Should the Care Quality Commission (CQC) run the new official care homes rating system?

Dr Jennifer Dixon, chief executive at Nuffield Trust

Frank Ursell, chief executive of the Registered Nursing Home Association (RNHA)

YES

An official care homes rating system looks set to return after a review by the Nuffield Trust found people have been “left in the dark” over the quality of care homes, hospitals and GP practices. The care regulator, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), stopped issuing its own star ratings in 2010. Since this, a number of companies have sprung up which issue ratings to care homes.

But the Nuffield Trust believes this has confused the public and would like to see a single organisation taking on the role.

Dr Jennifer Dixon, who led the review, suggests that the body that would be ideal to carry out the ratings would be the Care Quality Commission which already carries out many tasks which would support a rating, such as inspection and data analysis.

She said: “One aggregate, comprehensive rating of providers may provide more clarity and simplicity for the public, especially if it came from one 'official' trusted source.

“The most obvious organisation to do the rating would be the Care Quality Commission (CQC). But the CQC would need political support, support from the main national stakeholders, resources, time to develop, as well as stability over a period of time.

“Any new system should be fully evaluated to assess its benefits versus drawbacks. Consideration should be given to road testing any new system to avoid any unintended consequences or perverse effects.

“If the Government does press ahead with ratings, it may be easier to start with ratings for social care and for general practices.”

NO

Frank Ursell, chief executive of the Registered Nursing Home Association (RNHA), supports the proposal of a “well-managed, transparent and consistent ratings system” as a good way of helping the public to assess the quality of care homes, as well as providing a stimulus to their owners, managers and staff to be constantly seeking ways to improve standards.

Mr Ursell said: “In particular, we welcome Nuffield’s strong recommendation that enough time should be allowed for a credible ratings system to be developed and, importantly, that it should be road-tested before being widely adopted. However he added: “Whilst we can see why the Nuffield Trust has suggested that the Care Quality Commission should be the body that runs the new system – a proposal the Health Secretary appears to have accepted – we can perhaps be forgiven, on the basis of the CQC’s past performance, for having reservations on that score.

“It should be borne in mind that the CQC swiftly and rather unceremoniously abolished the ratings system that the previous regulator had introduced. We hope that the creation of the post of chief inspector of social care to oversee a new system, albeit presumably under the umbrella of the CQC, will overcome our past disappointments.

“The RNHA will gladly work with all key stakeholders, including service users, the Nuffield Trust and the chief inspector, to bring in a system that is built to last. What we want is something relevant and specific to care homes.”