The level of public concern in our professions remains small, but it is rising
As a regulator, our key function is to protect the public. In doing so, we need to maintain the public’s trust in your profession and all the professions we regulate.
One way we do this is by investigating concerns that are raised about registrants’ fitness to practise, and taking action if necessary.
Our Fitness to practise annual report 2019
Last December, we published our Fitness to practise annual report 2019.
It reports that, between 1 April 2018 and 31 March 2019 2,424 concerns were raised which is a 5.3 per cent increase compared to the previous year.
The proportion of registrants who had concerns raised about their fitness to practise remained very low, at 0.66%. We concluded 2917 cases this year. Only a small proportion required hearings (19%).
The greatest proportion of cases were closed as they did not meet our Standard of acceptance or Threshold policy (62%). 19% were concluded at our Investigating Committee Panel.
You can view a breakdown of our fitness to practise data for 2018–19 by profession and how we are improving our fitness to practice processes.
What does the report tell us about...
-
There were 22 concerns raised about arts therapists – a significant increase on the previous year, but still a very low number. 63% were raised by the public, followed by 14% by self-referral and 9% by the registrant’s employer.
Only 0.5% of arts therapists were subject to a concern in this period, just below the HCPC average of 0.66%, and it was not necessary to apply any interim orders to those registrants. One case was concluded, but the case was not well founded.
-
There were 47 concerns raised about biomedical scientists – a 19% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. Only 0.2% of biomedical scientists were subject to a concern in this period, significantly below the HCPC average of 0.66%. 38% were raised by the registrant’s employer, followed by 30% by self-referral and 17% by the public.
Six new interim orders were imposed during this period. 14 cases were concluded at final hearing, with four registrants suspended, three struck off, three consenting to be removed from the Register, two subject to conditions of practice and one receiving a caution.
-
There were 52 concerns raised about chiropodists / podiatrists – a 19% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. Only 0.41% of chiropodists / podiatrists were subject to a concern in this period, significantly below the HCPC average of 0.66%. 56% were raised by the public, followed by 21% by the registrant’s employer and 13% by self-referral.
One new interim order was imposed during this period. 17 cases were concluded at final hearing, with 10 not well founded, three registrants suspended, one struck off, one consenting to be removed from the Register and two cautions.
-
There were nine concerns raised about clinical scientists, two more than the previous year. Only 0.14% of clinical scientists were subject to a concern in this period, significantly below the HCPC average of 0.66%. 33% were raised by the public, followed by 22% by self-referral, 22% by another registrant and 11% by the registrant’s employer. One new interim order was imposed during this period. One case was concluded at final hearing as not well founded.
-
There were 20 concerns raised about dietitians – three more than the previous year. Only 0.21% of dietitians were subject to a concern in this period, significantly below the HCPC average of 0.66%. 50% were raised by the registrant’s employer, followed by 25% by a member of the public and 20% by self-referral.
No new interim orders were imposed during this period. Three cases were concluded at final hearing with one not well founded, one registrant consenting to be removed from the Register and one subject to conditions of practice.
-
There were 29 concerns raised about hearing aid dispensers – a 20% increase on the previous year. Only 0.95% of hearing aid dispensers were subject to a concern in this period, however this is significantly higher than the HCPC average of 0.66%. 35% were raised by a member of the public, followed by 31% by the registrant’s employer and 14% by self-referral. 14% of cases were raised as part of our Article 22(6) obligations to act on information received anonymously or that the HCPC has seen and we believe should be investigated.
Two new interim orders were imposed during this period. Two cases were concluded at final hearing during this period with both concluded as not well founded.
-
There were 107 concerns raised about occupational therapists – an 11% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. Only 0.27% of occupational therapists were subject to a concern in this period, however, this is significantly lower than the HCPC average of 0.66%. 42% were raised by a member of the public, followed by 34% by the registrant’s employer and 18% by self-referral.
Six new interim orders were imposed during this period. 25 cases were concluded at final hearing during this period with seven registrants being struck off, one consenting to be removed from the Register, six suspended, two subject to conditions of practice, one receiving a caution and one case where no further action was required. Seven cases were concluded as not well founded.
-
There were 76 concerns raised about operating department practitioners – a 19% growth on the previous year. Only 0.55% of operating department practitioners were subject to a concern in this period, similar to the HCPC average of 0.66%. 43% were raised by the registrant’s employer, followed by 28% by self-referral and 17% by a member of the public.
12 new interim orders were imposed during this period. 13 cases were concluded at final hearing with five registrants struck off, four suspended and two receiving a caution. Two cases were not well founded.
-
There were two concerns raised about orthoptists – one was a self-referral and the other raised as part of our Article 22(6) obligations to act on information received anonymously or that the HCPC has seen and we believe should be investigated.
Only 0.13% of orthoptists were subject to a concern in this period, significantly lower than the HCPC average of 0.66%. No interim orders or cases were concluded at final hearing in this period.
-
There were 302 concerns raised about paramedics – a 5% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. Only 1.09% of paramedics were subject to a concern in this period, but this is significantly larger than the HCPC average of 0.66%.
42% were self-referrals, 20% were raised by the registrant’s employer, 19% by a member of the public and 8% were raised as part of our Article 22(6) obligations to act on information received anonymously or that the HCPC has seen and we believe should be investigated.
25 new interim orders were imposed during this period. 46 cases were concluded at final hearing with 10 registrants struck off, seven suspended, seven subject to conditions of practice and seven receiving a caution. 14 cases were not well founded.
-
There were 148 concerns raised about physiotherapists – an 18% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. Only 0.27% of physiotherapists were subject to a concern in this period, but this is significantly less than the HCPC average of 0.66%. 34% were raised by a member of the public, 33% were raised by the registrant’s employer and 20% were self-referrals.
Six new interim orders were imposed during this period. 34 cases were concluded at final hearing with seven registrants struck off, seven suspended, five subject to conditions of practice and one receiving a caution. 11 cases were not well founded.
-
There were 175 concerns raised about practitioner psychologists – a 9% increase on the previous year. Only 0.72% of practitioner psychologists were subject to a concern in this period, which is slightly higher than the HCPC average of 0.66%. 68% were raised by a member of the public, 8% were raised by the registrant’s employer and 7% were raised by other registrants.
Two new interim orders were imposed during this period. 15 cases were concluded at final hearing with two registrants struck off, one registrant consenting to be removed from the Register, five suspended, two subject to conditions of practice and one receiving a caution. Four cases were not well founded.
-
There were three concerns raised about prosthetists / orthotists, when only one was raised in the previous year. One was raised by a member of the public, another by the registrant’s employer and the final one was a self-referral. Only 0.27% of prosthetists / orthotists were subject to a concern in this period, which is significantly lower than the HCPC average of 0.66%. No new interim orders were imposed during this period. One case was concluded at final hearing with the registrant subject to conditions of practice.
-
There were 69 concerns raised about radiographers, a 12% decrease on the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. 39% were raised by the registrant’s employer, 28% were self-referrals and 19% were by members of the public. Only 0.2% of radiographers were subject to a concern in this period, which is significantly lower than the HCPC average of 0.66%.
Six new interim orders were imposed during this period. 24 cases were concluded at final hearing with five registrants struck off, one registrant consenting to be removed from the Register, two suspended, five subject to conditions of practice and four receiving a caution. Seven cases were not well founded.
-
There were 1,345 concerns raised about social workers in England – a 15% increase on the previous year. 56% were raised by a member of the public, 23% were raised by the registrant’s employer and 13% were self-referrals. Only 1.42% of social workers were subject to a concern in this period, which is significantly higher than the HCPC average of 0.66%.
50 new interim orders were imposed during this period. 154 cases were concluded at final hearing with 30 registrants struck off, four registrants consenting to be removed from the Register, 41 suspended, eight subject to conditions of practice and 17 receiving a caution. 49 were not well founded.
-
There were 18 concerns raised about speech and language therapists – a third less than the previous year, bucking the trend for HCPC registrants as a whole. 39% were raised by a member of the public, 39% by the registrant’s employer, 11% were self-referrals and 11% were raised by other registrants. Only 0.11% of speech and language therapists were subject to a concern in this period, which is significantly lower than the HCPC average of 0.66%. No new interim orders were imposed during this period. Three cases were concluded at final hearing with three suspensions.
Improving our fitness to practise process
In 2018–19, we concluded a major programme of work, our Fitness to Practise Improvement Project, designed to the improve quality of our decisions and timeliness of our work.
This work is in the process of being embedded, meaning both registrants and complainants will begin to feel the benefits.
However, we strive to improve and are currently identifying how we might operative differently within our current legislative framework and how we might adapt following any future regulatory reform.
In February 2019, we also implemented a new case classification process. This allows us to better understand the nature of the concerns raised and how they proceed through our processes. This information will be hugely helpful to us and our stakeholders in future.