Home Articles Downloads Forum Products Services Seminar Contact
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: Geoff Hannis] #73022 20/03/18 11:51 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 124
Rob1234 Offline
Savant
Offline
Savant
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 124
Originally Posted by Geoff Hannis

Fair enough, Rob. smile

What's your take on CPD? think


You're going to get into trouble with Huw yet again for going off topic...

But

"CPD is the holistic commitment of professionals towards the enhancement of personal skills and proficiency throughout their careers." - I chant these words three times whilst standing under a copy of my expired VRCT certificate every morning before I start work.

It's something that should occur naturally / shouldn't require any conscious effort within your day-to-day role - you get shown and then you learn how to do things yourself (and then hopefully you pass the info on) - a continuous cycle. There should never really be a point where you stop learning.
Do we need to document it? If that cycle (learn-do(-teach)) is broken somewhere then this would hopefully highlight the problem to someone who cares enough to do something about it. If you work somewhere with a good work ethic, then all documenting CPD does is waste time that could be used productively (again IMO).
It's a measure, for those external to your immediate area of work, that the system you are working in is working itself.




I laugh in the face of danger. Then I hide 'til it goes away.
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: Rob1234] #73023 21/03/18 12:06 AM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035
Geoff Hannis Online Content
Super Hero
Online Content
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035

Yes; I agree. Surely it's all about the mindset* of the "Noble Technician"** - the enquiring mind, the "hands-on imperative" and all such good stuff. smile

Although I must admit to having had the dubious pleasure in the past (and not just overseas) of being burdened with "technicians" who seemed to be prepared, shall we say, to simply rest on their laurels (not to mention their questionable, and generally over-inflated, "documentation"). frown

No doubt most of us could suss out a wrong 'un within twenty minutes, without having to recourse to a search through their CPD (or any other) Portfolio.

* One of my favourite words.
** (c) Huw


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: Geoff Hannis] #73030 22/03/18 10:48 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 173
exitwound Offline OP
Mentor
OP Offline
Mentor
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 173
The government have said on several occasions that there is no need for us to be state registered, so what part of NO, do these people not understand.

If it did go ahead then it would be VRCT's excuse to hit us with an annual bill for £200-300 and to spend time with a lot of formal and nonsensical record keeping to provide jobs for them. If this does go ahead, then that's the time to deal with it and not before.

We waste enough time as it is checking emails, infilling KSF with whatever we think will do to get shot of it, logging "cpd" etc, playing the Learnpro games. We're here to look after the equipment in our remit and getting regular access to it is difficult enough without having to spend even more time on a keyboard.

There are just four of us here, covering a 400 bed acute hospital, and doing everything in-house as well as covering five other hospitals, 72 GP/Health centre locations and carrying out duties pertaining to the specification/equipping of major projects and builds. Our time is precious!

This is what we do and we do it very well, but this VRCT bs is in no way constructive to us. I feel its just a vehicle for those to escape their normal duties and sideways shift to an admin type job the same way I used to watch people become union delegates in my past life. Most of us 'hands on' types have no interest in this VRCT and wish only to continue carrying out our duties, and fortunately for us neither do a lot of health boards and departments within.

Last edited by exitwound; 22/03/18 10:49 AM.

5.7L V8 Corvette.. Doing my bit to keep our summers warmer!
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: exitwound] #73031 22/03/18 10:55 AM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035
Geoff Hannis Online Content
Super Hero
Online Content
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035

Bravo! smile


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: exitwound] #73056 24/03/18 3:08 PM
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1
plins Offline
Newbie
Offline
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1
To say I am disappointed and saddened in equal measure is probably the biggest underestimate I can make about this forum subject to date. As a CPD auditor for IPEM , RSCi and the RCT it would be useful to get some insider knowledge and a qualified opinion, rather than people making sweeping statements about what they ‘think’ the RCT’s role is for its members (both now and in the future) and the value of membership, or not.

As people have already said, membership is not mandatory, however in some instances employers are now asking for membership, or eligibility to be on the register as part of job applications. It’s been almost 17 years since the launch of the RCT (then the VRCT) and in 2015 the RCT register obtained official approval via the PSA, and wrote to employers asking that they consider the register as a governance and assurance way forward for members within our profession. In January 2018, the government report on regulation for all healthcare professions reached its final date for consultation and this is know going to the next stage.
https://consultations.dh.gov.uk/professional-regulation/regulatory-reform/

Whether RCT gets any additional ‘mandatory’ status or not should not deflect from the need to be professional in our work, activities and approach to increasing our knowledge, sharing with others and our focus on patient care. Recording this for our annual appraisal meeting, job performance review or for an official state/voluntary register is the same information.

Some members have also commented about parity with nursing, doctors and the other many state regulated professions. The HCPC methods of assuring CPD has been adopted by IPEM and the RCT in equal measure and passing the CPD audit is neither an arduous task, or beyond the reach (or scope) of every day work for all our colleagues.

Guidelines simply state that.;
1. we keep a record of CPD
2. There is a good spread across the year (no more than 3 month gaps)
3. There is good mix of activities …. 5 types are listed ranging for ‘professional activity’ to ‘self directed learning’ and there are hundreds of examples of what you can use.
4. there is reflection about how the CPD benefits you as a person (in terms of new things learnt, challenges faced or further knowledge required to better understand things
5. How the CPD activity has benefited the dept, patient or employer.

There are more and more examples coming through of what (and how) the CPD return should look like, and after all its only a summary that is required. In addition the RCT have arranged webinars to help anyone submitting their return this year, and auditors are sharing their knowledge too to help members through the process.

As an auditor that oversaw the 2015 (sample) and 2016 CPD returns it was obvious the we all need help and guidance in how to record our CPD and how to meet the requirements. In both years there was a 50% failure rate in simple things such as
a) more than 3 month gaps
b) only 1, or 2 types of activity; instead of the 3 that is required

These simple failings meant the CPD submissions will fail. After all you wouldn’t take your car for an MOT with bald tyres or worn wiper blades (would you ??)… then lets make sure we know what is required and how we can best meet these simple requirements.

I sat down with a colleague at work last week and spent no more than 1 hour compiling his annual CPD return, (his first ever) and it’s ready for RCT submission. We listed all the activities he’s done and anything that we thought would be suitable. And reading, and contributing to the forum and sharing ideas and thoughts with peers on EBME.co.uk is also one of them!!!!!

One of our biggest challenges is how best to write our thoughts and reflections on the 2 factors that also cause us to fail CPD audits ; (benefits for you, and also your employer/service). As soon as you put your mind to it, then it does become easier. Take care not to cut and paste the same statements as we look for that too, and try to think of 2 key factors.

1. What has, and how have I improved?… if not why not?
2. What has reduced, and has it saved time, reduced variation, money, service costs etc.

Don’t forget that there are patients at the centre of all we do and it wouldn’t go amiss to mention the influence you have had on servicing their equipment, care, treatment or saved time and improved their lot.

My fingers are crossed for May’s CPD audit day, and Im really hoping that RCT members do us proud (and I’m a member) and we assure the auditors, our employer, patients, and the public that we are as professional in our approach to our job, education and life long learning as our colleagues in nursing and other state regulated professions.

Last edited by plins; 24/03/18 3:13 PM. Reason: typo
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: exitwound] #73057 24/03/18 7:05 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 575
Chris Watts Offline
Philosopher
Offline
Philosopher
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 575
oh dear, I hope Mr exitwound is at the top of their band wink
Unfortunately, with the new pay deal, you can expect more emphasis on KSF, appraisals and CPD. At least you can thank some of those union delegates for insisting on a transition period. The original proposal was for immediate implementation, no development or appraisal no more increments.

Sounds more like you've got a staffing problem there. You work for roughly 1762.5 hours in the year of which most bodies specify 30 - 40 hours CPD. That's about 2% of your time doing CPD, that's less time according to some reports than in the toilet, or attending meetings or reading emails.

Hope Huw doesn't mind me going off topic a bit to excel the ebme seminar coming up soon but last years was highly interesting. Although I do note that where some delegates were encouraged to attend whereas others had to negotiate the release. If you have to spend 100% on the tools there's something seriously wrong with your organisation! whistle

Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: Chris Watts] #73059 25/03/18 2:43 PM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035
Geoff Hannis Online Content
Super Hero
Online Content
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,035

I'm not Feeling the Love here, guys. whistle

All these acronyms are indicative of what happens when organisations become "Too Big to Fail" ... they become bloated bureaucracies that spend far too much time (and, in some cases, all their time) on internal politics and what-have-you, rather than cracking on with the real work to hand. frown


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: Chris Watts] #73060 25/03/18 5:26 PM
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,361
Huw Online Content
Hero
Online Content
Hero
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,361
Originally Posted by Chris Watts

Hope Huw doesn't mind me going off topic a bit to excel the ebme seminar coming up soon but last years was highly interesting.

How could a comment like that ever be construed as being off topic, Chris... wink

Geoff however... [Linked Image]


Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: exitwound] #73436 21/06/18 8:51 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 141
leonius Offline
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 141
I must admit I was a longstanding member (Almost from the very beginning)and even wrote the need into the job descriptions for the department.
When a Flaw in the renewal process left me on the expired side, I was at cause to evaluate the benefits of registration. Whilst I want the registration to be Mandatory, As i belive this is the best for all. I do not think that theRCT are competent in meeting the standards that they aspire to. The shear fact I found myself in the position I did, was equally their fault. I could not consider reapplying out of principle. Likewise I have now "written out" the need for the whole department even as a desirable.
I still see the need to have a big brother and have found an already regulated one.I am busy embedding this. At least this one approaches its renewals in the standard way.That way if you get removed its for a genuine reason.

This might sound like bitter grapes and for the best part is. However if they wish to be taken seriously and do audits of their members activities they need to get their own house in order, and meet the current standards. That all the other regulated organisations do. The comments of "It would cost too much" to do a proper job. Just alienated me just further. My ethos is "value for money but it must be a proper job"

I am lucky in the fact I can make the call for my team, and I was the person with the problem. If I had taken it at face value and it had been a member of my staff they could have lost their job along with their registration.
All I can say is best shot of them (the RCT) and I hope that all the existing and potential members consider the very low membership costs as indicative of the standards they set themselves. i urge them to exercise their right, and leave before its too late. If we are worth any salt. We want to do a good job and should demand better standards not bureaucracy.

Last edited by leonius; 21/06/18 8:52 AM. Reason: grammer and clarity
Re: VRCT audit.. [Re: exitwound] #73438 21/06/18 9:43 AM
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,850
Neil Porter Online Happy
Hero
Online Happy
Hero
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,850
'hoisted by one's own petard'


If you think hiring professionals is expensive, try hiring amateurs!
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  DaveC in Oz, KM, RoJo 

Who's Online Now
5 registered members (Raja DilNawaz, Neil Porter, balazs, Mark Radbourne, Huw), 793 guests, and 32 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Raja DilNawaz, Dr Sarah Peel, Crosswell, Gemini_IV, alrepairist
9588 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums25
Topics10,528
Posts71,259
Members9,588
Most Online5,980
Jan 29th, 2020
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.2