ESPO Working Group and Forum sessions
Short overview and presentations
Welcome to CQC
By Sarah Bickerstaffe (Director of Policy and Strategy, CQC) and Charles Rendell
Working Group 1 – Patient and User participation
Chaired by Lena Weilandt, Sweden
Input form Denmark, Socialstyrelsen – Henrik Frostholm
Working Group 2 – Integrated Care
Presentation by Heleen Buijze
Input from CQC- Janet Ortega, Head of Integrated care
Input from New-Zealand, Richard Hamblin, Director of Quality Evaluation in Health Quality and Safety Commission
Working Group 3 – Observation
Presentation by the Chair, Carien Geertse (The Netherlands)
Input from David Frances, Wales
Input from CQC- Allison Murray, Head of Inspection in adult social care
Tuesday 25th April
Working Group 4 – Risk
Chaired by Liz Owen, CQC and Klas Öberg, IVO, Sweden
Input from England, Sweden, Ine Broghans, Netherlands and Andrew Terris, New Zealand
EPSO CQC Forum
Chaired by Klas Öberg, Sweden
Regulation and Inspection of General Practitioners Practices (acceptance and improvement):
Introduction – Michele Golden, Head of General Practice Inspection, CQC, England
Overview of the pioneering work done by CQC in respect of the regulation of general (family) practice in England
-We have identified that 75% of practices provide care that is either ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’. We have taken enforcement action against providers who have breached regulations.
-We have driven improvement in two main measurable ways: firstly by identifying and highlighting what outstanding practice looks like and secondly by taking enforcement action (where necessary) to force practices to improve the standards of care.
Intervention and discussion lead by Anne Marie Vangsted, director general of Danish Patient Safety Authority, Denmark
Incident handling and transparency in supervisory practice:
Introduction – Ian Leistikow (replacing Ronnie vand Diemen), IGZ, the Netherland
– Public transparency of data from adverse event analysis benefits the learning ability of health & care providers;
– Health & care providers should be transparent to the public about their own adverse events.
Intervention and discussion lead by Charles Rendell, CQC.
Trust in supervision and methods that contribute to learning and quality improvement:
Introduction – Gunilla Hult Backlund, General Director, IVO, Sweden
– To be able to contribute to quality improvement and learning effectively, there must be a certain level of trust between the supervisory agency and the supervised. The latter must trust that the agency’s primary focus is learning and quality improvement. The supervisory agency must trust that the supervised want to develop and must act in a way that does not create fear.
– The opposite to trust – mistrust and also fear of making mistakes and the consequences that can follow – is an obstacle for learning and development.
Intervention and discussion lead by Ian Leistikow, IGZ, Netherlands
Multidisciplinary teams of professionals in supervisory practice:
Introduction – Sabina Wikgren Orstam, IVO, Sweden
– To truly understand the organization and the value it creates for the individual we need multidisciplinary teams.
– The creation of multidisciplinary teams make the supervisory work more flexible to changing conditions.
Intervention and discussion- Henrik Frostholm, Deputy head of office at the National Board of Social Services, Denmark