NHS Education for Scotland: - Comments, Concerns and ComplaintsReport 2012-2013

Total Number of Comments, Concerns and Complaints Received / Percentage resolved within andout with 20 days / Median number of days(from receipt to acknowledgement of complaint) / Percentage acknowledged within 3 days / Percentage acknowledged within 10 days (as per the guidance)
12 / 83% resolved in 20 days / 2.3 / 75% / 100%
COMMENTS CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS LOG / Year to: 31st March 2013
Source (1) / Summary (2) / Case/File Ref (3) / Receipt Date / Acknowledged Date and Final Response Date / Outcome (4) / Lessons learned/ Improvements made (5)
Message via the website from a practitioner in NHS GG&C expressing concern at an image in the 2012-13 corporate plan. / Concern about an image of a baby being bottled fed which is against the UNICEF guidelines. / Complaints/CorpPlanMay12 / 11th May 2012 / Acknowledged and response sent 14th May 2012 / Upheld - After discussion with lead colleagues and taking advice from the Scottish Government we replaced the photograph in the online document and re-printed. We also brought it to the attention of colleagues on the Steering Group for the NHSScotland picture library from where we secured the photograph. / A new check on images used for corporate documents is being put in place by communications so that where there is potential for sensitivities, Directorate colleagues have the opportunity to check before publication.
Letter dated 4th June 2012 from an ex student on the University of Edinburgh, Clinical Dental Technician training course. / Concern about the University of Edinburgh, Clinical Dental Technician training course. / Complaints/DenCDTJune12 / 7th June 2012 / Acknowledged and response sent 7th June 2012. / Resolved (for the time being) - we noted that the complainant had channelled their complaint through the University of Edinburgh and that they wished to wait for the outcome of that process. / N/A
By letter to CEO from the BMA on behalf of a member regarding the national GP appraisal process. / Complaint about a ‘Scot 5b’ form for non-participation in GP appraisal issued by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and a request that we arrange an appeal hearing. / Complaints/GPAppScot5bJuly12 / 9th July 2012 / Acknowledged by letter to BMA on 12th July 2012. Final response sent 19th Sept 2012 / Partially upheld – we did not arrange an appeal hearing as it was not within our authority to do so. However we noted a general lack of clarity regarding how concerns are handled as well as the respective roles of the NHS Board and NES in managing the system. / NES GP appraisal policies and guidance are reviewed to ensure that; (1) the respective roles of NES and the local NHS Board are made clear; (2) there is absolute clarity regarding how complaints and concerns are handled, including the respective roles of NES and the local NHS Board and how appeals are to be managed; (3) communication is improved between local appraisal systems and deaneries and between the GP appraisal system in NES and the GP section of the directorate where issues of relevance and importance to general practice arise; (4) accountability and reporting lines for the medical appraisal unit within the medical directorate are clarified.
By e-mail from a GP regarding training practice inspection and accreditation. / Complaint about breaches of the GP training practice agreement; a lack of process, care, and transparency in decision-making and damage to the reputation of the GP Practice, and professional reputation. / Complaints/GPTrainerAug12 / 3rd August 2012. / Acknowledged by e-mail on 7th August. Final response sent 19th Sept 2012 / Partially upheld – we did not find that the GP training practice agreement had been breached. We did find a lack of a nationally agreed process for practice inspection that allowed the practice to comment ‘for accuracy’ on the report before finalisation. We also noted that finding information on the NES website was difficult. / Recommendations; (1) The development of one nationally agreed process for GP training practice inspection and visiting to ensure that there is the opportunity to check initial findings for fact and accuracy at the end of the visit; (2) GP practices have an opportunity to comment on the visit report for accuracy (excluding recommendations), prior to it’s submission to the local GP training committee and; (3) One national approach is developed for general practice information, protocols, processes and guidance and these are published on the NES website general practice pages in a consistent national format.
PRPS Applicant
* Not handled as a general corporate complaint. Separate process applies. / Concern regarding a short-listing panel decision (unsuccessful) Quoted FOI so referred to Information Governance team. / FOI2012-331 / 8th August 2012 / Information governance formal response to FOI request sent 10th August 2012
HR feedback provided on15th August 2012 / Resolved - Did not progress to a full complaint. / The PRPS Recruitment team will include in its published guidance to applicants that requests for feedback relating to the individual during a recruitment campaign are not covered by FOI.
Letter dated 24th June 2012 to NHS Lothian and re-directed to NES complaints by David Felix on 24th August from a Dentist regarding a practice inspection visit. / Complaint about a practice inspection visit covering a range of issues including data protection. / Complaints/DenParctInspectAug12 / 24th August 2012 / Acknowledged 27th August 2012 and final response sent 4th Sept 2012 / Partially Upheld – After investigation with lead colleagues in house and taking advice we made recommendations to improve the dental practice joint inspection process. / We recommended that the guidance and protocols for new inspection visits is updated to; (1) ensure that data protection requirements are clear; (2) address whether the NES participant in practice inspection is ‘an authorised officer of the Agency or Health Board’; (3) ensure that the dental practice is included in a review of the visit report for accuracy (excluding recommendations); (4) include clear best practice guidance on what is expected from the visitor and the practitioner, in terms of both process and conduct and; (5) ensure that a process is put in place for dealing with complaints or concerns.
Online complaint from a junior doctor regarding an application for study leave. / Complaint that that the process for applying for study leave is difficult and unclear and that unnecessary delays are being caused by repeatedly returning paperwork. / Complaints/WestMed-StudyLeave-Nov12 / 8th November 2012 / Acknowledged 8th November 2012 and response sent 20th November 2012 / Not Upheld – After investigation we found that the process is clear, study leave guidelines could be easily found on our website, and a link to the guidelines had been e-mailed to all trainees in September. Both the guidelines and the study leave application form state that sections 3 and 4 of the form must be completed and signed, these sections of the complainants form had not been completed and this had caused the paperwork to be returned to the complainant for completion. / N/A
Online complaint from an NHS employee enquiring about a NES programme. / Complaint about an enquiry not being dealt with helpfully or professionally by our Reception staff. / Complaints/ReceptionDec12 / 17th December 2012 / Acknowledged 17th December 2012 and response sent 18th December 2012 / Upheld – We apologised and acknowledged that our receptionist had not dealt with it well and we found out the information requested and sent it to the complainant. / Incident reported to the Senior Facilities Manager with recommendation that principles of customer service are re-enforced with reception staff and this issue is specifically raised with the Receptionist concerned. Also new system put in place for resolving difficult queries and training identified, including how to use the new phone system.
Online complaint from a trainee regarding the OYJGS application process. / Complaint of being unfairly treated by the OYJG selection process because they did not get their 1st or 2nd choice placements in their local NHS Board. / Complaints/OYJGS-Jan13 / 18th January 2013 / Acknowledged 21st January 2013 and final response 18th February / Not Upheld – We did not find that the complainant had been treated unfairly. OYJGS is a national Scottish Government scheme administered by us and it does not guarantee a position locally. This is clearly identified in the scheme guidance and the allocation process was found to fair and agreed nationally by all stakeholders. / N/A
Online complaints form from a nursing student regarding loss of saved work. / Complaint of loss of saved work on the Cleanliness Champions Programme (CCP). / Complaints/CCProg-Jan13 / 23rd January 2013 / Acknowledged 23rd January 2013 and final response 30th January. / Resolved – Work was still available but only from an archive and complainant was provided with the contact details to enable access to their historic course work. / N/A
STR in Oral Surgery Candidate.
* Not handled as a corporate complaint. Separate process applies. / Complaint - did not agree with short-listing panel decision (unsuccessful). / STRComplaints/Acknowledgement/ST1 / 7th February 2013 / Acknowledged 13th Feb 2013,
hold letter sent on 6th March 2013 and final response sent on 8th April 2013. / Not Upheld – the complainant has not appealed the outcome of the review panel. / The Stage 1 Review panel investigated the complaint and all related evidence before reaching a final decision and concluded that the complaint could not be upheld. The complaints procedure is under review.
Consultant (Health Board)
*Not handled as a general corporate complaint. Separate process applied. / Complaint - a consultant claimed racial discrimination as trainees were not being allocated to him. / Multiple instances – mainly through NSS Legal Office / Received directly by Directorate – exact date not recorded. / Acknowledged immediately and kept in touch at all stages as the complaint went through various legal stages / Not Upheld - Case was dismissed by a tribunal in August 2011, claimant then appealed on March 2012 and appeal was dismissed in October 2012. The case is now closed. / If trainees are not allocated to a specific consultant then detailed reasons will be recorded as to why this is the case.

(1)Source:Indicate the status of the person making the complaint in relation to NES e.g. “FYI Trainee”, “External Contractors”, “Educational Institution”, “Professional Organisation”. For the purposes of logging, returns should be anonymous with the proviso that further information may be sought as necessary.

(2)Summary:Provide a brief outline covering the core substance of the complaint.

(3)File Reference:Use your local identifier such that each case can be found as necessary.

(4)Outcome:Indicate current status if the complaint has not been resolved, or indicate if the complaint has been upheld or rejected and the grounds for that outcome.

(5)ImprovementsOutline any learning opportunities or improvements identified as a result of the complaint, either locally or corporately.

1