Decision Logs, Judgement and Evidence: How Registered Managers Prove Reasonable Control
When services are challenged, CQC rarely asks only what happened. It asks how leaders decided, what information they used, and whether their judgement was reasonable. These judgements are interpreted through the CQC Quality Statements & Assessment Framework, and where decisions are undocumented or unclear, Registered Manager accountability & individual liability becomes a focus.
Why decision evidence matters
Registered Managers are not expected to predict every outcome. They are expected to demonstrate that decisions were:
- Informed by available evidence
- Proportionate to the risk
- Reviewed when circumstances changed
Decision logs provide this protection when outcomes are later questioned.
Operational example 1: Managing complex behavioural risk
Context: A person’s behaviour escalates despite existing controls.
Support approach: Decisions are logged and reviewed.
Day-to-day delivery detail: The Registered Manager records the rationale for interim controls, specialist input requests and review timelines. Decisions are revisited as new information emerges.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Records show structured decision-making rather than reactive responses.
Operational example 2: Staffing risk decisions
Context: Short-notice absences create staffing pressure.
Support approach: Risk-based staffing decisions are documented.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Decisions to use agency staff, adjust rotas or reduce non-essential activity are recorded with rationale and mitigations.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Staffing decisions align with risk and are defensible under scrutiny.
Operational example 3: Deciding not to escalate
Context: An issue is managed internally rather than escalated.
Support approach: The decision not to escalate is justified.
Day-to-day delivery detail: The Registered Manager documents why internal controls were sufficient and sets a review trigger if conditions change.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Decisions appear measured, not dismissive.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioners expect transparent judgement. They want assurance that risks are understood, decisions are reasoned, and escalation occurs when thresholds are met.
Regulator expectation (CQC)
CQC expects defensible decision-making. Where outcomes are poor, inspectors look for evidence that leaders acted reasonably based on what they knew at the time.
Decision logs as protection
Decision evidence protects Registered Managers by showing control, reflection and leadership maturity. It shifts scrutiny from blame to professional judgement.