Title: Clinical Excellence Awards
1Clinical Excellence Awards
- October 2008
- Jonathan Montgomery
- Chairman ACCEA
2Objective
- To reward consultants who show the greatest
sustained levels of performance and commitment to
the NHS
3In a way that is
- Transparent, fair, based on clear evidence and
perceived to be so - Open and accessible to all eligible consultants
- Fair in its distribution of awards
4- 2009 5 Guides
- Applicants eligibility, how to apply
- Assessors scoring, details on criteria
- Employers committees annual reports
- Nominators ranking processes, citations
- Award holders reviews, changes of circumstance
5Eligibility
- At least one years experience at consultant
level, medical or dental qualification, fully
registered, employed in NHS or DH bodies - Pre-conditions
- Participation in appraisal
- Fulfilling job plan
- Compliance with Private Practice Code
- Working to GMC/GDC standards of conduct
6Criteria for Excellence
- Performance over and above standard expected of a
consultant in their post - Sustained commitment to patient care, public
health - High standards
- Commitment to values and goals of the NHS
7The Pyramid
8A Competitive Scheme
- 2,243 national applications for 576 new awards
- All applications considered by regional
sub-committees - Some also by national nominating bodies, e.g.
Royal College of Surgeons - Shortlisted applications from either route
considered by Chair and Medical Director
9Reviews 2006 2007
Total 459 590
5 year renewal or higher award 440 538
2 year renewal 10 8
1 year resubmission 8 43
Withdrawal 1 1
10Decision-making for national levels
11Distribution of CEAs at June 2007
12(No Transcript)
13(No Transcript)
14(No Transcript)
15(No Transcript)
16(No Transcript)
17Application
- Candidate complete the application form.
- Submitted electronically on web-based form by
1700 on 19 12 08 - Standardised presentation of case
- Personal statement, job plan, five domains
- Employer citation and confirmation of eligibility
18You already hold You can apply for
Discretionary Points or Level 1-8 Award Bronze Award through the national process and/or Level 9 from your employer
Bronze Award or Level 9 Award Silver Award
Silver Award Gold Award
Gold Award or an A Distinction Award Platinum Award
B Distinction Award Either a Silver or Gold Award
192006
20(No Transcript)
21(No Transcript)
22Age of Awardees 2005
Award Level Age (mean at 1.04.05)
Level 9 50
Level 10 54
Level 11 53
Level 12 56
23Nomination
- Indication of relative esteem ranked lists
- Sub-Committees National Nominating Bodies
- Ensure consideration by Medical Director Chair
- Specialist Societies
- Consideration by sub-committees
- The process for nomination must comply with ACCEA
requirements - Must provide citations on request even if do not
rank
24Comparison of success rates 2006
Bronze Recommend Awarded
Subcommittee 324 285 88
NNB 292 169 58
Subcommittee/NNB 137 131 96
25Citation
- Comment on quality of achievements
- Should relate to achievement within the
competence of the nominating body - Should not be provided by a colleague from the
same institution - Should be submitted by the President or Chairman
of the nominating body
26Evidence
- Standard application form complete by consultant
- Personal statement, job plan summary 5 domains
- delivering high quality service,
- developing high quality service,
- managing a high quality service,
- research,
- teaching and training
- Employer (mandatory) and third party (voluntary)
citations - Nominations (ranked lists)
27The Form
- Personal statement.
- Should highlight the key achievements presented
in detail in the rest of the application form - Will be published if you are successful
28The Form
- JOB PLAN
- Summarises the candidates job
- Excellence does not require additional activity
before it can be judged to be over and above
expectations - But excellence may be judged differently for
contributions that that are a major part of the
job receiving dedicated support
29- No one gets a national award unless their
application has impressed a peers, employers and
lay people - BUT
- deserving people may not apply
- application forms may not do the applicants
justice
30Evidence Needed
- Evaluation of applications not people
- Quality indications needed, not posts held
- Over and above expectations
- Sustained improvement needed for progression