Non-Medical Quality and Contract Performance Management

Transcription

1 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management Developing people for health and healthcare Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management QCPM Results May 2014

2 Contents 1. Foreword 1 2. Introduction 2 3. Results by profession 4

3 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management 1. Foreword In April 2013 three Local Education Training Boards (s) covering all of London were established. They are part of Health Education England and responsible for ensuring that NHS education, training, and workforce development drive the highest possible standards of public health and patient outcomes. Following the inception of the London s we, the Directors of Education and Quality, made a commitment to ensure the continued development of the quality of education and training, across the whole workforce. One year on the positive impact of the localised approach has proved its worth and we wish to build on this to create a workforce that can meet the demands of the current and future population of London. The Quality and Contract Management (QCPM) framework was implemented in 2007, and was designed to assess, monitor and facilitate improvement in the quality of education and training to London s healthcare professionals (Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professionals) both student and post-qualification This year is the sixth year of publishing the results from the QCPM process. It is encouraging to see and hear, on an almost daily basis, about the positive changes that have come about since the QCPM process was introduced, with the overall improvement in results reflecting this. This year to showcase the work of the Education s Part 2 of this document contains information on innovative projects leading to improvements in Education and Training, and ultimately patient care. The strength of the QCPM process and the manner in which we translate the process in to high quality education and training and patient care lie within the partnership working it is only through partnership working with all stakeholders in our respective s that we will continue to improve on these results. It is for this reason that we would like to thank all of the Universities and Education s who continue to engage so positively with the QCPM process. We hope that you will find these results as encouraging as we do we look forward to and remain committed to working with all stakeholders in 2014 in order to improve these results further in order to ensure that we continue to collectively and collaboratively deliver high quality education, training and patient care to all those in London. Dr Diana Hamilton-Fairley and Dr Nav Chana Joint Directors of Education and Quality Health Education South London Margaret Murphy Director of Education and Quality Health Education North Central and East London Dr Jeremy Levy Director of Education and Quality Health Education North West London 1

4 2. Introduction Non-Medical/Healthcare Professionals Quality Contract Management (QCPM) The Quality Contract Management system was developed in 2007/08 with Education s (EP) and placement providers based on the National Education Contract Management framework. Its main aims are: 1. To ensure contracted Education s are all subject to the same management processes 2. To ensure value for money and fitness for purpose of contracted education and training. 3. To monitor the of Education s in their delivery of suitable newly qualified professionals to perform the roles required to deliver the very best and appropriate healthcare in London QCPM The results are based on all activity and student numbers that relate to the academic year. The results present the scores of all professions including Nursing, Midwifery, Allied Health Professions, Clinical Psychology, Child Psychotherapy and Workforce Development by Education (EP). Education s are assessed on the relevant academic year at a profession or branch level based on a series of Contract Indicators (CPI) and a score is applied as red, amber or green for each CPI. Red and amber identifies concerns following which action plans are put in place with on-going monitoring to deliver quality improvements. The summary of results, for all professions across London, are produced and published at the end of the review cycle relating to the previous academic year. It is of note that the system has been running for six years and the first results were published for The process was aligned to the national system defined by Department of Health through Education for Quality in which a number of new CPIs were introduced and some of the original CPIs were replaced. This prevents results from the year being directly comparable with those from that point forward, however from onwards comparison can reasonably be made. What are the Contract Indicators? The scores are an aggregate of CPIs. CPIs are based on the student lifecycle and are grouped into the following areas: 1. Recruitment and selection to identify the best prospective students including widening participation considerations 2. Academic education covering course learning outcomes, best practice and course content 3. Faculty covering research undertaken by staff that brings about excellence in education 2

5 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management 4. Innovation that has led to or has the potential to lead to quality improvement 5. Practice placements e.g. variety of clinical settings, placement provider audits and preparedness. 6. Commitment and transparency to include student feedback. 7. Student outcomes e.g. recruitment variance, attrition and pass rate. What the results tell us The results provide a high level summary of EP against agreed specific CPIs the results are based purely on the information that EPs submit in their data returns. This data is analysed by the Local Education and Training Board () Education Teams and an annual report is produced for each profession, branch (for Nursing), or Education for Workforce Development, giving overall red, amber (high and low) or green (RAG) rating based on their with the thresholds and descriptors for each of the RAG ratings being as follows: Red (<50%) - Serious concerns about aspects of and immediate action needs to be taken to rectify the problem Low Amber (50% to <70%) Several areas of concern where improvements need to be made High Amber (70% to <90%) A few areas for concern where improvements need to be made Green (90% to 100%) - No significant areas for concern The results are an indication of value for money and partnership working to ensure that qualifiers have the skills, knowledge and personal attributes required by the NHS. It is also an indication of the EP s ability to supply timely and accurate data. A red rating does not necessarily mean that the overall standard of education provided is poor, or that the should not continue to have a contract with the Education. Whilst the red rating does suggest that there are serious concerns about there are many reasons why an EP might be red rated some of which may be outside of the direct control or influence of that individual EP. If an Education is rated Red for a number of CPIs or for a whole branch or profession then the Education could be put into Turnaround until the issues are remedied and the is assured of both the quality of education and training, and patient safety within that branch of profession. Enhancements The process is reviewed on an annual basis with all parties and the internal review of the QCPM process started early January Following consultation with the London Local Education and Training Boards it was established that the changes for should be kept to a minimum and greater emphasis was to be placed on streamlining the process and changing timelines to accommodate timely review of the data submission. Future enhancements will be introduced as required in order to ensure the QCPM process and system continues to meet the needs and demands of a changing NHS. For additional information please contact the Pan-London Quality and qcpcm@southlondon.hee.nhs.uk. 3

6 3. Results by profession Midwifery 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG City London HENCEL 99.1% Green 18.6% 80.50% High Amber 63.60% Low Amber Kings College London HESL 96.5% Green 5.2% 91.30% Green 90.00% Green HESL 85.9% High Amber 7.8% 78.10% High Amber 72.70% High Amber HENCEL 92.9% Green 19.2% 73.70% High Amber 92.40% Green Middlesex HENCEL 82.4% High Amber 5.1% 77.30% High Amber 71.30% High Amber of Greenwich HESL 81.7% High Amber 8.0% 73.70% High Amber 65.10% Low Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 94.6% Green 0.1% 94.50% Green 74.90% High Amber of West London HENWL 97.2% Green 23.9% 73.30% High Amber 81.30% High Amber Adult Nursing 2012/13 * Excludes Education s where no new students were commissioned in Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG Buckinghamshire New HENWL 93.8% Green 1.2% 92.60% Green 66.00% Low Amber City London HENCEL 84.6% High Amber 4.5% 79.10% High Amber 66.10% Low Amber Kings College London HESL 91.7% Green 2.1% 89.60% High Amber 86.10% High Amber HESL 91.0% Green 0.8% 90.20% Green 84.10% High Amber HENCEL 87.4% High Amber 9.4% 78.00% High Amber 69.00% Low Amber Middlesex HENCEL 79.9% High Amber 15.8% 64.10% Low Amber 66.70% Low Amber of Greenwich HESL 95.1% Green 11.2% 83.90% High Amber 81.00% High Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 85.6% High Amber 12.7% 72.90% High Amber 77.80% High Amber 4

7 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management Child Nursing 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG Buckinghamshire New HENWL 91.5% Green -1.7% 93.20% Green 61.10% Low Amber City London HENCEL 89.4% High Amber 13.0% 76.40% High Amber 76.90% High Amber Kings College London HESL 97.5% Green 4.5% 93.00% Green 93.10% Green HESL 98.9% Green 1.4% 97.50% Green 90.50% Green HENCEL 70.1% High Amber 16.9% 53.20% Low Amber 68.90% Low Amber Middlesex HENCEL 87.8% High Amber -9.7% 97.50% Green 81.00% High Amber of Greenwich HESL 96.3% Green 5.6% 90.70% Green 66.70% Low Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 96.3% Green 31.9% 64.40% Low Amber 78.60% High Amber of West London HENWL 87.8% High Amber 1.4% 86.40% High Amber 50.00% Low Amber Learning Disabilities Nursing 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG HESL 100.0% Green 13.6% 86.40% High Amber 85.70% High Amber HENCEL 85.4% High Amber -5.3% 90.70% Green 87.30% High Amber of Greenwich HESL 86.6% High Amber -13.4% 100.0% Green 88.90% High Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 84.1% High Amber -9.1% 93.20% Green 74.50% High Amber of West London HENWL 100.0% Green 17.2% 82.80% High Amber 96.70% Green 5

8 Mental Health Nursing 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG Buckinghamshire New HENWL 93.7% Green -5.5% 99.20% Green 68.30% Low Amber City London HENCEL 88.5% High Amber 8.1% 80.40% High Amber 86.50% High Amber Kings College London HESL 93.0% Green 10.0% 83.00% High Amber 74.70% High Amber HESL 84.0% High Amber 6.0% 78.00% High Amber 83.10% High Amber HENCEL 88.7% High Amber -0.2% 88.50% High Amber 86.60% High Amber Middlesex HENCEL 92.2% Green -2.4% 94.60% Green 79.40% High Amber of Greenwich HESL 93.3% Green 6.9% 86.40% High Amber 70.60% High Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 90.2% Green 0.4% 89.80% High Amber 87.30% High Amber of West London HENWL 84.3% High Amber 17.9% 66.40% Low Amber 78.40% High Amber 6

9 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management Allied Health Professionals 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/11 RAG RAG RAG Human Nutrition and Dietetics Kings College London HESL 98.2% Green -1.8% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green London Metropolitan HESL 78.1% High Amber -2.8% 80.90% High Amber 74.00% High Amber Occupational Therapy Brunel HESL 72.8% High Amber -3.2% 76.00% High Amber 70.40% High Amber HESL 92.0% Green 14.8% 77.20% High Amber 73.10% High Amber Oxford Brookes HESL 96.3% Green 3.1% 93.20% Green 95.20% Green Operating Department Practitioner Anglia Ruskin HESL 93.4% Green 3.4% 90.00% Green 82.50% High Amber HESL 98.0% Green 18.9% 79.10% High Amber 63.30% Low Amber of West London HESL 96.1% Green 6.1% 90.00% Green 98.30% Green Physiotherapy Brunel HENWL 98.1% Green 13.2% 84.90% High Amber 78.60% High Amber Kings College London HENWL 100.0% Green 4.2% 95.80% Green 97.40% Green HENWL 100.0% Green 6.8% 93.20% Green 90.50% Green HENWL 84.2% High Amber 2.7% 81.50% High Amber 68.90% Low Amber Podiatry of East London HENCEL 59.1% Low Amber -11.2% 70.30% High Amber 61.90% Low Amber Radiography - Diagnostic City London HENCEL 87.8% High Amber 3.1% 84.70% High Amber 92.10% Green HENCEL 87.2% High Amber -10.3% 97.50% Green 93.70% Green HENCEL 93.7% Green 12.0% 81.70% High Amber 85.10% High Amber of Hertfordshire HENCEL 87.8% High Amber 16.2% 71.60% High Amber 92.30% Green Radiography - Therapeutic City London HENCEL 80.8% High Amber 2.5% 78.30% High Amber 75.10% High Amber HENCEL 82.9% High Amber 11.7% 71.20% High Amber 79.40% High Amber HENCEL 84.0% High Amber 11.9% 72.10% High Amber 67.00% Low Amber Speech and Language Therapy City London HENCEL 84.5% High Amber -6.2% 90.70% Green 79.90% High Amber College London HENCEL 91.9% Green -0.7% 92.60% Green 87.70% High Amber 7

10 Child Psychotherapy & Clinical Psychology 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/ RAG RAG RAG Child Psychotherapy British Association of Psychotherapists (BAP) Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 90.60% Green HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 98.10% Green Clinical Psychology Kings College London (IoP) HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green Royal Holloway HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green College London of East London HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green 8

11 Non-Medical Quality and Contract Management CPPD and Cytology 2012/13 Historic Data 11/12 Historic Data 10/ RAG RAG RAG CPPD Buckinghamshire New HENWL 90.6% Green -9.4% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green City London HENCEL 100.0% Green 10.0% 90.0% Green 86.7% High Amber Kings College London HESL 100.0% Green 8.3% 91.7% Green 90.0% Green HESL 97.7% Green -2.3% 100.0% Green 96.7% Green HENCEL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 90.0% Green Middlesex HENCEL 96.9% Green -3.1% 100.0% Green 90.0% Green Royal Marsden School of Cancer Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust HENWL 100.0% Green 0.0% 100.0% Green 100.0% Green HENCEL 61.7% Low Amber -28.3% 90.00% Green 76.70% High Amber of Greenwich HESL 100.0% Green 10.0% 90.00% Green 90.00% Green of Hertfordshire HENCEL 89.8% High Amber -0.2% 90.00% Green 90.00% Green of West London HENWL 100.0% Green 0.0% % Green 90.00% Green Cytology Northwick Park Hospital HENWL 100.0% Green 0.0% % Green 89.70% High Amber 9

12 Developing people for health and healthcare Health Education England NC