“There is no minimum standard of training for
healthcare assistants before they can work unsupervised, an independent report
has found” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23246066
Actually
that’s not true!
Back in
March Skills for Health and Skills for Care launched the National Minimum
Standards for Healthcare and Social Care workers – see http://www.skillsforhealth.org.uk/about-us/news/code-of-conduct-and-national-minimum-training-standards-for-healthcare-support-workers/
. In addition the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations
2010 state quite clearly the Health and Social Care providers must ensure
employees are “appropriately supported in relation to their responsibilities,
to enable them to deliver care and treatment to service users safely and to an
appropriate standard, including by receiving appropriate training, professional
development, supervision and appraisal” (Regulation 23)
So, the issue is not whether those
standards are in place but how those standards are applied, implemented and
inspected.
The first
area that needs real scrutiny is the induction process.
Imagine
that time when you first started in a new job, there is always an element of
nervousness as you enter a new environment, have to learn new routines and
adapt to working with new people. Now imagine how much information you are
likely to retain when you are bombarded with DVD’s or reading material which is
supposed to make you competent in the role you are about to undertake!
While we
have, in social care, the Common Induction Standards, it has to be remembered
these only form a part of the induction process. Induction must be as much
about ensuring that new employees learn about the workplace, its routines etc.
and how the induction standards apply to the workplace and the individuals
receiving care and support there. A tick box approach to the induction
standards will not work and there needs to be a greater understanding by
managers and leaders in the home of the importance of mentoring new employees
to ensure the induction standards are embedded in work practice.
Learning
and development must not stop after a successful induction. Professional
development is a regulatory requirement and continuous training is important.
Even if you have been on endless health and safety courses the chances are
going on another will spark something in your mind that you had forgotten or
prompt you to think about a bad habit you have got into and encouraged you to
change it. Training, aside for giving us new information, can also make us
think about how we do things right now, it brings us into ‘conscious competence’,
always a good thing to do on occasion.
Supervision
and appraisal also serves the same purpose. It helps us question why we do
things in certain ways and can make us consider better ways of doing our work.
Too often supervision and appraisal are seen as a means to be critical of an
employees work but they should be seen as a means of encouraging employees to
think about their own role and how they perform it.
The key
issue is to ensure that those responsible to managing and leading staff are
sufficiently trained themselves in staff development.
One of the
vital areas of training, often overlooked, is the quality of training itself.
Certainly I have stopped using training providers because of the negative
feedback I had from staff (the usual complaint is ‘they were just reading from
a script’ – how can a trainer engage learners when they a focused on reading
their lines?) yet how many providers actually get feedback from staff about the
quality of training. It is important that providers do this, not only to ensure
the quality of training but also to ensure they are not wasting their money!
There are
schemes in place which accredit training in social care the principle one being
the National Skills Academy for Social Care, and whilst their list is somewhat
small at the moment, it would benefit all those who provide social care
training to apply for accreditation (here’s the link https://www.nsasocialcare.co.uk/training-providers
).
Given that
standards and regulation already exists the obvious question is how are these
actually regulated and inspected. If there are issues over training and
development why are these not picked up in the inspection process? It can only
be speculated that the inspectors themselves are receiving insufficient
training into what to look for and what questions to ask about training and
development. One of the proposals from the Care Quality Commission’s
consultation on inspection is the introduction of ‘specialist’ inspection teams
– personally I hope that includes specialist in training and development to
ensure standards and regulations are adhered to.
The
training and development regulations and standards are there, the issue is how
these are applied and inspected, if we can improve this we can improve the
general quality of care across the board.
No comments:
Post a Comment