Our Approach

Built for where CQC is heading, not just where it's been.

The regulatory framework is changing. The direction of travel is clear: more focus on outcomes, more sector-specific evidence expectations, more weight on innovation. Studio is designed for the framework that's coming, not the one that's leaving.

The framework is changing

In our direction

In October 2024, the Dash and Richards independent reviews were highly critical of CQC, calling for a far greater focus on effectiveness, outcomes, and innovative models of care delivery. CQC's response has been substantial.

The “Better regulation, better care” consultation ran from October to December 2025. The proposals signal a fundamental shift in how care quality is assessed — and every change strengthens Studio's position.

The 1–4 scoring system is being removed

Ratings will be based on rounded professional judgement with rating characteristics. The evidence bar rises, not falls.

Sector-specific frameworks are replacing the generic SAF

Adult social care will have its own tailored framework. Evidence requirements become more explicit and granular.

Greater emphasis on professional judgement

Inspectors will have more discretion. Structured, auditable evidence becomes more important, not less.

Innovation is now explicitly valued

The Well-led quality statement now includes “learning, improvement and innovation.” Adopting Studio is itself evidence of innovation.

Where we are now
October 2024
Dash & Richards reviews published
Highly critical of CQC. Called for fundamental reform in how care quality is assessed and how innovation is supported.
Oct–Dec 2025
“Better regulation, better care” consultation
CQC proposed removing 1–4 scoring, introducing sector-specific frameworks, and strengthening evidence expectations.
Spring 2026 — Now
CQC analysing feedback
We're in the gap between consultation closing and CQC publishing final frameworks. The direction is set. The details are being worked out.
Summer 2026
Testing with providers
New frameworks published for provider feedback. Final versions expected before implementation.
End of 2026
Implementation begins
New sector-specific frameworks go live. Providers who've prepared will be ahead.
The scoring mechanic is changing. The evidence requirements are not weakening. The underlying evidence expectations are strengthening, not loosening — which makes evidence gaps more visible, not less.
More Days Studio positioning
Innovation as evidence

CQC's six principles — and how Studio aligns

Both the Dash and Richards reports criticised CQC for failing to support innovation in care delivery. In response, CQC — working with NHSX, the Health Foundation, and NCF — published six principles of innovation and explicitly included innovation in the Well-led quality statements.

For operators already rated Good and looking to differentiate, this is a compelling angle: adopting Studio is itself evidence of the kind of innovation CQC is explicitly encouraging.

People's experience of care is at the centre

Innovation should demonstrably improve outcomes for residents, not just operational efficiency.

Studio → Journey Score measures whether activities are making a difference to each individual.

Safety is integral to innovation

New approaches must maintain safety standards while improving care delivery.

Studio → Built on RCT-evidenced clinical frameworks. Evidence from real practice, not AI-generated documentation.

Innovation supports continuous improvement

Technology should enable learning, trend analysis, and evidence-based refinement over time.

Studio → Closed-loop audit trails, trend analysis, and outcome measurement across the portfolio.

Leadership drives an innovation culture

Well-led services actively seek and adopt new approaches to improving care.

Studio → Adopting Studio demonstrates the forward-thinking approach CQC assesses under Well-led.

Innovation must be inclusive and accessible

New tools should work for the full range of residents and staff, not just the most capable.

Studio → Four-tier differentiation means any staff member can deliver, any resident can participate.

Evidence underpins innovation

Claims of innovation must be supported by evidence of impact, not just implementation.

Studio → The entire platform is an evidence generation engine. Impact is measured, not assumed.
Who built this

Built by digital data technologists, not a lifestyle company

Studio wasn't built by a team that happened into care technology. It was built by digital data technologists who chose to apply serious technical capability to a sector that's been underserved by the software industry.

The product architecture reflects that background: four engines, FHIR-aligned from day one, vector embeddings for personalisation, generative AI for activity synthesis. This isn't a content library with a compliance module bolted on.

Our team brings decades of experience delivering government-grade digital services to GDS standards — the same rigour applied to data architecture, interoperability, and evidence-based design now powers every part of Studio.

30+
Years in digital delivery
Multi-exit technology entrepreneurship and GDS-standard government services
4
Distinct engines
Personalisation, scheduling, evidence, and compliance — architected as a platform, not a feature set
FHIR
Aligned from day one
Healthcare interoperability standard built into the data model, not retrofitted
Regulatory alignment

Built with CQC's direction, not just for it

“CQC does not give better ratings because a provider is doing something. They need to see what difference it's making.”
CQC Policy Team
“Part of the rounded care of people living in care homes… part of their whole holistic experience of how they're living.”
Katie Barton, CQC Senior Policy Officer, describing Studio's proposition

See where your portfolio stands

We'll analyse your care group's published CQC ratings and show you exactly where the evidence gaps are. Free. No obligation. Results in a week.

Get your free analysis →