Managing Qualiity in health and social care
Managing Qualiity in health and social care
Order Description

the CQC report is that of a care home not hospital
you can use any care home CQC report from the interne
LO1 LO2 LO3 LO4 with introduction and conclusion with Harvard referencing system, can you tittle the essay with the essay questions Eg 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 so on, read the
all case study and the essay brief thank you,
Rules and regulations:
Plagiarism is presenting somebody else’s work as your own. It includes: copying information directly from the Web or books without referencing the material; submitting
joint coursework as an individual effort; copying another student’s coursework; stealing coursework from another student and submitting it as your own work. Suspected
plagiarism will be investigated and if found to have occurred will be dealt with according to the procedures set down by the College. Please see your student handbook
for further details of what is / isn’t plagiarism.
Coursework Regulations
1 Submission of coursework must be undertaken according to the relevant procedure – whether online or paper-based. Lecturers will give information as to which
procedure must be followed, and details of submission procedures and penalty fees can be obtained from Academic Administration or the general student handbook.
2 All coursework must be submitted to the Academic Admin Office and a receipt must be obtained. Under no circumstances can other College staff accept them.
Please check the Academic Admin Office opening hours.
3 Late coursework will be accepted by Academic Admin Office and marked according to the guidelines given in your Student Handbook for this year.
4 If you need an extension (even for one day) for a valid reason, you must request one. Collect a coursework extension request form from the Academic Admin
Office. Then take the form to your lecturer, along with evidence to back up your request. The completed form must be accompanied by evidence such as a medical
certificate in the event of you being sick. The completed form must then be returned to Academic Admin for processing. This is the only way to get an extension.
5 General guidelines for submission of coursework:
a) All work must be word-processed and must be of “good” standard.
b) Document margins shall not be more than 2.5cm or less than 1.5cm
c) Font size in the range of 11 to 14 points distributed to including headings and body text. Preferred typeface to be of a common standard such as Arial or Times
New Roman for the main text.
d) Any computer files generated such as program code (software), graphic files that form part of the course work must be submitted either online with the
documentation or on a CD for paper submissions.
e) The copy of the course work submitted may not be returned to you after marking and you are advised to have your personal copy for your reference.
f) All work completed, including any software constructed may not be used for any purpose other than the purpose of intended study without prior written
permission from St Patrick’s International College.
Merit Descriptors Indicative characteristics/evidence needed Contextualised Indicative characteristics (All the characteristics need to be achieved)
M1
Identify and apply
strategies to find
appropriate solutions
Complex problems with more than one variable have been
Explored Explored health or social care factors and analysed different concepts of quality in relation to Royal United Hospital.
(Opportunities to meet in section 1)
1.1,1.2,1.3
M2 Select/design and apply appropriate methods/
techniques
A range of sources of information has been used Has used a range of sources of information in the exploration of strategies for achieving quality throughout
the assignment. (Opportunities to meet in section 1,2,3 and 4) 1.1,1.2,1.3,2.1,2.2,2.3,3.1,3.2,3.3,4.1 4.2
M3 Present and
communicate
appropriate findings
The appropriate structure and approach has been used Has used appropriate Report structure and various approaches in the evaluation of systems, policies and
procedures in a specific health or social care setting in relation to achieving quality systems. (Opportunities to meet in LO3 and LO4) 3.1,3.2,3.3,4.1 4.2
Outcomes and assessment requirements
Learning Outcomes Assessment requirements
To achieve each outcome a learner must demonstrate the ability to:
LO1 Understand differing perspectives of quality in relation to health and social care services 1.1 Explain perspectives that stakeholders in health and
social care have regarding quality
1.2
Analyse the role of external agencies in setting standards
1.3 Assess the impact of poor service quality on health and social care stakeholders
LO2 Understand strategies for achieving quality in health and social care services 2.1 Explain the standards that exist in health and social care for
measuring quality
2.2 Evaluate different approaches to implementing quality systems
2.3 Analyse potential barriers to delivery of quality health and social care services
LO3 Be able to evaluate systems, policies and procedures in health and social care services 3.1 Evaluate the effectiveness of systems, policies and procedures
used in a health and social care setting in achieving quality in the service(s) offered.
3.2 Analyse other factors that influence the achievement of quality in the health and social care service
3.3 Suggest ways in which the health and social care service could improve its quality
LO4 Understand methodologies for evaluating health and social care service quality. 4.1 Evaluate methods for evaluating health and social care service quality
with regard to external and internal perspectives
4.2 Discuss the impact that involving users of services in the
Evaluation process has on service quality.
Distinction Descriptors
Indicative characteristics Contextualised Indicative characteristics (All the characteristics need to be achieved)
D1 Use critical reflection to evaluate own work and justify valid conclusions
Conclusions have been arrived at through synthesis of ideas and have been justified/ self-criticism of approach has taken place
The learner has clearly justified or given a self-criticism of the approaches taken when evaluating the methods, approaches and effectiveness of quality
service, systems, policies and procedure in health and social care setting. (Opportunities to meet in section 2,3 and 4)
2.2,3.1,4.1
D2 Take responsibility for managing and organising activities
Substantial activities, projects or investigations have been planned, managed and organised/the important of interdependence has been recognised and achieved/
Has substantially investigated and explored strategies for achieving quality in health and social care setting (given case study or work experience) and
recognised the importance of interdependence. (Opportunities to meet in section LO3 and LO4).
3.1,3.2,3.3
4.1
4.2
D3
Demonstrate
convergent/lateral/creative thinking Problems have been solved/ self evaluation has taken place/innovation and creative thinking have been applied
Has recommended problem-solving initiatives for poor quality of care services and new innovation and creative thinking to improve quality in a health and social care
setting.
(Opportunities to meet in section 3)
3.3
Summary of grades
In order to achieve a pass Learners will have meet the assessment requirements for all learning outcomes and associated assessment criteria.
In order to achieve a merit Learners will have to submit a REPORT, and meet the Pass and all merit grade descriptors (M1,M2,M3)
In order to achieve a distinction Learners will have to submit a report that meets the Pass, Merit and requirements for distinction descriptors D1, D2 and for
D3.
.
NB: A copy of a REPORT format will be made available to students.
Case Study
Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust: CQC Quality report
Date of inspection visit: 5-6 and 14 December 2013 Date of publication: February 2014
Summary of findings
The Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust (RUH Bath) provides acute treatment and care for a population of around 500,000 people in Bath and the surrounding towns and
villages of North East Somerset, North and West Wiltshire, Somerset (Mendip) and South Gloucestershire. The trust provided 595 beds and a comprehensive range of acute
services, including medicine and surgery, services for women and children, accident and emergency services, and diagnostic and clinical support services. The trust had
an annual budget of around £230 million and employed 4,600 staff.
The trust had faced significant challenges in the past year, particularly over the last winter period of December 2012 to March 2013:
There was a high demand for trust services and the trust did not have sufficient capacity to cope with emergency admissions. The trust had three periods of ‘black
escalation’ in January, February and March 2013. Patients were waiting in the corridors of the accident and emergency (A&E) department for treatment. The day surgery
unit was being used for overnight stays. The trust received £2.35 million of NHS winter pressures funding to improve services.
• The NHS patient safety indicators on falls, catheter and urinary tract infections, blood clots and pressure sores were above the national average and incident
report rates were low compared with other trusts.
• Elective surgical procedures were being cancelled and patients had long waiting times for surgery; this was worse than other trusts.
• The staff survey results identified that the level of staff engagement was in the bottom 20% of trusts.
• Patient complaints and concerns increased during this time.
• The trust was not meeting standards and there were compliance actions following several CQC inspections for respecting and involving service users, care and
welfare, safeguarding, and assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision.
• We served a Warning Notice after our inspection in June 2013 because the trust did not meet standards for Regulation 20 (1) (a) and (2) (a) (b) (Records) of
the Health and Social Care Act 2008.
The trust also had positive areas of practice:
 Surgical procedures were safe and the trust had not had a ‘never event’ for 18 months.
 Infection control rates were similar to those of other trusts.
 Overall mortality rates were similar to those of other trusts. The hospital standardised mortality ratio (HSMR) is a measure for deaths in hospital for
specific conditions and procedures. This was significantly lower than other trusts and there was no difference between weekday and weekend mortality.
 The trust participated in national clinical audit and could demonstrate many areas where national guidelines were adhered to.
 The trust was supportive of innovation in services, for example, in dementia and end of life care.
 Patient feedback from surveys and NHS Choices was largely positive.
From this inspection, the trust has demonstrated that it could lead significant change effectively. It had been open and transparent with partners about challenges and
funding had been used to support innovative changes. It had engaged the national Emergency Care Intensive Support Team (ECIST) to change services in both the trust and
across the local health and social care community to improve the management of patient admissions and discharge. The changes had significantly improved how the trust
managed the demand for its services and ensured that patients received good quality and safe care. Staff told us there had been a tangible shift in culture over the
past few months from a corporate to a patient focus, and the trust was in a better position to manage winter pressures and unexpected demand for services.
Patients received safe and effective care. Surgical services were safe, for example, and infection rates were similar to those of other trusts. Patients were being
treated according to national guidelines and clinical outcomes for them were good. Patients told us staff were caring and that they were treated with dignity and
respect. Services were more responsive to patients’ needs and the trust had made changes to improve how it handled and responded to complaints. The trust was making
progress in providing a seven-day service, and new models of care in A&E, medicine and surgery had meant patients were receiving quick and effective treatment and
their length of stay in hospital was reduced. The environment on two wards, Combe Ward and the neonatal unit, had been redesigned and refurbished to reduce anxiety and
improve the comfort of patients with dementia and of children and parents, respectively.
The CQC standards identified in the Warning Notice, and all but one of the compliance actions from our inspection in June 2013, had now been met. The Warning Notice
has now been lifted.
We also identified a number of areas where the trust needed to improve. Staffing levels were safe but needed to improve in some areas, particularly in the critical
care and neonatal units. Incident reporting had improved but information was not shared effectively so that staff could learn from mistakes. Patients were safeguarded,
but more staff need appropriate safeguarding training to protect children, and some staff needed a clearer understanding about the rights to independence of patients
who are at risk of wandering. Staff were caring, but at busy times in busy areas, such as admission and short stay wards, patients’ care needs were not always being
met. Patients still had long waiting times for some planned surgery and outpatient appointments, and there were discharge delays for some patients with complex needs.
The trust needed to engage with staff in lower pay bands who spend much of their time with patients and in patient areas, such as cleaners, who told us they did not
feel valued or listened to. The trust was well-led but it needed to further improve how it assessed and monitored its quality and safety procedures. We identified
actions for the trust to take to improve its services.
Click the link below to access the full report:
http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/new_reports/AAAA0780.pdf
Description of the problem to be solved:
The CQC report identified some improvements and a need to further improve how the hospital assessed and monitored its quality and safety procedures. As a health and
social care practitioner (Quality Manager) you are required to provide a report explaining the systems, policies and actions that can be taken to tackle the identified
shortfalls.
Assignment
Based on the Case Study above you are required to provide a Report of approximately 3,000 words. (The word count is set here as a guide.) You should refer to the
assessment criteria and the relevant unit content, when preparing your evidence of assessment. The report should address the following four tasks below which relate to
the learning outcomes.
Section 1
In section1 of your report you are required to show an Explanation of perspectives that stakeholders in health and social care have regarding quality; Analysis of the
role of external agencies in setting standards and Assessment of the impact of poor service quality on health and social care stakeholders. You need to refer to the
case study provided to cover all the assessment criteria. (1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and also opportunities to meet M1 and M2).
Section 2
In section 2 of your report, you need to show that you understand strategies for achieving quality in health and social care services. This will be achieved by
analysing potential barriers to delivery of quality service; evaluating different approaches to implementing quality systems and finally explaining the standards that
exist for measuring quality at The Royal United Hospital. (2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and also opportunities to meet M2 and D1)
Section 3
In section 3 of your report, you are required to evaluate systems, policies and procedures in The Royal United Hospital. You are required to Evaluate the effectiveness
of systems, policies and procedures used in The Royal United Hospital in achieving quality in the service(s) offered. You should also analyse other factors that
influence the achievement of quality, and lastly suggest ways in which quality could be improved.
NB: You must identify the specific systems, policies and procedures that you are evaluating in this section. This can include any systems, policies and procedures
mentioned in the CQC REPORT or /and other policies as seen on stponline folder named ‘RUH CQC Report and Policy documents’.
(3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and also opportunities to meet M2, M3, D1, D2 and D3)
Section 4
In section 4 of your report, you are required to evaluate methods for evaluating quality with regards to external and internal perspectives and discuss the impact that
involving users of services in the evaluation process has on service quality. (4.1 and 4.2 and also opportunities to meet M2, M3 AND D1)
Formative Submission
Formative assessment will take place to advise you on your progress within the term (during the 4th week) and the ways in which you could improve before the final
(summative) submission. The feedback is for your benefit and is not part of your final grade for the unit. Formative feedback may, however, not be as detailed as the
final feedback you receive, and may be in verbal and/or written form (at the lecturer’s discretion). You will be asked to submit your work for formative feedback in
electronic or hard copy form to which you will receive verbal and/or written feedback.
Final (Summative) Submission
You need to submit the report covering all the 4 sections which relate to all the assessment requirements in this unit via www.stponline.co.uk on or before 19th
December 2014.
Example feedback form:
Feedback
Strengths: Note: Summative Submission will be made via stponline.co.uk and summative feedback will be provided via Turnitin.
Areas for Improvement
Grade Awarded:
Lecturer Signature: