Representatives of ACP-UK met representatives of HCPC on 3 March 2022 to discuss HCPC scrutiny of overseas applications. The meeting was chaired by Mr Brendon Edmonds, Head of Education HCPC and lead for a project to review overseas application accreditation processes. The meeting also included Nicola Bibby, International Process Manager for HCPC, Dr Ché Rosebert, ACP-UK Director for External Relations, Dr Sarah Swan, ACP-UK Director for England and Prof Mike Wang, Chair, ACP-UK.

This meeting was prompted by concerns previously raised by ACP-UK regarding the scrutiny of overseas applicants. Mr Edmonds explained that HCPC was in the process of developing a new model to deal with overseas applicants because it was recognised that the present process was unnecessarily bureaucratic and based on paper applications rather than an online system. Mr Edmonds also explained the criteria that were being used and the importance of applicants meeting the Standards of Proficiency previously developed in collaboration with the BPS Committee on Training and Clinical Psychology and the Group of Trainers in Clinical Psychology. The scrutiny process, undertaken by a panel with two clinical psychology registrants, looks at curriculum content, design and assessment of overseas training programmes completed by overseas applicants. It was also acknowledged that during the period that the UK was part of the European Union, HCPC was required by law to favour European applicants with the expectation that almost all of these ultimately would be registered, even where there was significant discrepancy between the standards in the applicant’s European country and those required in the United Kingdom. Although the European pressure to accept applicants has now ceased, there is still a run-through period involving those who applied in the period prior to Brexit.

The assessing panel has always taken the view that professional experience either in the UK or elsewhere can make up for shortfalls in training. ACP-UK had also previously raised a concern that overseas applicants may be at risk of exploitation if there was not clear guidance and governance of UK placements.  ACP-UK asked about the brief for the two clinical psychologist members of the Panel and we were told that this was presently being reviewed but that we would be provided with written Panel directions.

Mr Edmonds also presented statistics on the outcome of overseas applications: around 3% of overseas applicants are rejected at the end of the process and in 12% further information is requested. These were the statistics for a sample of 1000 applications.

ACP-UK is concerned by this very high acceptance rate, given the clear difference between UK clinical psychology training and required competencies and those overseas.

HCPC Proposed Actions:

HCPC has a five-point plan for improvement:

1. to record all accept decisions and circumstances
2. to implement quality control checks on outcome recommendations
3. to develop document assessment rationales for accept decisions
4. to develop new assessor guidance training and overview of role
5. to develop a new operating model incorporating online application

Multiple modalities

Mr Edmonds presented further statistics on cases in which applicants received multiple modality accreditation in comparison with UK applicants: 11% of overseas applicants were granted two modality accreditations in comparison with only 2% for UK registrants; 2% of international applicants were granted three modality accreditations in comparison with none at all for UK registrants.

HCPC Proposed Actions:

1. HCPC plans to apply just one modality per application fee rather than multiple modalities as is currently the case. Overseas applicants will be required to submit separate applications with additional fee requirements if they want to be considered for more than one modality. There will be separate assessments by panels with relevant modality expertise for each modality.
2. There will be further quality assurance for multiple modality applications with an annual review of data examining multiple modality variances with UK registrants.
3. Overseas applicants will determine what they wish to apply for and HCPC will provide detailed information online in relation to these options.

Application Processing and Waiting Time

HCPC plans to introduce surge capacity resourcing and increasing assessment capacity. They will also be reviewing approval for comparable qualifications and proactive approaches to support international pipelines for UK recruitment.

HCPC requested ACP-UK provide case examples of where it appeared that international application approval was inappropriate.

ACP-UK Proposed Action:

Although HCPC has only recently completed an extensive review and consultation of the Standards of Proficiency, ACP-UK will be entering into discussions with the BPS Committee on Training in Clinical Psychology and the Group of Trainers in Clinical Psychology concerning the use of the standards for judging international applications.

It was agreed by both organisations that the meeting was very useful and we plan to meet again in three months’ time.