CHRE Performance review report 2011-12 - Professional Standards ...

Initial handling of potential fitness to practise allegations
7.19 All the regulators have frameworks in place to ensure that once a ‘complaint’ (or
other information) is identified as being relevant to a registrant’s fitness to practise,
it is handled appropriately. We audit the regulators’ compliance with their
frameworks for handling fitness to practise concerns during our initial stages audits.
7.20 However, there is a crucial stage that occurs beforehand - the regulators’ decisionmaking
about which complaints/ enquiries/information should be treated as
potentially raising concerns about a registrant’s fitness to practise, and the action
the regulator takes as a result of that decision. It is important that the regulators, in
line with their overriding statutory duty to protect the public, take active steps to
establish whether or not enquiries/concerns which they receive raise concerns
about their registrants’ fitness to practise, particularly as many complainants may
be unfamiliar with the regulatory process and may not use the term ‘complaint’ or
identify that they are raising a ‘fitness to practise’ concern on first contact with the
regulator. Similarly, and as highlighted by the report of the Health Select Committee
in 2011, it is important for public protection that the regulators proactively
investigate potential fitness to practise concerns that they become aware of (e.g.
through media reports) even where no ‘complaint’ as such is made to them 6 .
7.21 The GCC has alerted us to the discovery of a significant number of fitness to
practise complaints (or complaints that might have become fitness to practise
cases) that had not been properly addressed upon receipt, demonstrating problems
with the initial handling stage of its fitness to practise processes. We acknowledge
the work that is being taken forward by the GCC to address this situation. This
highlights the need to ensure that all potential fitness to practise complaints are
handled appropriately upon receipt, so that the regulator can ensure that any risks
to the public are properly addressed. We would encourage all the regulators to
review their processes and staff guidance about the handling of initial enquiries and
the identification of those enquiries that may raise concerns about a registrant’s
fitness to practise, in order to ensure that they are protecting the public from
registrants whose fitness to practise may be impaired, and that they are doing so at
the first available opportunity.
Information security
7.22 We have reported on failures to protect information about fitness to practise cases
at four of the regulatory bodies during this performance review period. Information
security breaches can cause harm to individuals, can lead to action being taken by
the Information Commissioner, and can damage public confidence that the
regulatory system will keep personal or sensitive data safe. We encourage all
regulators to review the security of their arrangements in order to identify any
weaknesses. We look forward to seeing demonstrable improvements in next year’s
performance review.
6 House of Commons, 2011. Health Committee seventh report annual accountability hearing with
the Nursing and Midwifery Council. 19 July 2011 and House of Commons, 2011. Health
Committee eighth report annual accountability hearing with the General Medical Council. 19 July
2011.
13