(published March 2022)

The results of the annual survey are available online here.

In general, the College appears to be doing well, even very well, in the areas that we asked about.

We asked about registrars’ experience of the training programme, and most (nearly all) responses indicated agreement or strong agreement to a range of questions relating to the training programme.

There were a few responses indicating that workplaces are not necessarily good at supporting completion of the training programme. In most cases, registrars experienced good or excellent formal or informal supervision. Responses to questions about patient safety were generally positive, though there were a handful of responses that indicated that the facility could improve. The College is looking to strengthen the approved training facility policy so that facilities with registrars do more to provide safe and supportive environments to registrars.

With regards to general liaison and communication with members, whether about the training programme, policies, or processes, responses were mixed.  The College is implementing a stakeholder engagement plan which includes inviting all members to comment on policies at the time of their review.

Although most Fellows understood the recertification programme, there were more than expected did not.  The DPD is running webinars to explain the requirements, and the GM is running UCCIS tutorials. The website pages describing the recertification programme are well written and understandable. Thus we believe that we are doing everything we can to improve understanding of the recertification programme and the supporting information system.

Although Fellows thought that the training prepared them well clinically, there were mixed responses to the question asking whether the programme prepared them to be a medical director.  The College is working on a leadership training module to be implemented this year. 

Support to supervisors from the College and their workplaces appears mixed.  As mentioned, we intend to strengthen the requirements placed on training facilities. The aim is to provide more support to registrars and supervisors. The supervisor training is available both online and as a level 2 workshop.

Some appear not to be aware of the registrar representative on the Executive Committee, or that there is a registrar subcommittee reporting to the Education committee. We’ll aim to promote both and invite more involvement from the registrar body.

In general, members reported that the office staff are approachable and professional, and that the website presents information well.

It does appear that urgent care workplaces, in general, do not actively provide opportunities for strengthening research skills. We’ll consider what the College can do in this area. Members are reminded that there is an annual research grant available (up to $10,000 per year spread across those approved by the ExC).