9\mXe?flj\ :X\ig_`ccp9lj`e\jjGXib MXeIfX[ :8<IG?@CCP :=/**<; K\c1')0)'0)//,' =Xo1')0)'0)//.. nnn%_`n%fi^%lb ISBN 978 0 7504 5473 5 © Crown copyright January 2010 CMK-22-12-176 E6240910 CONTENTS Page No. Foreword iii 1. Who we are and what we do 1 2. Our work in 2008-09 11 3. Looking ahead 35 i ii Foreword I have pleasure in presenting the fifth annual report of Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW). HIW’s role is to regulate the quality and safety of healthcare in both the NHS and the independent sector. As always, the main purpose of this report is to describe and summarise the outcomes and findings of the work we have taken forward over the past 12 months. The management and delivery of effective healthcare have always presented very considerable challenges. Public expectations and the potential of clinical innovation and technology continue to rise, as does the longevity of our population. The birth rate is also rising. These issues have been confronted head-on in the past decade, with the result that Wales has a more modern and responsive system of healthcare than that which existed even five years ago. The pace of change and the breadth of the Healthcare Standards for Wales, published in 2005, have been major factors in HIW’s own development. Our functions have progressively been added to, for example, through the regulation of independent healthcare and the statutory supervision of midwives since 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Treatment Working?
    Is the treatment working? Progress with the NHS system reform programme Health National report June 2008 The Audit Commission is an The Healthcare Commission works to independent watchdog, driving promote improvements in the quality of economy, efficiency and effectiveness healthcare and public health in England in local public services to deliver better and Wales. outcomes for everyone. In England, we assess and report on the Our work across local government, performance of healthcare organisations health, housing, community safety and in the NHS and independent sector, to fire and rescue services means that we ensure that they are providing a high have a unique perspective. We promote standard of care. We also encourage value for money for taxpayers, covering them to continually improve their £180 billion spent by 11,000 local services and the way they work. public bodies. In Wales, the Healthcare Commission’s As a force for improvement, we work role relates mainly to national reviews in partnership to assess local public that include Wales and to our yearly services and make practical report on the state of healthcare. In this recommendations for promoting a work, we collaborate closely with the better quality of life for people. Healthcare Inspectorate Wales. This report is available on our website at: www.audit-commission.gov.uk Our website contains a searchable version of this report, as well as a textonly version that can easily be copied into other software for wider accessibility. If you require a copy of this report in large
    [Show full text]
  • Care Quality Commission Third Party Review of CQC’S Regulatory Approach Final Report
    Care Quality Commission Third party review of CQC’s regulatory approach Final report 23 January 2013 This final report has been prepared for the Audit, Risk and Assurance Committee at the Care Quality Commission. No party, other than the Care Quality Commission is entitled to rely on the Final Report for any purpose whatsoever and we accept no responsibility or liability to any other party in respect of the contents of this Final Report. © 2013 Deloitte LLP Deloitte LLP 2 Hardman Street Manchester M3 3HF The Audit, Risk and Assurance Tel: +44 (0) 161 832 3555 Committee www.deloitte.co.uk Care Quality Commission Finsbury Tower 103 - 105 Bunhill Row London EC1Y 8TG 23 January 2013 Dear Sirs, Third party review of the Care Quality Commission’s regulatory approach We have assumed that the information provided to us and management's In accordance with the terms of the purchase order dated 10 September representations are complete, accurate and reliable; we have not 2012 (the ‘Contract’), for the third party review of the regulatory approach independently audited, verified or confirmed their accuracy, at the Care Quality Commission (‘CQC’), we enclose our final report dated completeness or reliability. In particular, no detailed testing regarding the 23 January 2012 (the ‘Final Report’). accuracy of the financial information has been performed. The Final Report has been prepared for the sole use of the CQC and is The matters raised in this report are only those that came to our attention subject to the restrictions on use specified in the Contract. No party, other during the course of our work and are not necessarily a comprehensive than the Care Quality Commission is entitled to rely on the Final Report for statement of all the strengths or weaknesses that may exist or all any purpose whatsoever and we accept no responsibility or liability to any improvements that might be made.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2008 the UK Health Care System
    February 2008 The UK Health Care System Sean Boyle Senior Research Fellow LSE Health and Social Care, London School of Economics and Political Science Who is covered? How is the health system financed? Coverage is universal. All those ‘ordinarily resident’ in the United National Health Service (NHS): The NHS accounts for 86% of total health Kingdom are entitled to health care that is largely free at the point of use. expenditure. It is mainly funded by general taxation (76%), but also by national insurance contributions (19%) and user charges (5%) (Department What is covered? of Health 2006). Apart from the income the NHS receives for the provision of prescription drugs and dentistry services to the general population, there Services: Publicly-funded coverage: the National Health Service (NHS) is some income from other fees and charges, particularly to private patients covers preventative services; inpatient and outpatient (ambulatory) hospital who use NHS services. (specialist) care; physician (general practitioner) services; inpatient and outpatient drugs; dental care; mental health care; learning disabilities; and Private health insurance: A mix of for-profit and not-for-profit insurers rehabilitation. provide supplementary private health insurance. Private insurance offers choice of specialists, avoidance of queues for elective surgery and higher Cost-sharing: There are relatively few cost-sharing arrangements for standards of comfort and privacy than the NHS. It covers 12% of the publicly-covered services. Drugs prescribed by general practitioners are population and accounted for 1% of total health expenditure in 2004. subject to a co-payment (£6.85 per prescription; $13.79), but about 88% of prescriptions are exempt from charges (Department of Health 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • 610 08 HC Substance Misuse Report 1/5/08 9:33 Am Page 14
    Improving services for substance misuse Commissioning drug treatment and harm reduction services Service review © May 2008 Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection. This document may be reproduced in whole or in part, in any format or medium for non-commercial purposes, provided that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a derogatory manner or misleading context. The source should be acknowledged by showing the document title and © Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection 2008. ISBN 978-1-84562-184-1 Concordat gateway number: 123 Cover photographs from www.johnbirdsall.co.uk Contents The Healthcare Commission 2 The National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse 2 Summary 3 Introduction 8 Methodology of the review 11 Key overall results 13 Overall scores 13 Regional variations in results 16 Results for commissioning and systems management 18 Strategic partnerships 20 Assessment of need 21 Drug treatment systems 23 Commissioning practice 24 Performance management 25 Commissioning partnerships 27 Results for harm reduction services 29 Harm reduction embedded in the treatment system 31 Access to harm reduction services 32 Reducing drug-related deaths 34 Staff competence 35 Conclusions and key messages 37 Local commissioning systems 37 Harm reduction services 38 Next steps 39 Appendix: the methodology and development process of the review 40 References 43 Improving services for substance misuse 1 The Healthcare Commission The National Treatment Agency The Healthcare Commission works to promote The National Treatment Agency for Substance improvements in the quality of healthcare and Misuse (NTA) is a special health authority, public health in England and Wales. created by the Government in 2001 to improve the availability, capacity and effectiveness of In England, the Commission assesses and treatment for drug misuse in England.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Literature Review on Effective Regulation: Implications for the Care Quality Commission
    Rapid literature review on effective regulation: Implications for the Care Quality Commission Published: September 2020 Care Quality Commission: Jillian Marsden, Debbie Bazzard, Kathryn Breeze, Andrew De’Ath, and Alison Thwaites With academic advice from Alan Boyd, Alliance Manchester Business School Contents 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 2 2 Approach ............................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Limitations and mitigations............................................................................ 3 2.2 Defining our terms......................................................................................... 4 3 Findings ............................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Theories, frameworks and models for understanding regulation................... 5 3.1.1 Responsive regulation ............................................................................ 6 3.1.2 Risk regulation regimes .......................................................................... 7 3.1.3 Quality improvement cycle...................................................................... 8 3.1.4 The life cycle model................................................................................ 8 3.1.5 Normalization process theory (NPT)....................................................... 9 3.1.6 System based regulation .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Care Quality Commission
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 08754, 1 May 2020 The Care Quality By Elizabeth Parkin Commission Contents: 1. Key functions 2. Changes to the CQC’s approach 3. Enforcement action 4. Inspections 5. State of Care 6. Major reports www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 The Care Quality Commission Contents Summary 3 1. Key functions 6 History 7 2. Changes to the CQC’s approach 9 Changes following the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Inquiry 9 Proposed changes following inspection at Whorlton Hall 11 3. Enforcement action 12 Enforcement powers 12 Criminal powers 13 Special measures for quality reasons 14 Special measures for finance reasons 15 4. Inspections 16 Frequency of inspections 16 Types of inspections 16 Factual accuracy 17 5. State of Care 18 6. Major reports 19 6.1 Mental health 19 6.2 Local system reviews 21 6.3 Restraint 22 Cover page image copyright Nurse Holding Elderly Patient's Hand by PortaldelSur ES. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 /image cropped 3 Commons Library Briefing, 18 February 2020 Summary This House of Commons Library briefing explains the statutory role and powers of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) The CQC was established in April 2009 and replaced three former regulatory bodies. The CQC is responsible for the registration, inspection and monitoring of health and adult social care providers, including independent providers, under the Health and Social Care Act 2008. All providers of health and adult social care who carry out “regulated activities” are required to register with the CQC and demonstrate they meet fundamental standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Care Quality Commission – Annual Report and Accounts 2016/17
    Annual report and accounts 2016/17 HC 200 Care Quality Commission Annual report and accounts 2016/17 Presented to Parliament pursuant to paragraph 10(4) of Schedule 1 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 18 July 2017. HC 200 © Care Quality Commission copyright 2017 The text of this document (this excludes, where present, the Royal Arms and all departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Care Quality Commission copyright and the document title specified. Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. Any enquiries related to this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications Print ISBN 9781474144971 Web ISBN 9781474144988 ID 15051708 07/17 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Contents Who we are and what we do 2 Performance report 4 Foreword 7 Progress against our strategy for 2016 to 2021 10 Performance summary 12 Performance analysis 16 Accountability report 76 Corporate governance report 78 Remuneration and staff report 105 Parliamentary accountability and audit report 121 Certificate and report of the Comptroller and Auditor General 123 to the Houses of Parliament Financial statements 126 Statement of Comprehensive Net Expenditure 128 Statement of Financial Position 129 Statement of Cash Flows 130 Statement of Changes in Taxpayers’ Equity 131 Notes to the financial statements 132 Care Quality Commission Annual report and accounts 2016/17 1 Who we are and what we do Who we are..
    [Show full text]