Annual Report 2014 - Page 34

Progress of our Transparency Initiative since August 2012 Premises Register Hearing Status of Discipline Proceedings Reinstatement Decisions of the Discipline Committee Providing More Information to Patients – the Transparency Initiative The College is already a clear leader in Canada with respect to our transparency practices. But we believe that providing access to additional physician-specific information may help patients make informed choices and enhance our accountability to the public. Early in 2014, Council approved placing criminal findings of guilt and bail conditions on the public register. We also launched a consultation that included posting a range of additional information on the public register including: Location of Records Reported findings of guilt under the Criminal Code Reported findings of offences made under the Health Insurance Act * Bail conditions that affect a physician’s right to practice * Criminal charges * Licences in other jurisdictions * Discipline findings in other jurisdictions * ICRC: Undertakings * ICRC: Cautions-in-Person * ICRC: SCERPs Discipline hearing outcome When no finding made (legislative change required) Publishing Reprimands in Dialogue (to begin in Winter of 2016) *Consultations in 2014, approved in May 2015. 32 Criminal charges Cautions-in-person Specified continuing education or remediation program (SCERP) orders Discipline findings and licences in other jurisdictions The Transparency Initiative was born of a growing recognition that access to more information may assist the public in choosing a health-care professional, enhance accountability and better inform any evaluation of the performance of professional regulation. The College was joined in this initiative by the colleges that govern dentists, pharmacists, nurses, physiotherapists, and opticians. Together we formed a group – the Advisory Group for Regulatory Excellence (AGRE) – to develop recommendations for making categories of information about all our members available to the public; and improve information provided to the public about colleges more generally. AGRE considered the degree of risk posed to patients as the measure in determining which outcome ordered by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) should be posted on the public register; the more serious the ICRC outcome, the more important that the information be made public. A caution-in-person is issued by the ICRC when there is a significant concern about conduct or practice that can have a direct impact on patient care, safety or the public interest. It is one of the most serious outcomes, short of a referral to discipline, that the Committee can order. The ICRC will order a SCERP when the identified matter poses a moderate risk to public safety and when a remedial agreement is insufficient or cannot be reached. “In order for the public to trust that the system works, we need to demonstrate that the system works,” said Dr. Rocco Gerace, COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO