Review of HCPC‟s standards of conduct performance and ethics, Tuesday 25 March 2014 Welcome
Today’s event • HCPC‟s Standards of conduct, performance and ethics • Shaping our lives: report on HCPC findings
Michael Guthrie, Director of Policy and Standards 25 March 2014 Reviewing the standards of conduct, performance and ethics
Today’s workshop • Our standards of conduct, performance and ethics • Review process • Issues already raised • Discussion • Feedback
Our standards of conduct, performance and ethics Set out what we expect of professionals: • Conduct - how you should behave personally and professionally • Performance - what you should do in practice • Ethics - principles that inform how you do what you do
Reviewing the standards • Reviewed every five years to ensure standards are: • Up-to-date and relevant • Useful for professionals and public • Accessible • Appropriate
Current review • Phase one: research period • Exploring the expectations of stakeholders • Gathering feedback on the standards • Phase two: Professional Liaison Group (PLG) – 2014 • Discuss key themes and devise draft standards • Phase three: public consultation • Consultation on draft standards
The review so far • Gathering feedback • Commissioned research with service users and carers and registrants • Workshops with service user and carer groups • Survey of fitness to practise chairs • Workshops with employers and registrants • Professional Liaison Group (PLG) – 2014 • Public consultation – early 2015-2016
Major changes since the last review • Three new professions on HCPC register: • Practitioner psychologists • Hearing aid dispensers • Social workers in England • Public Inquiries
Areas already raised for review Raising and escalating concerns and being open • Standards currently say: „…As soon as you become aware of a situation that puts a service user in danger, you should discuss the matter with a senior colleague or other appropriate person.‟ • HCPC considering how this could be strengthened, perhaps through a dedicated standard
Areas already raised for review Being open and dealing with mistakes • The Focus Group research, along with other commissioned research, concluded that there is a need to make clear the: „… responsibility of a registrant...to report incidents and ensure the safety of the service user by responding appropriately and supporting and providing information to the service user where things go wrong .‟ • Francis Inquiry recommendations about a „duty of candour‟
Other areas raised during the review to date • Use of social media • Collaborative approach to care/treatment • Dealing fairly and safely with risk of infection • Values underpinning care/treatment • Personal and professional conduct • Format, accessibility and language of the standards
Shaping Our Lives HCPC review of the Standards of conduct, performance and ethics Becki Meakin 25 th March 2014
Shaping Our Lives Vision : A society which is equal and fair where all people have: • the same opportunities, choices, rights and responsibilities, • choice and control; over the way they live and the support services they use.
We aim to: Improve the quality of care and support people receive by: • Supporting and promoting local user involvement • Giving a shared voice to user controlled organisations • Enabling service user involvement at a national level • Enabling groups to link to other user controlled groups • Work in an equal and accessible manner.
What we do • User involvement: policy and planning • User research: to inform national policy makers • User-led training: inclusivity and diversity
Review of the HCPC Standards of conduct, performance and ethics
Definition of a service user • HCPC: “someone who uses or is affected by the services of a registrant” • Shaping Our Lives: “disabled people, but also a wider group including people who are homeless, with experience of long term care and with drug and alcohol use issues
Methodology • Service user perspective – disabled people, people from diverse communities and carers • 31 interviews (up to one hour) • Interviewees ranged from under 18 to 77 years old, six declared to be carers • Range of living arrangements, some with support • Focus group of 10 people • Study produced by people with learning disabilities
Methodology continued • Standards were modified for accessibility, prompts provided and additional questions about awareness and accessibility • Not all of the supporting notes were provided • 19 women, 16 men • 70% living with a long term condition or impairment • 17 people declared as white, 20 as either black, Afro- Caribbean, African, or Asian. • There was experience of all 16 professions
Findings General • Service users and carers reflected on their own lived experiences “Understanding that I am the best person that knows me, my capabilities and my body .” • Concerns regarding awareness of equality issues such as accessible communication, premises and capacity of the individual. • Issues often raised in discussion that were covered in the supporting text or other documents.
Findings continued Understanding existing standards • Standards were modified and generally understood • Not all accessible to people with learning disabilities •Standard 1 and the definition of „best interests‟ proved most difficult • Merge 1 and 3 with focus on respect, understanding and behaviours of practitioners.
Findings continued Relevance • Some concerns raised about the aspiration of: Standard 6 – choice of referral options Standard 8 - supervision of delegated tasks • Standard 14 was questioned: What role does the Advertising Standards Authority have? • This is part of acting with integrity and honesty
Findings continued Additions • Consideration of user involvement, disability awareness and accessibility Beyond the remit of the research • Doubts that one set of standards could work for both professionals and people who use services • Raise awareness of the SCPE, the HCPC and their role • Make the SCPE more readily available
Findings continued The Words and Pictures Team • Some words were misunderstood: - Standards, confidentiality, personal conduct, competence, practitioner •Standard 6 caused difficulty with expression „limits of your knowledge‟ •“I think the word permission would be better than informed consent”. • Standard 12 was difficult as a concept and one person asked: “Does judgement mean when you are diagnosed?”
Recommendations • Distinguish between those relating to conduct and performance of practitioners within their profession and those for people using services • Customer charter or checklist made available at service point Being in control • People are experts in their own care. • Right to choose • Standards cover good practice for user involvement.
Recommendations continued Integration and Joint Working • Integration and joint working between professionals Accessibility • Include all aspects of accessibility, physical, communication, attitude and behaviour • State what is unacceptable in the provision of goods and services. • Accessible language, concepts and formats • Ease of accessing the SCPE.
Recommendations continued Protecting Service Users • Use of technology and how this conflicts with confidentiality and accessibility • Explicit policy regarding whistleblowing by practitioners to safeguard vulnerable people • Complaints procedures and role of SCPE • Awareness raising and clarity about the role of the HCPC .
Thank you If you require more information please contact: Becki Meakin becki@shapingourlives.org.uk 07956 424511
Looking at the standards • How do you think the standards could be improved? • What needs to be added? • Is anything unclear? • Is anything out of date?
Finding out more and getting in touch www.hcpc-uk.org registration@hcpc-uk.org 0845 3004472 (lo-call) Monday to Friday 8am to 6pm Find us on www.facebook.com/hcpcuk Follow us @ The_hcpc Follow us on www.linkedin.com Sign up for our RSS feeds www.hcpc-uk.org Sign up to our newsletter newsletter@hcpc-uk.org
Thank you www.hcpc-uk.org Thank you www.hcpc-uk.org
Recommend
More recommend
