GDC Fails PSA Report

GDC Fails PSA Report

The PSAs latest periodic report on the GDC has now been published & shows that fewer required standards were met this year.

On 30 September 2022, there were 114,030 dental professionals registered with the GDC. Many would not know that the GDC is itself regulated by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA). The PSA regulates ten healthcare regulators including those responsible for doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and opticians, as well as dental teams. It produces regular reports on the various regulators with a style, language, and presentation reminiscent of a CQC report.     Periodic Review - GDC 2021-22 (professionalstandards.org.uk)

The PSAs latest periodic report on the GDC shows that of the 18 standards assessed the GDC met 16. This compares with the previous publication form the PSA in which the GDC met 17 standards. The added failure relates to Standard 11, Registration processing times. As has been reported in the dental and general press there have been major delays in registrations adding to the stresses on dental professionals and further reducing access to dental care at a time when there are serious workforce shortages.

The PSA summary says, “For this review period, the GDC has been taking too long to deal with applications for registration. We have therefore concluded that this Standard is not met. We will closely monitor the effect of the GDC’s work to improve its performance in registration processing, and its progress in improving processes around the ORE and the SLAA. ” GDPUK has previously covered the GDC’s failings relating the Overseas Registrants Exam (ORE) and the Specialist Lists Assessed Application (SLAA). Proponents of joined- up government should note that while a key part of official policy to improve access is to get more overseas dentists working in the UK, that the GDC has been, and remains, a major barrier to achieving this.

PSA Standard 15 is that, “The regulator’s process for examining and investigating cases is fair, proportionate, deals with cases as quickly as is consistent with a fair resolution of the case and ensures that appropriate evidence is available to support decision-makers to reach a fair decision that protects the public at each stage of the process.” Once again, the GDC fail this standard. Indeed in the entire history of the PSA, and over multiple reviews, the GDC has never met all of the required standards for FTP (Fitness to Practice).

Despite the long history of unsatisfactory performance, the time taken by the GDC to reach FTP decisions has not improved. A stakeholder is quoted as saying that “The GDC has, in our view, made insufficient progress in improving the timeliness of its FtP process. […] This is not good enough and improvement is required. Again, behind these numbers sit real people; there is a human cost to this. […] Delays of this nature serve no one and disadvantage many.” 

And how did the GDC report its deteriorating score? A news item on the GDC website welcomed the PSA’s positive feedback before acknowledging that standards 11 and 15 had not been met, but pointed out that this related to “specific” part of the standards. The GDC blame the registration delays on difficulties with staff recruitment and retention. When it comes to FTP there was acknowledgement that this is a “long-term issue” followed by a claim that the causes for this keep changing. According to the GDC things had been improving but the impact of Covid, and staff recruitment difficulties, meant that the improvements could not be sustained.

Outdated legislation was also blamed, as an impediment to the GDC improving its performance. GDC Chief Executive and Registrar, Ian Brack is quoted saying that, “Backlogs in fitness to practise can grow quickly but, once established, any steps to address them will take time to yield positive results. The fact that we wrote about these issues and what we were doing to address them over a year ago is indicative of this. Once a backlog develops, timeliness suffers and the existence of the backlog itself makes rectifying timeliness issues all the more challenging.” He did add that he expected timeliness to improve over the next review period.

The GDCs behaviour may frequently suggest that it knows that it is answerable to no one. This groundhog day report does little to dispel that belief.

0
0
0
s2sdefault

You need to be logged in to leave comments.

Please do not re-register if you have forgotten your details,
follow the links above to recover your password &/or username.
If you cannot access your email account, please contact us.

Mastodon Mastodon