Research into the regulation of HCAs
A quantitative telephone survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI on behalf of the RCN amongst a random, stratified sample of 350 health care assistant (HCA) members between August and September 2008. The research aimed to find out what our HCA members think about the possiblefuture regulation of HCAs.
Understanding of Regulation
The most common interpretation of the phrase ‘professional regulation’, mentioned by 36% of HCAs relates to having consistency across the profession and for all professionals, namely ‘having standards and practices that all professionals work to’ and ‘having a code of conduct’, mentioned by 32%.
Perceived Benefits of Regulation
Eighty-five percent of HCAs spontaneously mentioned at least one potential benefit of regulation when asked, and ninety-nine percent identified at least one possible benefit of regulation when prompted with a list. The two joint top potential benefits mentioned from this list, by 95% of HCAs, were better training and education opportunities, along with official recognition of the importance and responsibilities of the HCA role.
Perceived Drawbacks of Regulation
Fewer members spontaneously identified potential drawbacks of regulation than identified potential benefits (43%, compared to 85% respectively). Around a third (34%) of members did not feel there would be any drawbacks to regulation, and almost a quarter (23%) of members did not know what drawbacks there might be.
The most common response (mentioned by 6% of members) is that regulation could limit jobs and clinical duties, and that the HCA role could be downgraded.
Views on Regulation
Of the HCA members surveyed, 85% felt that all HCAs should be regulated. Just over one in ten (11%) felt that only HCAs working at the higher levels 3 and 4 on the National Career Framework should be regulated, whilst 3% feel that only HCAs working at the highest Lever (4) on the Framework should be regulated.
The RCN’s current policy position is that all HCAs should be regulated in the interests of public protection and that regulation of Assistant Practitioners (or those working at Levels 3 and 4 on the National Career Framework) in nursing by the NMC is a first pragmatic step in this direction.’
Responsibility for Regulation and Willingness to Pay
Fifty-one percent of members favour a combined model approach with regards to who should act as the regulator of HCAs, of the NMC and their local employer. Eighteen percent felt the NMC on its own should regulate HCAs. These were the top two options chosen by members, from a list of options put to them.
Eighty-nine percentof HCAs surveyed were prepared to pay something in terms of an annual fee to the regulating body. Seventeen percent said they would be prepared to pay the same amount as registered nurses.
Training and Education
Almost all members who took part in the survey have received some training in their current role, whether in house (94%), on the job (90% or externally (75%).
HCAs working in the independent sector are more likely to have received external training in their current role than those working in the NHS.
Technical Details
The survey was carried out by Ipsos MORI by telephone among a regionally stratified sample of 350 RCN Health Care Assistant members, between 19 August and 5 September 2008. Quotas were set proportionately by UK country and English region and 15% of interviews were conducted amongst RCN HCA members of black or minority ethnic (BME) background. Data have not been weighted as the achieved profile by UK country/region was very close to the universe profile and the proportion of interviews amongst BME members was deemed to be representative.