CQC quality statement — Responsive
Care provision, integration and continuity
"We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity." In MyCareCompliance, 10 mapped checks across 10 audit templates map to this quality statement.
Last reviewed: September 2026. This guidance reflects CQC information available at the date above — always refer to cqc.org.uk for current regulatory requirements.
How we check it
Each check below is a real question from a MyCareCompliance audit template. It names the regulation it evidences, describes what an auditor looks for in good and poor practice, and lists the evidence an inspector would expect you to produce.
- 10 mapped checks under the "Care provision, integration and continuity" quality statement
- Evidences 2 regulations: Regulation 9 — Person-centred care, Notifications (Registration Regulation 18) — Notification of other incidents
- Failed checks become tracked improvement actions with an owner, due date and evidence
The 10 checks
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careBusiness Continuity
Are emergency contact details for staff, service users, next of kin, and key partner agencies accurate, up-to-date, and accessible off-site?
What we look for: Review the on-call pack or emergency contact database. Sample 3 staff and 3 clients to verify numbers are current. Good looks like a secure, easily accessible list for on-call staff that includes local safeguarding and emergency duty teams.
Evidence: Emergency contact lists, On-call folder, Next of Kin records, Local Authority emergency contacts
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careCare Plan Audit
Has the care plan been reviewed regularly (at least annually or when needs change) and updated to reflect the current situation?
What we look for: Sample care plans of people who recently had a change in health (e.g., hospital discharge). Good looks like the plan was updated immediately. Fails if reviews are out of date or if copy-pasted with no meaningful evaluation.
Evidence: Care plan review forms, updated care plan documents, correspondence with social workers
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careCommissioned vs Delivered Care
Does Electronic Call Monitoring (ECM) or timesheet data confirm that actual care delivered matches the commissioned call durations?
What we look for: Compare commissioned hours against actual delivered hours for a sample of 10 service users. Look for systemic 'call clipping'. Consistent delivery of significantly less time than commissioned without review is a fail.
Evidence: ECM reports, Call log data, Timesheets, Exceptions reports
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careContinuity of Care
Is there a consistent core team of care workers allocated to each person's visits, minimizing the number of different carers?
What we look for: Sample rotas for 5 service users over a 4-week period. Good practice means a small, defined team provides the care. A fail would be a high turnover of different carers with no continuity, causing distress or confusion.
Evidence: Staff rotas, electronic call monitoring (ECM) data, care worker allocation logs, service user schedules
- Notifications (Registration Regulation 18) — Notification of other incidentsCQC Notifications Audit
Are all deaths of people using the service appropriately notified to the CQC, regardless of the cause or location of death?
What we look for: Review the roster/discharge list for service users who have passed away. Good looks like a Notification of Death is submitted for every deceased service user where regulated activity was being provided. Fails if deaths in hospital (while still on service) are missed.
Evidence: Service User Discharge/End of Life Log, Notification of Death records, CQC Portal Receipts
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careElectronic Call Monitoring
Does ECM data confirm that care workers remain for the full duration of the commissioned visit, avoiding 'call clipping'?
What we look for: Sample 5 service users and compare their commissioned hours against ECM actuals. Good looks like staff staying for the full time, or leaving early only if the client requested it and it was documented. Systemic 'call clipping' (leaving 10-15 mins early regularly) without reassessment of needs is a fail.
Evidence: Call duration reports, commissioned vs actual hours reports, care plan visit requirements
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careEmergency / On Call
Is there a clear procedure followed by on-call staff to manage and cover sudden staff sickness to prevent missed visits?
What we look for: Cross-reference staff sickness reports with out-of-hours logs to see how care was reallocated. Good practice involves dynamic risk assessment prioritizing critical visits and keeping clients informed of delays. A fail would be visits dropping off the system resulting in a missed visit due to inadequate out-of-hours coordination.
Evidence: Missed visit policy, on-call logs covering sickness, unallocated visit reports
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careHospital Transitions
Is there a robust system for tracking hospital admissions, pausing care, and maintaining appropriate contact during the hospital stay?
What we look for: Review the agency's hospital tracking logs. Check that care packages are correctly paused on the rostering system to prevent staff arriving at empty homes. Good practice includes scheduled welfare checks with the hospital ward and family to anticipate discharge.
Evidence: Call log records, Communication notes, Hospital tracker spreadhseet, Roster system printouts
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careLate / Shortened Visits Audit
Are all shortened (by >5 mins) or late (by >15 mins) visits clearly identified and flagged through Electronic Call Monitoring (ECM) or timesheet analysis?
What we look for: Review a sample of ECM data or timesheets for a 1-week period. Good looks like clear system flags for any visit that starts late or is cut short. A fail would be a lack of tracking, meaning management is unaware of clipped calls.
Evidence: ECM exception reports, Timesheets, Rota system alerts, Call duration logs
- Regulation 9 — Person-centred careRota / Staffing Capacity
Does the rostering process ensure continuity of care by assigning a consistent core team of care workers to each person using the service?
What we look for: Review schedules for 5 people with complex needs. Calculate the number of different carers they have seen in the past month. Good practice involves a small, consistent team. A fail is a high turnover of unknown staff delivering personal care.
Evidence: Client rotas/schedules for the last 4 weeks, continuity reports from rostering software, care plan preferences
Other Responsive quality statements
See it with your own service
Book a free demonstration and we will walk through the platform using scenarios from a service like yours.