Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Evolving quality

No description
by

Medical Development Team

on 30 July 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Evolving quality

Evolving quality
Step 1
STEP 2: Quality assurance framework (qaf)
Step 3: QTA Update
Step 4: Accreditation process
Questions?
Making it...ESE
Dashboard
Quality Assurance Framework Model
Effectiveness

Experience
Safety
Quality is not just about compliance and audit, its about outcomes, making sure the FP and SAC methods we provide are effective for an individual client.
Quality is key to keeping our clients safe. Doing the right thing in the right way the first time. Its about behaviours & attitudes as well as facilities & commodities
Quality will ultimately be determined by the client and the experience they have had using our services.

Quality is about continual improvement!
2013 Results
Changes in 2014
Rationale
What has changed?
How does it affect a score?
APPLICABILITY
Time to evolve current tool – in use since 2007
Overall score does not always give a true reflection of quality in a programme
Does not allow for scoring of ‘red flags’
Misalignment between ‘enforcement notices’ and high scores
Need to emphasise areas of high risk to client safety
Weighted checklist
Clinical governance
10% reduction to Clinical Governance score if marks received are less than or equal to 80%
5% reduction to Clinical Governance score if marks received are less than 90% but greater than 80%
Infection prevention
10% reduction to the Infection prevention if marks received are less than or equal to 80%
5% reduction to Infection prevention score if marks received are less than 90% but greater than 80%
Red flags!
Other observations (for issues not captured by checklist, at discretion of the assessor)

5% reduction against a site’s overall score for observations receiving a Medium risk rating
10% reduction against a site’s overall score for observations receiving a High risk rating
Where more than one ‘red flag’ identified for the site, top score included.

Penalty for caseload
2% reduction to a site’s overall score if it has been agreed that a service will be observed, but that service is not observed.

This will be supported by the introduction of a ‘contract’ into the TOR – through which the programme and assessor can agree in advance of the QTA which services the assessor can expect to observe, based on services that are routinely provided within the programme.
benchmarks
85% = achieving minimum standard for social franchising
-5% to centre 1 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-5% to centre 2 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-5% to centre 3 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-4% to outreach 2 score due to MSL and MSV services being offered but not observed
-10% for 'High Risk' additional observation
-10% to clinical governance score due to a score below 80%
-8% to centre 1 score as no STP, STMP, MSMP, and MSL clients were observed despite these services being offered and agreed
-10% to centre 3 score as no MSP, MSMP, STP, MSTP, MSL clients were observed despite these services being offered and agreed
-4% to outreach 1 score due to MSL and MSV services being offered but not observed
-10% for infection prevention score equal to 80%
-4% for not observing MSL and MSV despite these services being offered
Overall score reduced to from 93% to 79%
Medical Development Team
Centres and Outreach
Social Franchises
-8% to centre 1 score as no STP, STMP, MSMP, and MSL clients were observed despite these services being offered and agreed
Full transcript