CHECKLIST FOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL REPORTS ON FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES COMPLAINTS

A: IS THE PANEL'S REPORT OF THE REQUIRED STANDARD:

COMPULSORY ELEMENTS: Questions 1 to 6 are based on the Secretary of State's directions about FHS practitioners and relate to what MUST be included in the panel's report.

1. Does the report include all relevant findings of fact?

2. Has the panel expressed its opinions with regard to the facts?

3. Has the panel given reasons for its opinions?

4. If the complaint is clinical, is the assessor's summary report appended?

5. If the panel disagree with the assessors have they given reasons?

6. The report must not suggest disciplinary proceedings against anyone.
Has it complied with this?

DISCRETIONARY ELEMENTS: This section covers points which the directions suggest may be included in the report but which are not compulsory.

7. Does the report include suggestions to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of the Primary Care Trusts and Island Health Boards?

8. Does the report suggest action the Primary Care Trusts and Island Health Boards might take to satisfy the complainant?

Question 9 relates to discretionary elements for complaints about FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES

9. Does the report include suggestions which would improve the services
of the primary care services practitioner complained about?

GOOD PRACTICE: Questions 10 to 28 relate to points which the Health Service Commissioner regards as general good practice. They are not required by, or referred to in, the directions.

10. Is the report dated?

11. Is it signed?

12. Are the names and status of panel members given? (eg Chairman,
convener, independent lay member)

13. Is there information on the qualifications and specialty of each
assessor?

14. Does the report make clear what use the panel has made of the
assessor's advice?

15. Is clinical evidence presented so that a lay person can understand it?

16. Does the report contain the necessary background information
to make sense of the complaint?

17. Are the terms of reference (TOR) stated clearly at the
beginning of the report?

18. Does it say whether the TOR were agreed with the complainant?

19. Have all the terms of reference been fully addressed in the report?

20. Does the report include information on how the review was
conducted?

21. Does it say who gave oral and/or written evidence?

22. If the complaint is clinical, have all relevant clinicians given
evidence?

23. Does the report refer to all the oral and documentary evidence
needed to support the findings of fact and opinions?

24. Is it clear in the report which type of evidence is being referred
to (eg oral/written)?

25. If suggestions/recommendations are given are they clear and
unambiguous?

26. Do they follow logically from the findings?

27. Does the report say whether the complainant saw all or part of
the report in draft?

28. Is the report factually accurate?

B: ASSESSORS' REPORT

29. Have the assessors provided a written report as required by
the directions for complaints about
primary care services practitioners?

30. Is it dated?

31. Are the assessors' qualifications given?

32. Do the assessors have appropriate qualifications/experience?

33. Is it clear on what issues the assessors were asked to advise?

34. Is it clear what written or oral evidence they had in giving their
advice?

35. Does the assessors' report express the views of both/all assessors?

36. If the assessors reported separately are both summary reports
attached?

37. If a joint report, is it clear where they agree and/or disagree?

38. Does the report explain clinical terms?

39. Does it reach clear conclusions supported by evidence/expert
opinion?

C: CIRCULATION OF THE PANEL'S DRAFT REPORT

The guidance says that the panel may circulate the draft report so that it can be checked for factual accuracy.

40. Was the draft report circulated to:

(a) the complainant?

(b) any person complained against?

40. Was the assessors' report issued with the draft report?

For complaints about PRIMARY CARE TRUSTS AND ISLAND HEALTH BOARDS ONLY as required by the relevant directions was the report issued to:

(a) the complainant

(b) any person on whose behalf the complaint was made

(c) any person complained against

(d) anyone who is not a participant who was interviewed by the panel

(e) the assessors

(f) the Chairman and Chief Executive of the Trust/Boards
(where applicable)

(g) the Chair and Chief Executive of the Trust/Boards

For complaints about FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES PRACTITIONERS ONLY as required under the relevant directions was the report issued to the Chief Executive of the Primary Care Trust and Island Health Boards.

Did the Chief Executive then forward the report, as required, to the following?

(a) the complainant

(b) the FHS practitioner complained about

(c) any person who is not a participant but who was interviewed
by the panel

(d) the patient if s/he is not the complainant

(e) the assessors

(f) the Chief Executive of the Primary Care Trust or Island Health Board

42. Did the copy sent to the complainant include a notice explaining
the right to approach HSC as required by Directions?

 [Section 1] [Section 2] [Section 3] [Section 4] [Section 5]