Poll: Should the CQC scrap its intelligent monitoring system?

A practice rated 'outstanding' was among those publicly labelled 'high risk' just two months ago. Have your say below on whether the system that led to this anomaly should be scrapped.

Professor Steve Field: intelligent monitoring system (Photo: JH Lancy)
Professor Steve Field: intelligent monitoring system (Photo: JH Lancy)

Around 140 practices have now been officially rated by the CQC, but in November 2014 the watchdog used its 'intelligent monitoring' tool to place every practice in the country into one of six bands from high to low risk. National media reports said one in six practices was 'failing' based on the CQC's data - but just 5 out of 140 visited by inspectors have been rated 'inadequate'.

Analysis of how practices' actual CQC ratings compare with risk scores made public by the watchdog just two months ago shows that practices labelled high risk have now been found to be performing well.

Similarly, practices initially flagged up as 'low risk' have received poor ratings after inspection. Given the wildly inaccurate picture of practice performance it appears to deliver, should the CQC's intelligent monitoring system be scrapped? Cast your vote.

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register

Already registered?

Sign in