CQC intelligent monitoring

I would hope that Steve Field, maintaining the transparency to which he and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) aspire, will review the effect of publishing their ‘intelligent monitoring’ (IM) on the practice in which I was proud to be a partner for 29 years.¹

The announcement of the practice’s IM putting it in the lowest banding (Band 1) came as a real shock to the doctors, nurses, and office staff and, most notably, a large number of the 29 000 patients.

The ‘outstanding’ result of the ensuing CQC inspection made the IM seem exceedingly fallible in its apparent lack of both content, and face, validity.

Might the CQC’s transparency now both allow it to publish any discussions about the utility of the words ‘intelligent’ and ‘monitoring’ in this context and make any apologies to those, for whom IM has proved both inaccurate and reputationally risky, highly visible?