The single assessment framework — how CQC judges you now

The building blocks

• Quality statements: the old KLOEs and prompts were replaced by 34 "we" statements — commitments like "we make sure people are safe" — grouped under the five key questions.
• Evidence categories: each quality statement is judged from set categories of evidence: people's experience, staff feedback, partner feedback, observation, processes, and outcomes.
• Scoring: evidence turns into a 1–4 score per quality statement (4 = exceptional standard, 1 = significant shortfalls). Scores aggregate into key-question ratings and your overall rating.
• Rolling assessment: evidence can be collected and scores updated at any time — from notifications, feedback, data and targeted requests — not only during a site visit. Your rating can move without an inspection.

What it changes in practice

1. Continuous evidence beats inspection sprints. Because assessment is rolling, the “tidy up before the visit” strategy is dead. Your systems need to generate inspection-grade evidence as a by-product of daily work — which is where digital records earn their keep.
2. People's experience carries real weight. Feedback from residents, families and staff is a formal evidence category. If you aren't systematically collecting and logging it, you're leaving score on the table.
3. Data flows to CQC between visits. Notifications, whistleblowing, local-authority feedback and public reviews all feed the picture. Consistency between what you submit and what you display matters.
4. Scores make weak spots visible. A “Good” rating built on scores of 2s is fragile; the same rating built on 3s is safe. Ask yourself statement by statement where you'd score, and shore up the 2s first.