Induction / Care Certificate

Is there documented evidence that new staff complete a sufficient period of supervised shadowing before providing care independently?

What we look for: Review shadowing logs for new starters to ensure they do not work solo until deemed competent. Good practice involves documenting the length of shadowing and the specific tasks observed. A fail occurs if new staff are deployed solo without shadowing records.

Evidence: Shadowing logs, Timesheets, Rota records, Sign-off sheets

Are care workers' practical competencies (e.g., manual handling, medication administration) directly observed and assessed in the workplace?

What we look for: Check that competency is not just assessed via e-learning but through direct workplace observation by a competent senior. Look for signed observation forms for high-risk tasks. Lack of practical assessment before solo deployment is a fail.

Evidence: Direct observation forms, Competency assessments, Spot check records

Are new care staff registered for and commencing a structured induction programme aligned with the Care Certificate standards immediately upon employment?

What we look for: Sample 3-5 recently recruited staff files. Verify that an induction programme based on the Care Certificate standards is initiated on day one. A fail is indicated if staff are delivering care without having started their formal induction process.

Evidence: Staff files, Induction checklists, Training matrix, Care Certificate workbooks

Are staff completing the full Care Certificate within the recommended 12-week timeframe?

What we look for: Review the progress trackers for staff employed between 3 and 6 months ago. Ensure the Care Certificate is completed within 12 weeks, or that robust reasons and support plans are documented for any delays. Consistent failure to complete on time is a red flag.

Evidence: Care Certificate progress trackers, Completed portfolios, Training matrix

Does the induction training include specific modules relevant to the unique needs of the people the service supports (e.g., Oliver McGowan training, dementia)?

What we look for: Cross-reference the needs of the client base with the induction content. Good practice ensures new staff receive specialized training (e.g., learning disability, autism) before supporting those clients. Generic inductions failing to cover specific complex needs will fail this check.

Evidence: Training certificates, Induction schedule, Service user profiles vs training matrix

Is feedback from people receiving care and support actively sought regarding the practice and attitude of new staff?

What we look for: Check if the agency routinely calls clients after a new staff member's first few visits to ask about their experience, punctuality, and kindness. Good practice uses this feedback in the staff member's probationary review. Missing service user input is a fail.

Evidence: Quality assurance calls, Care review notes, Spot check records, Feedback forms

Are new starters receiving regular, documented support, mentoring, and probationary supervision during their induction period?

What we look for: Sample supervision files for staff in their first 6 months. Look for 4-week, 8-week, and 12-week probationary reviews that discuss well-being, competence, and training needs. A lack of structured support during the critical early employment phase is a fail.

Evidence: Supervision records, Probationary review forms, Mentor meeting notes

Is there robust management oversight and final quality assurance sign-off by a competent assessor for completed Care Certificate portfolios?

What we look for: Review completed portfolios to ensure they are signed off by an occupationally competent person, not merely self-certified by the worker. Management should have a clear dashboard tracking induction status. Poorly completed workbooks being signed off indicates a QA failure.

Evidence: Signed Care Certificates, Internal QA records, Assessor qualifications, Management dashboards