216 17 Fitness to practise key information 217
Contents Introduction 3 About us 3 Section 1: Developments in the Fitness to Practise Department 4 Section 2: Fitness to practise key statistics 6 Fitness to practise concerns received in 216 17 6 Decisions by Investigating Committee Panels 8 Final hearings 9 Section 3: Future developments 11 Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 2
Introduction Welcome to the summary of key information about the Health and Care Profession Council s (HCPC) work considering concerns raised about the fitness to practise of our registrants. This summary covers the period 1 April 216 to 31 March 217 and includes key statistics about the concerns raised and how we, and our fitness to practise panels, have dealt with them. The information in this report is an extract from the full Fitness to practise annual report 217. For more details and full understanding of the Fitness to Practise Department s work please see the full report. About us Our overarching objective is protection of the public. Our fitness to practise process is designed to protect the public from those registrants who are not fit to practise. If a registrant s fitness to practise is impaired, it means that there are concerns about their ability to practise safely and effectively. That may mean that they should not practise at all, or that they should be limited in what they are allowed to do. Our processes do not mean that we will pursue every isolated or minor mistake but if a registrant is found to fall below our standards, we will take action to protect the public. Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 3
Section 1: Developments in the Fitness to Practise Department In the last five years the number of registrants on our Register has increased by 13 per cent, to 35,33 in 216 17, and the number of concerns the Fitness to Practise Department have received has increased by 37 per cent, to 2,259 in 216 17 (see Figure 1). It is important to note, however, that during 216 17 only.64 per cent of registrants had an allegation made against them (see Figure 2). Over this period, only.9 per cent of registrants were subject to a sanction imposed at a final hearing. As a result of our continued focus on the timely progression and conclusion of cases, we have seen significant increase in hearings activity this year with 39 per cent more cases being concluded at a final hearing in 216 17 compared to 215 16. We have seen a 31 per cent increase in the number of hearing days compared to last year. Figure 1 Number of registrants and concerns raised compared to five years ago Total number of registrants 31,942 35,33 13 % 35,33 212 13 216 17 FTP concerns 1,653 37 % 2,259 Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 4
Section 1: Developments in the Fitness to Practise Department This year we realigned the Fitness to Practise Department to provide for greater specialisation in the case management process. This included establishing a dedicated team responsible for the initial receipt and risk assessment of fitness to practise concerns and a dedicated team responsible for the preparation of cases for a final hearing following a case-to-answer decision. To enhance the independence of the adjudication function, we have worked on a project establishing the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS). Greater independence of this function reinforces the separation of the investigation and adjudication of fitness to practise cases. Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 5
Section 2: Fitness to practise key statistics This year has seen an increase of 6.2 per cent in the number of concerns received compared to the last year. At the same time, the number of professionals registered increased by 2.5 per cent. Fitness to practise concerns received in 216 17 Figure 2 Total number of registrants, concerns received and percentage of the Register The proportion of registrants who have had a fitness to practise concern raised about them has increased slightly, from.62 last year to.64 per cent in 216 17. It means that this year only one in 164 registrants were the subject of a new concern about their fitness to practise. Please note that in a few instances a registrant would be the subject of more than one concern. Total no. of registrants 4, 35, 3, 25,.52%.64%.66%.62%.64% 3,5 3, 2,5 2, No. of concerns 2, 1,5 15, 1, 1, 5 212 13 213 14 214 15 215 16 216 17 Total no. of registrants % of registrants subject to a concern No. of concerns Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 6
Members of the public raised the largest proportion of concerns about registrants (4.9 per cent), which is consistent with previous years. Similarly, employers continue to be the second largest source of concerns, comprising 26.4 per cent of the total. The proportion of cases which were the result of a self-referral by the registrant has remained the same as last year, at just over 2 per cent (see Figure 3). Where a concern does not meet the Standard of Acceptance, 1 even after we have sought further information, or the concerns that have been raised do not relate to fitness to practise, the case is closed. In 216 17, 1,854 cases were closed as not meeting the Standard of Acceptance, a 12 per cent increase compared to 215 16. Figure 3 Where concerns come from 2.5% 2.9% 26.4% 4.5% Article 22(6) / anon (2.9%) Employer (26.4%) Other (4.5%) Other registrant / professional (3%) Professional body (.4%) Police (1.4%) Public (4.9%) Self-referral (2.5%) 4.9% 3%.4% 1.4% 1 The Standard of Acceptance is the threshold a concern about a registrant must meet before we will investigate it as a fitness to practise allegation. Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 7
Decisions by Investigating Committee Panels The Investigating Committee Panels (ICPs) considered 653 cases in 216 17, which was 17 per cent less than last year. In 27 out of 653 cases considered by ICPs this year, the panel requested further investigation. The outcome of the remaining 626 cases is set out in the Figure 4. Figure 4 Case to answer by complainant Committee Number of cases to answer Number of no case to answer Total % case to answer This year, the case-to-answer rate for cases considered by the ICPs was 71 per cent, which is an increase on last year when the case-to-answer rate was 63 per cent. The largest complainant group for the cases considered by the ICPs were employers and a case to-answer decision was made in a significant proportion of those cases (78 per cent). Cases that were referred to us anonymously, or by article 22(6), which enables the HCPC to investigate a matter even where a concern has not been raised with us in the usual way, also have a high proportion of case-to-answer decisions (83 per cent). Fitness to practise allegations received from the Police had the highest percentage (88 per cent) of case-toanswer decisions, although this is a small complainant group. Article 22(6) / anon Employer Other Other registrant / professional Police Professional body Public Self-referral Total 5 276 18 4 14 4 24 98 443 1 8 11 7 2 4 27 51 183 6 356 29 11 16 8 51 149 626 83 78 62 36 88 5 47 66 71 Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 8
Final hearings In 216 17, 445 final hearing cases were concluded. This is 125 (39 per cent) more cases than the previous year. Final hearings where allegations were well founded concerned only.9 per cent of the professionals regulated by the HCPC. In 215 16, this was.7 per cent. Decisions from all public hearings where fitness to practise is considered to be impaired are published on our website at www.hcpc-uk.org (or www.hcpts-uk.org). Details of cases that are considered to be not well founded are not published on the HCPC website unless specifically requested by the registrant concerned. Figure 5 Number of concluded final hearings 45 4 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 212 13 213 14 214 15 215 16 216 17 Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 9
Figure 6 Outcomes reached by each committee Committee Caution Conditions of practice No further action Not well founded / discontinued Removed by consent Struck off Suspension Wellfounded Total Conduct and Competence Committee Health Committee Investigating Committee (fraudulent and incorrect entry) 39 39 1 8 115 2 26 5 92 11 5 3 432 13 Analysis of the impact of outcomes on registrants shows that 53 per cent had a sanction that prevented them from practising (strike off order including removal by consent and suspension). Nine per cent had a sanction that restricted their practice (conditions of practice) and nine per cent had a caution entry on the Register. 26 per cent of the cases considered at the final hearings were not well founded. Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 1
Section 3: Future developments Looking forward to 217 18, in addition to our day-to-day operations, our priorities will include evaluating the impact of the realignment of Fitness to Practise Department and establishing the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS). We will continue to carry out improvements to processes ensuring timely progression and conclusion of cases. We will continue to develop our policies including the Indicative Sanctions Policy along with ensuring openness, fairness and transparency in our fitness to practise proceedings. I hope you find this document of interest. Further information can be found in our full Fitness to Practise Annual Report 217 which can be found on our website at www.hcpcuk.org/publications/reports If you have any feedback or comments please email ftpnoncaserelated@hcpc-uk.org Health and Care Professions Council Fitness to practise key information 217 11
Park House 184 Kennington Park Road London SE11 4BU tel +44 ()3 5 6184 fax +44 ()2 782 9684 www.hcpc-uk.org To request this document in Welsh or an alternative format, email publications@hcpc-uk.org Health and Care Professions Council 217 Publication code: FTPKEY217 (published November 217)