1. Standards for Better Health implementation Suzie Loader Director of Nursing

2. 2 Healthcare Commission’s statutory roles Assessment of the provision of healthcare, including public health, in the NHS and independent sectors Annual ratings for NHS trusts Regulation and annual inspection of independent healthcare Consideration of complaints which NHS trusts have not resolved Investigations into serious failures in service Coordination of healthcare inspection by others Inspecting Informing Improving

3. 3 Healthcare Commission Assessments 2005/2006 Annual review and performance rating Core standards Getting the basics right Developmental standards Making and sustaining progress New national targets Improvement reviews Existing targets Use of resources Core standards

4. 4 The 24 core standards “…bring together and rationalising existing requirements for the health service…” “…organisations must comply with them from the date of publication of this document…” “…describe a level of service which is acceptable and which must be universal…” Standards for Better Health. DH, July 2004

5. 5 Principles for reducing the burden Build on trust’s own responsibilities local assurance processes self-assessment Inspect selectively risk based random sampling Use available information intelligently routine NHS sources partnership with other agencies

6. 6 Core standards assessment: Timing Selective inspection ‘Draft’ process Declaratio n Cross- checking Via annual review/rating and possible qualification of declarations Reporting May – July 2006 April 2006 May 2006 September 2006 A public statement of compliance; plus third party comments Declarations and performance data compared Assessment of adequacy of local assurance: 1) Risk based 2) random

7. 7 Core standards assessment: Timing Selective inspection ‘Draft’ process Declaratio n Cross checking May – July 2006 April 2006 May 2006 Selective follow up Draft declaratio n Cross checking Nov. ‘05 – Jan. ‘06 October 2005 November 2005

8. 8 The board’s declaration The board has reasonable assurance that the organisation has complied with the core standards over the past 12 months Subject to… Cases of inadequate assurance Except for… Cases of inadequate compliance Internal audit view of quality of SIC process Any external audit concerns re. SIC process Strategic health authority comments… Overview and scrutiny committee comments… Patient and public involvement forum comments… + +

9. 9 Screening approach – data items 2000 data items from many sources: our own work (surveys, clinical audit data, acute hospital portfolio etc) national data sets (hospital episode statistics, mental health minimum dataset, quality and outcomes framework) information from other regulators and review agencies (both concordat signatories and beyond) Core standards Getting the basics right

10. 10 Selective inspection Approximately 10% of trusts identified via cross checking process Focuses on local assurances used to sign- off particular standards A further 10% selected as a random sample Can result in the qualification of a trust’s declaration

11. 11 Which trusts get a follow up? Group one: screening 10% of trusts Group three: limited follow up 80% of trusts Group two: random 10% of trusts have submitted a positive declaration (may include number of action plans) not identified within the top 10% of trusts most at risk of not meeting the core standards. have not been selected randomly for a spot check have submitted a positive declaration (may include number of action plans) screening data identifies trust as being in 10% most at risk of not meeting the core standards have submitted a positive declaration (may include number of action plans) not identified within the screening group of trusts identified through random sampling for ‘spot check’ Trusts will fall into one of three groups

12. 12 Performance Ratings Trusts will be awarded a final rating by the Healthcare Commission from the following: E * Excellent G * Good * Fair * Weak