Update to Investigating Committee Guidance Manual and Indicative Outcomes Guidance

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Update to Investigating Committee Guidance Manual and Indicative Outcomes Guidance"

Cassandra Lyons
5 years ago
Views:

1 Item 6 Council 24 July 2014 Update to Investigating Committee Guidance Manual and Indicative Outcomes Guidance I t e m Purpose of paper Public/Private Action Corporate Strategy To propose revisions of the Investigating Committee Guidance Manual (ICGM) and Indicative Outcomes Guidance (IOG) Public For decision Strategic Objective 2.0 Deliver proportionate and targeted regulation of dental professionals to improve public protection and enable the public to have confidence in dental regulation Decision Trail Recommendations ICGM The ICGM was implemented by the Executive Management Team (EMT) in late 2011 having been approved by the Fitness to Practise Policy Committee IOG The Council (27 September 2012) approved the provision of indicative outcomes guidance to the Investigating Committee (IC) which is direct, current and specific as well as engaging in a discussion with a targeted stakeholder group. The Council (6 December 2012) approved (subject to some minor suggested amendments) the Indicative Outcomes Guidance for the Investigating Committee The Council is asked to approve: the revised Indicative Outcomes Guidance for the Investigating Committee set out at Appendix 1; and the revised Investigating Committee Guidance Manual set out at Appendix 2

2 Authorship of paper and further information Neil Marshall Director of Regulation Caroline Jaggard IC Development Manager (secondee) Appendices Appendix 1: Amended Investigating Committee Guidance Manual (ICGM) (tracked changes) Appendix 2: Amended Indicative Outcomes Guidance (IOG) (tracked changes) Appendix 3: Advice Bank Appendix 4: Warning Bank Appendix 5: Explanatory document for amendments to ICGM Appendix 6: Explanatory document for amendments to IOG Appendix 7: Risks and Considerations

3 1. Executive Summary 1.1 The Council is asked to approve amendments to Investigating Committee Guidance Manual ( ICGM ) (set out at Appendix 1) and amendments to the Indicative Outcomes Guidance ( IOG ) for the Investigating Committee (set out at Appendix 2). 1.2 The Council is also asked to approve advice and warnings banks for the Investigating Committee, set out at Appendix 3 and Appendix 4 respectively. 2. Introduction and background 2.1 In 2011, concerns were raised that previous guidance for the Investigating Committee ( IC ) was no longer fit for purpose, that the GDC s fitness to practise processes and procedures were being applied inconsistently and that complainants were not given enough information to understand why their complaint had not met the test for referral to a Practice Committee. 2.2 As a result of those concerns, the Investigating Committee Guidance Manual (ICGM) was drafted by an external lawyer with input from several other GDC sources. Following consultation with key external stakeholders, the ICGM was approved by the Fitness to Practise Policy Committee and was implemented in November In September the following year, the Council approved the principle of providing clear and specific guidance for the IC on indicative outcomes to supplement the more general guidance provided to the IC and the provisions of the GDC s standards guidance. This document was called the Indicative Outcomes Guidance (IOG). 2.4 The aim of the IOG was to set out general principles and details in relation to common types of cases and to provide the IC with benchmarks and thresholds against which certain types of cases should be measured. In December 2012, the Council approved the IOG subject to some minor amendments, and it was published in January It was intended that the ICGM and IOG be updated from time to time in accordance with good practice and to reflect any changes in the law or GDC guidance. However, before any amendments could be proposed, in July 2013, a member of the Investigating Committee raised concerns under the GDC s whistleblowing policy that certain processes were compromising the independence of the Investigating Committee's decision-making. 2.6 In August 2013, in response to the whistleblower s concerns, the GDC commissioned an independent review (the Hudson Report) which looked at the issues raised by the whistleblower.

4 2.7 The final report was received by the GDC on 23 December 2013, and its recommendations required a substantial revision of both the IOG and the ICGM. In addition, Mr Hudson made specific comments on both documents which were incorporated as part of the review. 2.8 The GDC accepted all the recommendations of the review and appointed an external solicitor to develop a detailed action plan to implement the recommendations, including the review of the IOG and the ICGM. 2.9 That Guidance was prepared, initially on a bespoke basis, before being rolled up into a single updated version of the Investigating Committee Guidance Manual. The updated version of the Manual also incorporated some amendments which were suggested by the Hudson review The Hudson reviewer also suggested some changes to the IOG. These were marked up on the document, as were some changes based on the publication of the GDC s Standards for the Dental Team which was published on 30 September The revised ICGM and IOG, together with advice and warnings banks (which are intended to assist the IC in formulating wording when disposing of cases in these manners) were then sent to key external stakeholders, who were invited to comment upon the documents. 3. Consultation and feedback 3.1 All comments received have been taken into account and various amendments have been made (to the ICGM in particular) based on consultation feedback. Explanatory documents, setting out the changes in some detail, can be found at Appendix 5 (for the ICGM) and Appendix 6 (the IOG). 3.5 The Council may note that, where changes have been made to the ICGM or IOG post consultation, numbering may no longer be sequential. This has not yet been amended, to avoid any confusion arising over which paragraph any consultation comments relate to. It is intended that any numbering or other formatting issues will be resolved prior to eventual publication. 4. Risk implications 4.1 The absence of up to date guidance for the IC exposes the GDC to risk of Judicial Review and other criticism. This is because there is potential for the IC to reach

5 inconsistent decisions on similar cases and for the IC to misdirect itself with regard to current practice. 4.2 Further, the absence of these specific amendments to guidance allows any external reviewer, when reviewing IC processes, to continue to have concerns regarding the process and decision-making function of the IC. 4.3 Appendix 7 sets out Risks and Considerations. 5. Recommendations 5.1 The Council is asked to approve: the revised Indicative Outcomes Guidance for the Investigating Committee set out at Appendix 1; and the revised Investigating Committee Guidance Manual set out at Appendix 2.

Fitness to Practise Rule 6E Guidance for informants

Fitness to Practise Rule 6E Guidance for informants Fitness to Practise Rule 6E Guidance for applicants Version 2.0 Reference FTP/GUI/031 Department Fitness to Practise Author Caroline Jaggard Approved