Skip to main content

Performance Review - GDC 2015/16

14 Nov 2016 | Professional Standards Authority
  • Performance Reviews
  • GDC
gdc-header
In our 2015/16 performance review, we are pleased to note that the GDC's performance for this year has improved considerably and, though it has not met all of the Standards, it has made good progress - meeting 21 out of 24

Key facts & figures:

key-facts_uk
Maintains a register of dental professionals in the United Kingdom
key-facts_tooth
110,797 dental professionals on register
key-facts_currency
Annual registration fee: £890 (dentists); £116 (dental care professionals)

Standards of good regulation met:

Guidance & Standards:

4 out of 4

Education & Training:

4 out of 4

Registration:

6 out of 6

Fitness to Practise:

7 out of 10

Highlights

We are pleased to report that the GDC’s performance this year represents a considerable improvement since our last review. Though it has not yet met all of the Standards, it has engaged positively with our review process and made good progress.

Guidance and standards: additional guidance helps registrants apply standards of competence/in developing this guidance, the gdc engages with stakeholders

The GDC published several pieces of guidance to help its registrants understand their obligations around specific issues. This included on the new requirements around rules on indemnity; on the types of evidence applicants can provide to show their knowledge of English is sufficient to practise in the UK; consulting and publishing guidance explaining the duty of candour. The GDC engaged with stakeholders, including a public consultation, and held workshops with both dental professionals and members of the public.

Fitness to practise: information about ftp concerns is shared

We expressed concern last year about the GDC’s information-sharing arrangements, especially with overseas regulators. The GDC detailed the steps it has taken to address these concerns. Information-sharing arrangements have been put in place with several organisations in the UK. In January 2016, it implemented the European Alert Mechanism to share information about professionals across Europe who might pose a risk to the public. It has also changed internal processes to ensure information is shared appropriately. We concluded that this Standard was met. Read more details about this in our full report.

Fitness to practise: ftp cases are dealt with as quickly as possible

Though this Standard has not been met in our previous two reviews. This year, after considering all the evidence and how the GDC has detailed to us the steps it has taken to improve its performance, we have concluded that the Standard is met. Read the full report for futher details of the actions taken by the GDC.

Fitness to practise: information about cases is securely retained

This Standard has not been met. Though we recognise the work the GDC has done to improve its performance since last year, it has been subject to enforcement action by the Information Commissioner for further breaches. In 2017, the GDC intends to work towards ISO 27001 certification (the international standard for information security management).

Fitness to practise: decisions made are well-reasoned and protect the public

This Standard has not been met. We carried out a targeted review because the GDC did not meet this Standard in 2013/14 or 2014/15. There are continuing concerns about some fitness to practise decisions identified by the GDC’s own quality-assurance activities. Through our section 29 casework, we have fed back to the GDC our concerns around decision-making related to the GDC’s reasoning and public protection. Read more about how we came to this conclusion in our full report.

Fitness to practise: complaints are reviewed and prioritised

We concluded that this Standard has not been met. We have concerns around the length of time taken by the GDC to make interim order decisions. Similar concerns about this issue have meant that this Standard has not been met in our last two performance reviews. Find out more about how we came to this conclusion in our full report.

Registration: the process is fair and efficient

We had concerns about the increase in the number of registration appeals so we carried out a targeted review. We concluded that the Standard was met after further explanations and evidence from the GDC. Read our full report for more details.

Downloads

Download the full pdf report now, or we can send it to your inbox for later

Download

Enter your name and address below: