Safe · KLOE 6

Safe staffing

Are there enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff who receive adequate support, supervision and development to keep people safe and meet their needs?

In brief

Safe staffing is key line of enquiry 6 under the Safe key question in the Care Quality Commission (CQC) draft adult social care assessment framework (v9, 19 March 2026), currently published for consultation. It covers workforce capacity and capability, safe recruitment (including disclosure and barring service (dbs) checks), staffing levels and skills mix, skills and qualifications/revalidation, learning, development and competency, support, supervision, performance management, people in positions of trust. CQC describes performance against it at four rating levels: Outstanding, Good, Requires improvement and Inadequate. Each statement and rating characteristic quoted here is reproduced verbatim from CQC's draft; plain-English summaries are HLTH's own.

Key question: Safe
Line of enquiry: KLOE 6 of 7 under Safe
Rating levels: Outstanding, Good, Requires improvement, Inadequate
Source: Adult social care assessment framework, v9 (19 March 2026)
Status: Draft, published by CQC for consultation
Reference: pp. 16–18 of the CQC draft

Scope and topic areas

What this line of enquiry covers

Scope of this key line of enquiry and topic areas include:

Workforce capacity and capability
Safe recruitment (including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks)
Staffing levels and skills mix
Skills and qualifications/revalidation
Learning, development and competency
Support, supervision
Performance management
People in positions of trust

Rating characteristics

How CQC describes each rating

The four characteristic sets for this KLOE, best to worst. Every point is CQC's wording, reproduced exactly.

Outstanding

In plain terms: Care is exceptional and consistently better than the Good standard.

Staffing levels are safe and optimised to enable proactive, personalised care. Skill mix is continually reviewed to reflect people’s evolving needs, and leaders can demonstrate adaptive strategies for responding to demand and capacity issues flexibly, so people receive the care and support they need.
Recruitment processes are inclusive, values-based, and co-designed with people who use services. They go beyond compliance to actively seek diverse talent that reflects the community.
Training is tailored to the individual needs and learning styles of staff and its effectiveness is continually reviewed to ensure it improves. People and those close to them are involved in planning and delivering this training, so this is based around them and their requirements.
Staff feel engaged, confident, valued, and inspired to grow, driving innovation and improving outcomes for all. The impact of this is evaluated and feeds into continuous improvement.
The continuing development of the qualifications, skills, competence and knowledge of staff are recognised as being integral to ensuring high-quality care, supported by a proactive support and appraisal system.
Staff are proactively supported and encouraged to acquire new skills, use their transferable skills, and share good practice.
Innovative, advanced and appropriate techniques to develop capability and competence are embedded and supported, such as simulation-based learning.
Supervision is an empowering process for staff, which fosters a culture where reflective practice and continuous learning are a shared priority.

Good

In plain terms: The service meets the expected standard.

Thorough and safe recruitment practices ensure staff, including agency staff and volunteers, are suitably experienced, qualified and competent to carry out their roles.
Recruitment, disciplinary and capability processes, and ongoing checks, are safe, effective and reviewed for equality impacts.
There are appropriate staffing levels and skill mix to meet people’s needs. Individual needs are taken into consideration so that when people receive one-to-one support, the skills and experience of staff are matched to the person’s needs.
Actions are taken to protect staff from fatigue, and leaders understand its impact on the safety of those who use services.
Staff and volunteers receive training that is appropriate to their role. This is embedded into practice and refreshed at regular intervals. Competency is assessed as required to maintain knowledge and skills in line with good practice.
There are induction, supervision and appraisal processes to support staff to develop and improve services (including professional revalidation where needed).
Staff and volunteers at all levels have opportunities to learn and are supported to keep their professional practice and knowledge up-to-date. Poor performance is managed appropriately.
The service has systems for investigating any allegations against people in positions of trust that it employs, and actions are taken to address any risk to people.

Requires improvement

In plain terms: The service is not yet Good and has areas that must improve.

Recruitment processes are not consistently thorough or safe. Required recruitment checks (including DBS, fit and proper person requirements and other recruitment checks) are not consistently completed.
Recruitment is driven by filling vacancies rather than on the qualifications, skills and values of applicants.
There are sometimes insufficient staffing levels and skill mix to ensure safety and promote good outcomes.
Staff are expected to provide care and support in a timescale that makes people feel rushed or unsafe.
Staff feel stretched and task-focused without attention to person-centred care and support.
Staff absence is not routinely anticipated or covered with appropriately qualified or skilled staff to meet people’s needs. People are often not informed about staff changes. Turnover of staff may be high.
Actions to reduce staff fatigue are not consistently taken, and leaders do not consistently recognise or respond to the impact this has on safety.
Training and development plans are not designed around learning needs and the care and support needs of people who use the service. Not all staff are up-to-date in safety-related training in line with good practice.
Poor performance is not reliably identified or addressed. Supervision or support for staff to maintain their professional skills or knowledge of good practice is not consistent.
The service has systems for responding to allegations involving people in positions of trust, but these are inconsistently applied or not consistently followed.

Inadequate

In plain terms: Performance is well below the expected standard; enforcement may follow.

Recruitment is not thorough or safe. Required recruitment checks on staff are not routinely completed, and unsuitable people may be recruited.
There are not enough staff and/or staff lack the qualifications, skills and competence required to deliver care safely.
Not enough time is allowed to deliver care safely.
Staffing levels and skills mix are not reviewed to reflect changing needs.
Absences are not adequately covered, or changes of staff are often made at short notice or without giving notice to people.
Staff fatigue is not recognised or managed, and leaders fail to understand or act on the risks it creates for people’s safety.
Staff are not adequately trained, and many lack essential skills and knowledge required to deliver care safely or in a way that ensures good outcomes for people.
Staff performance is not monitored adequately, and action is not taken to address poor performance or unsuitability.
Staff and volunteers are not supported or clear about their role or responsibilities. They do not receive appropriate supervision.
Staff are not supported to maintain their professional skills or encouraged to keep up-to-date with good practice.
The service does not have safe or effective systems for managing allegations about people in positions of trust. Concerns may go unreported, un-investigated, or inadequately investigated.

Reading these against your own evidence is where most providers get stuck. We can walk it through with you.