Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Yes, it was an April Fool ... CQC and its 'super-outstanding' rating

This story was published on 1 April and it was (well done for those of you that guessed it) an April Fool...

GP practices who already have an ‘outstanding’ rating will be able to apply for a new higher level of accreditation from the CQC from September.

The regulator announced the move yesterday, as part of a new drive at the CQC to ‘champion excellence’ at all levels of general practice.

The new ‘super-outstanding’ rating will only be open to practices that already have an ‘outstanding’ score on a previous practice inspection and would be subject to an ‘enhanced’ inspection that would be conducted by the regulator.

Chief inspector Professor Steve Field announced the move in a speech yesterday in Westminster. Professor Field said: ’We want to champion excellence at all levels of general practice and this new award will only be made to the 0.5% of practices that will become beacons of good practice around the profession and will be tasked with leading continuing improvement in primary care.’

Professor Field said that all practices with the new rating would be presented with a large gold star award that they will be able to display in their waiting room and a logo on their practice page on NHS Choices. 'This is an opportunity to show what general practice can be if GPs really try,' he added.

Professor Field, answering a question from a Pulse reporter, denied this was a tactic to distract from the recent astronomic rises in CQC fees, responding that he was 'worth every penny'.

Readers' comments (17)

  • If only yesterday's CQC story had been the April Fool one

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "Super?outstanding" the first thing coming into my mind is the contestants winning a motorboat on the old quiz show "Bullseye".In this case the shows called "Bulls***".and it smells like it to.Is this worth the ripoff fees an extra tick and gold star from teacher,I think not.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am a GP advisor to the CQC, so for the first time in 35 years, I am actually priviledged to visit colleagues Practices, and fascinating it is too.There are indeed some outstanding Practices out there.We should acknowledge their achievements and be prepared to learn from them rather than engage in vacuous carping.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Gold Star also comes with a large pot of lube and a Steve Field onesy suit. Partners must display details of their earnings on a poster in the waiting room along with photographs of their houses and spouses. Free Easter eggs for all vexatious complainants. Must stop now before give NHSE any more good ideas..

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Re. Anonymous | Sessional/Locum GP01 Apr 2016 9:23am

    Well I wouldn't tell the practices you locum at what you do.
    You may never work again. Some practices will not shortlist
    CQC doctors.

    CQC reports = Brutal cut and paste

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Will the CQC move to looking at outcomes rather than processes?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • CQC takes a lot of time resources and costs loads of money. I am happy with 'Just good enough' as I really do not understand what value they have. Nice to know the CQC assessor likes visiting colleagues practices. I am sure his patients prefer him wasting his time doing that rather than seeing patients which is what he should be doing!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • all GPs should work for the CQC and let some other mugs actually see patients.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Does Prof Field have even the slightest insight?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Daryl Mullen... spot on question.
    But probably wasted as the simplicity of observing results does not enable extortion and empowers kleptocrats.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.