Using CQC Quality Statements to Evidence Risk Assessment, Positive Risk-Taking and Proportionate Control

Risk assessment and management sit at the heart of how CQC quality statements are applied in adult social care. Providers must demonstrate that risks are identified, assessed and managed in a way that protects people while supporting independence and choice. This expectation begins at CQC registration, where services must show how they will balance safety with person-centred care. The key challenge is evidencing that risk management is proportionate, dynamic and consistently applied in practice.

Balancing safety with independence

Risk management in social care is rarely about eliminating risk entirely. Instead, providers must demonstrate how they support individuals to take informed risks while minimising harm. This requires a clear understanding of the person’s preferences, capacity and the potential consequences of different approaches.

Overly restrictive practices can undermine independence and wellbeing, while insufficient control can expose people to avoidable harm. Providers must evidence how they achieve this balance.

Developing dynamic and person-centred risk assessments

Risk assessments should not be static documents. They must be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect changes in need, environment or behaviour. Staff must understand how to apply risk assessments in real time and when to escalate concerns.

Effective risk assessments include clear descriptions of risks, agreed control measures, staff responsibilities and review processes. They should also document the rationale for decisions, particularly where positive risk-taking is supported.

Providers frequently need to consider how this aligns with governance, assurance and oversight processes across services. These are explored in our CQC governance and assurance hub for adult social care services.

Operational example 1: supporting independent community access

Context: A person wishes to access the community independently despite previous incidents of becoming disoriented.

Support approach: The provider develops a risk assessment that supports independence while introducing safeguards.

Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff agree check-in times, ensure the person carries identification and provide route familiarisation. Records capture each outing and any concerns.

How effectiveness is evidenced: Evidence includes maintained independence, reduced incidents and consistent staff recording demonstrating safe practice.

Operational example 2: managing risks associated with eating and drinking

Context: A person is at risk of choking but wishes to maintain control over their diet.

Support approach: The provider works with professionals to develop a plan that balances safety and choice.

Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff prepare food according to guidance, monitor eating and support the person to make informed choices. Records capture adherence to guidance and any concerns.

How effectiveness is evidenced: Evidence includes reduced incidents, consistent staff practice and clear documentation of how risks are managed.

Operational example 3: reducing restrictive practices in behavioural support

Context: Staff have introduced restrictions in response to behaviour that challenges, limiting the person’s activities.

Support approach: The provider reviews the approach and introduces less restrictive strategies.

Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff use proactive techniques, provide structured support and monitor behaviour. Restrictions are only used where necessary and clearly documented.

How effectiveness is evidenced: Evidence includes reduced restrictions, improved engagement and consistent staff understanding of positive risk-taking.

Commissioner expectation

Commissioner expectation: Commissioners expect providers to demonstrate proportionate risk management that supports independence while maintaining safety. This includes clear evidence of decision-making and consistent practice.

Regulator / Inspector expectation

Regulator / Inspector expectation: CQC will expect providers to show that risks are managed effectively and that restrictive practices are minimised. Inspectors will look for evidence of person-centred approaches and clear documentation.

Governance and oversight of risk management

Effective governance includes regular review of risk assessments, incident trends and staff practice. Providers should identify patterns, such as recurring risks or inconsistent application, and take action to address them.

Leadership oversight should ensure that risk management is embedded into service culture, with clear accountability and continuous improvement. This includes monitoring whether risk assessments remain current and effective.

When risk management and positive risk-taking are fully integrated into quality statements, providers can demonstrate that care is safe, balanced and centred on the individual.

---