1 / 83

“Disciplinary Programs: Does Yours Measure Up?”

Expect the Unexpected: Are We Clearly Prepared?. “Disciplinary Programs: Does Yours Measure Up?”. Christine D. Niero, PhD, Professional Testing, Inc. Richard Bar, Esq., Galland, Kharasch, Greenberg, Fellman & Swirsky, P.C.

steffi
Download Presentation

“Disciplinary Programs: Does Yours Measure Up?”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Expect the Unexpected: Are We Clearly Prepared? “Disciplinary Programs: Does Yours Measure Up?” Christine D. Niero, PhD, Professional Testing, Inc. Richard Bar, Esq., Galland, Kharasch, Greenberg, Fellman & Swirsky, P.C. D. Scott Williamson, Jr., CAE, MBA, The American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics, Inc. Council on Licensure, Enforcement and Regulation 2006 Annual Conference Alexandria, Virginia

  2. Overview and Objectives • Learn about private sector practices • Learn how to recognize fair and effective disciplinary programs • Learn how to evaluate private sector codes of ethics Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  3. Overview and Objectives • Understand the scope of authority of private sector certification boards • Benchmark private sector practices • Learn how to enhance communication between private and public sectors Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  4. Benchmarking Data Survey of Certification Organizations—Benchmarking • 37 Question Survey • Disseminated to 879 Certification Boards • 8% Response Rate (70 respondents) Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  5. Benchmarking Data General Survey Categories • Information about the Certification Organization • General Information about the Disciplinary Program • Actionable Offenses • Processing Cases • Qualifications of Personnel Handling Cases Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  6. Benchmarking Data Organizational Structure • 97% of Certification Programs are Part of a Parent Non-profit • 44% of Certification Programs are Separately Incorporated Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  7. Benchmarking Data Reasons Certification Programs Were Established • 75% Established to Raise Level of Professionalism • 66% Establish Industry Standards • 40% Consumer Protection Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  8. Benchmarking Data Reasons for Implementing Disciplinary Programs • 50% Advised by Legal Counsel/Consultants • 30% Implemented due to Complaints • 34% Accreditation Compliance (NCCA, ISO 17024, ISO 9000, Other) Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  9. Benchmarking Data Importance of Certification • 77% No Requirement for State or Federal Licensure • 15% Requirement for the Industry • 88% Moderate or Significant Impact on Earning Power Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  10. Benchmarking Data Active Certificants • 12% Fewer than 500 • 23% Between 501 – 2,500 • 23% Between 2,501 – 10,000 • 13% Between 10,0001 – 25,000 • 13% Between 25,001 – 50,000 • 15% More than 50,000 Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  11. Benchmarking Data Length Discipline Program has been in Existence • 47% Since Inception • 33% More Than Last 10 Years • 19% Less Than 5 Years Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  12. Benchmarking Data Requirement to Uphold Code of Conduct • 72% At time of application • 19% At time certification is awarded • 15% Do not require a pledge to uphold Code of Conduct • 13% At time of renewal or recertification Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  13. Benchmarking Data Actionable Offenses • 85% Falsification of Application • 80% Violation of Code • 51% Criminal Charges • 46% Felony Convictions • 31% Poor Services/Products Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  14. Benchmarking Data Actionable Offenses • 28% Violation of Other’s Codes • 21% Misdemeanors Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  15. Reference and Guidance Documents • NCCA Accreditation Standards • ISO/IEC 17024 (ANSI) Accreditation Standards • 35% of responding organizations are accredited Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  16. NCCA Accreditation Standards Standard 2—Purpose, Governance, Resources • Program must be structured and governed to protect against undue influence • Policies and procedures must provide for autonomy in decision making regarding important aspects of the certification program Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  17. NCCA Accreditation Standards Standard 6—Responsibilities to Stakeholders • Policies and procedures related to discipline and appeals • Disciplinary policies must address complaints about conduct that is harmful to the public or inappropriate for the discipline Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  18. NCCA Accreditation Standards Standard 9—Responsibilities to Stakeholders • Maintain a list and provide verification of certified individuals • Addresses “good standing” while safeguarding confidentiality Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  19. ISO/IEC 17024 4.1 Certification body 4.1.2—The certification body defines policies and procedures for … suspending or withdrawing the certification Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  20. ISO/IEC 17024 4.2 Organizational Structure 4.2.1 c)—The certification body shall have overall responsibility for formulating policies regarding … decisions on certification and the implementation of policies and procedures Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  21. ISO/IEC 17024 4.2 Organizational Structure 4.2.6—The certification body shall define policies and procedures for the resolution of appeals and complaints • Policies must ensure appeals and complaints are resolved independently and in an unbiased manner Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  22. ISO/IEC 17024 4.7—Confidentiality Through legally enforceable commitments keep confidential all information … and release information required by law with the requirement of informing individuals concerned Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  23. ISO/IEC 17024 6.6 Use of certificates and logos/marks 6.6.2—The certification body shall require discontinued use of all claims to certification; upon suspension or withdrawal of certification the Certificant must return certificate Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  24. Typical Codes/Standards • Abide by Laws • Conduct business in a professional manner • Respect the confidentiality of client information Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  25. Typical Codes/Standards • Perform services in a competent manner • Be truthful and honest in the performance of the job • Do not discriminate Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  26. Typical Codes/Standards • Promote professional integrity • Abide by industry accepted practice norms • Advance the body of knowledge Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  27. Typical Codes/Standards • Use logos and credentials in accordance with organization’s policies • Affirm behaviors and practices consistent with Code of Conduct and Standards of Practice Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  28. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Mission and purpose of certification organization • Authority over credential (Bylaws) • Guiding documents (Policies and Procedures; Code of Conduct; Standards of Practice) Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  29. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Mission of certification organization typically includes serving the public’s trust, upholding high standards, and credible processes • Key feature separating certification from regulatory functions and membership status • Key program component is to document safeguarding the public’s trust Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  30. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Scope of Authority—supported in Bylaws, Policies and Procedures and other guiding documents such as published roles and responsibilities for all parties • Nature of authority for each phase of the process is clearly delineated • Ultimate authority for process and liability rests with governing board Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  31. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Code of Ethics or Standards of Professional Practice/Behavior developed with input and representation of certificant population • Complaints and investigations must be limited to published codes and standards • May not extend to issues relating to legitimate marketplace competition Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  32. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Codes and Standards are considered “living” documents to keep pace with developments in the profession and/or industry • Circulated for input from stakeholders • Documents disseminated at application stage and in public domain (handbook, website) Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  33. Benchmarking Data Codes of Conduct • 86% Have a Code • 81% Enforce it Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  34. Benchmarking Data Frequency of Code Review • 65% As Needed • 30% Every 1 – 3 Years • 6% Every 4 - 6 Years Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  35. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs Fairness in Investigative Procedures • Complaints must be signed • Complaints must be submitted in writing • State alleged violations of Code or Standards • Provide adequate statement of facts or description of violation/incident Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  36. Developing Fair Disciplinary Programs • Complainant agrees to disclosure of information to Certificant and authoritative bodies • Must be actionable or dismissed • Notify the Certificant in writing of an actionable complaint • Include complaint Code and Rules • Certificant must respond to complaint Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  37. Benchmarking Data Receipt of Complaints • 86% In Writing of Any Kind • 25% Written Complaint Form • 19% By Phone Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  38. Benchmarking Data Sharing Information with All Involved Parties • 64% No • 36% Yes Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  39. Checks & Balances: Role & Authority Governing Board, Committees, Investigative Panels & Professional Staff • Governing Board—ultimate responsibility for administration of program and final authority; may handle appeals • Ethics & Standards Committee—responsibility for administering the program and assuring implementation of Codes/Standards Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  40. Checks & Balances: Role & Authority • Review findings and recommendations of Investigators • Recommend sanctions, corrective action, further action, dismissal of case • Formally communicate outcome to the governing board Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  41. Checks & Balances: Role & Authority • Investigators—composed of seasoned certificants and experts in the field of investigation & nature of complaint • Conduct investigations and have direct interaction with complainant, Certificant and witnesses • Data gathering and recommendations Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  42. Checks & Balances: Role & Authority Professional Staff & Administrators • Prepare all case documentation • Provide “institutional memory” • Offer assistance with complaint process • Direct to other agencies, BBB, attorney, etc. • Provide updates regarding complaint status Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  43. Benchmarking Data Authority to Implement the Disciplinary Program • 46% Board of Directors • 48% Committee • 26% Staff • 11% Other Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  44. Benchmarking Data Initial Review of Complaints • 86% Staff Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  45. Benchmarking Data Timing of Committee Involvement • 72% After initial determination of a valid complaint • 20% At time of review and decision • 14% At the time the complaint is filed Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  46. Conducting Investigations Prompt and competent investigation All decisions must be “legally defensible” Requirements for Investigators • Impartiality • No conflict of interest • Expertise • Ability • Time Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  47. Conducting Investigations Volunteer Committees • Confidentiality • Conflict of Interest • Subject Matter Experts • Clearly Defined Objective Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  48. Benchmarking Data Frequency of Disciplinary Matters Review • 76% As Needed • 8% Quarterly • 10% Semi-Annually • 8% Annually Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  49. Benchmarking Data Number of New Investigations Annually • 67% Less than 5 • 17% Between 6 and 10 • 3% Between 11 and 20 • 3% Between 21 and 40 • 3% Between 41 and 60 Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

  50. Conducting Investigations Duty of Confidentiality • Facts must remain confidential • Confidentiality agreements for team • Court orders or valid subpoenas • Repercussions of a breach of confidentiality Presented at the 2006 CLEAR Annual Conference September 14-16 Alexandria, Virginia

More Related