Reviews
The three different types of reviews the learner will experience during their training programme are:
Level 1: Informal review
Individuals should receive formative feedback at their regular monthly meetings with their educational supervisor, and during their period of learning in practice, with their designated prescribing practitioner.
Level 2: Intermediate progress review
This is a more formal review and should occur at least every six months. As a minimum, it will include the learner and their supervisor (educational supervisor and/or designated prescribing practitioner). Post-registration foundation programmes may wish to include additional roles in some/all of these review meetings e.g. a member of the academic team or an experienced external educational supervisor (particularly if upskilling new educational supervisors).
The purpose of these reviews is to:
REVIEW: systematically review the learner’s performance and progress in a holistic and supportive way. This will allow strengths and any specific training needs to be identified
SUPPORT: early identification of learners who may require additional support so that individually tailored support strategies can be implemented
ASSESS: check the quality of supervised learning events and other portfolio evidence meets the required standard. Can focus on the outcomes that still require evidence. Any issues with the quality of evidence can be addressed before the final assessment
PROGRESS: determine the learner has made satisfactory progress to move forward with the programme. Where this is not the case, appropriate remediation can be implemented
Level 3: Final assessment
Depending on the training model, the process will be slightly different.Decisions to submit should be supported by the individual’s supervisor(s) (if they have one).
Integrated training programme
Individuals can submit their e-portfolio for a final decision review by a competency committee when:
- All of the curriculum outcomes and clinical assessment skills have been achieved
- Any additional summative assessments required by the higher education institution to meet their academic regulations have been completed
Modular training programme
Individuals can submit their e-portfolio for a final decision review by a competency committee when:
- The non-independent prescribing outcomes and any clinical assessment skills not assessed during the standalone independent prescribing course have beenachieved
- The higher education institution has awarded their Practice Certificate in Independent Prescribing and it has been uploaded to their e-portfolio
Regardless of the training model, the learner’s higher education institution will be the awarding body for the Practice Certificate in Independent Prescribing. Where the higher education institution’s requirements for independent prescribing are fully met by the RPS programme of assessment, the final summative assessment can serve as a dual final summative assessment and this would be agreed by the higher education institution and RPS.
Using the collection of assessment data gathered from a variety of sources throughout the programme, post-registration foundation competency committees will review performance information to assess the learner has met the minimum level of performance to be credentialed.
To be credentialed, the individual must have been awarded the Practice Certificate in Independent Prescribing.
Who assesses my portfolio?
Portfolios will be assessed by an RPS post-registration foundation competency committee, which will be chaired by a senior RPS representative and include at least panel members representing the following roles:
- Educational supervisor (not directly involved in the supervision of the learner)
- Practising pharmacist (practising at a level beyond the standard articulated in this curriculum)
- Active prescriber (pharmacist or non-medical prescriber with at least two years prescribing experience)
- Academic expertise
Outcomes
The potential assessment outcomes of the PFCC are as follows:
Standard met – the individual has provided satisfactory evidence to demonstrate achievement of all the Post-registration Foundation curriculum requirements
The learner’s higher education institution, as the regulated awarding body, awards the Practice Certificate in Independent Prescribing. The RPS credentials the learner having completed the wider post-registration foundation programme which demonstrates they have developed the appropriate skillset to progress to RPS advanced practice credentialing pathways.
Standard not met – the individual has not provided satisfactory evidence to demonstrate achievement of all the Post-registration Foundation curriculum requirements under assessment. This outcome may result from one or both of the following:
- Inadequate progress – the evidence does not meet the required standard
- Incomplete evidence presented – the panel can make no statement about progress or otherwise where either no information or incomplete information has been supplied and/or is available to the panel
When can I submit my portfolio for assessment?
Dates to follow.
Assessment fee
Information about the fee for submitting your portfolio will be added shortly.