Mr. Finbarr Colfer:

Where we receive information or learn there is a concern about an impact on residents, we do not allow that situation to continue. Our inspectors, when they are carrying out an inspection, risk-assess the situation. We have plenty of examples where our inspectors have required providers to put immediate actions in place to deal with the immediate, high-level risk to residents, and providers are then required to respond in the ongoing addressing of that risk, or its elimination where possible.

As for the funding, the Senator is correct. We are detached from the funding side of things. The regulations set out the minimum requirements - they are minimum requirements - that all providers are required to implement to ensure the safety and the quality of life of residents. Our role is to assess whether they are meeting those requirements, and the provider and the funder then have to discuss how to address those matters. Our actions are not informed by that part. If there is an immediate risk and there is a requirement for immediate action, we require the provider to take that action. Providers are in the difficult position of having to engage with their funder to ensure they have funding to do that. Our focus is on the impact of the people living in the centres.

I have worked in the disabilities sector throughout my working life, but I was shocked by some of the cases we found in 2013 when we started carrying out inspections. It was the first time an independent authority had gone into many of these centres and reported publicly on what we found. There has been progress. Our compliance and non-compliance levels, which are set out in our annual overview reports, show that for the vast majority of providers, a good population of service providers works hard to deliver good-quality care. There is also a cohort of centres, however, that does not manage to achieve that, and regulation is very important in that we publicly state that and require providers to take action to address it.

Our pathway is such that when we receive information, it is assessed within three days. We consider the seriousness of the information and base our actions on that. Those actions might involve asking the provider to investigate the circumstances and to report back to us, but it may also be that we have a concern or the issue has been identified at a previous inspection and we now have more information on it. We will then perform an unannounced risk inspection and, if the information is substantiated, require the provider to take action in respect of it. One thing we do not do is wait around for months for the issue to be resolved.