Guidance for External Verification
1. Coterminus Students / Verifications
Students on coterminus (integrated) degree programmes will have their verifications arranged directly by the university. Queries relating to these verifications should be initially directed to the university, e.g. their expense claiming procedures. Some aspects of the guidance may differ for university arranged verifications and this document is only directly applicable to verifications arranged outside the coterminus route. However, the general principles relating to the verification process must be in line with Institute guidance, even if the University has alternative administrative procedures.
Please note that reports for coterminus students are forwarded to the university and not the IBMS. The university will forward the reports to the Institute at the appropriate time.
2. Role of the External Verifier
The Institute of Biomedical Science (IBMS) will appoint an external verifier (henceforth referred to as ‘verifier’) as its representative. The only exception to this rule is for coterminus students, where the university will appoint a verifier.
Their role is to verify that the evidence provided by a candidate as part of their training and fitness to practice assessment in the working environment (host laboratory) demonstrates competence against the ‘Standards of Proficiency’ set down by the Health Professions Council (HPC). In addition, the verifier considers the suitability of a laboratory for pre-registration training.
It is the role of the laboratory to make and record the assessment of competence and the verifier checks that there is evidence of this process. Upon completion of the portfolio verification and tour the verifier makes a recommendation in their report with respect to the candidate’s eligibility for the award of the IBMS ‘Certificate of Competence’.
The verifier and laboratory will have an opportunity to provide feedback following the completion of the verification process. The feedback should be exchanged between each party via email and the Institute should be copied into this process.
3. Requirements of the ‘Standards of Proficiency’
The purpose of the standards is to ensure that all registered practitioners meet the same threshold standards of competence relevant to day one of registered practice. Their purpose is not to demonstrate specific in-depth knowledge and skills within a particular discipline, nor do they necessarily demonstrate fitness for purpose with respect to the employer’s requirements for a particular role.
Since the standards are generic for all disciplines, it is not necessary to appoint discipline specific verifiers. It is likely that the verifier will be asked to verify evidence in a discipline other than their own but this will not disadvantage either the verifier or the candidate, as an in-depth knowledge of the pathology discipline is not required (this is assessed at the end of Specialist Portfolio training). Indeed, the focus is on obtaining minimum standards applicable to the scope of practice rather than the in-depth role of a specialist.
4. Academic Requirements for Biomedical Scientists
The academic requirements for biomedical scientists are represented in section 3a.1 of the registration portfolio. The standard is met through an IBMS accredited honours degree programme in biomedical science (or its equivalent accepted through the Institute’s Form B assessment process for non-accredited qualifications). It may have been necessary for the candidates with non-accredited qualifications to have completed supplementary education at the undergraduate level to achieve equivalence and satisfy the academic component of the certificate of competence.
All candidates (except coterminus students) for the registration portfolio must have had their qualifications evaluated by the Institute (Form A and Form B procedures for accredited and non-accredited qualifications respectively). Candidates will have received a letter from the Institute detailing the outcome of the evaluation, which will form part of the evidence used to support whether standard 3a.1 has been met. If supplementary education has been specified by IBMS, the candidate will need to supply evidence from the university that this education has been completed.
5. Arranging an External Verification
The Institute will appoint an external verifier who has volunteered their time. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Institute appoint a verifier from within the same organisation or health trust. The Institute will confirm to the verifier that they have been accepted and provide them with the details of the trainee and the laboratory training officer.
The verifier is then expected to contact the training officer within one week to arrange a mutually convenient date for the verification visit. This is an opportunity for the verifier to check that the laboratory understands what they will require and also that the evidence in the portfolio is not overly excessive.
6. Verification Visit
The verifier will require a quiet room for the duration of the visit. The host laboratory can be reasonably expected to provide refreshments. It is essential that the verifier adheres to the procedures set down by the Institute and be guided by the ‘Verifier’s Report’. Whilst the sharing of good practice is encouraged, this must be done in accordance with the Institute’s guidelines and should not be an attempt to impose personal preferences. Over-zealousness can be as unprofessional as being half-hearted or casual.
- The verification visit will comprise the following (times are guidelines):
- Informal interview with candidate and training officer (15-20 mins).
- Portfolio verification (a minimum of one hour and maximum of two hours).
- Tour of laboratory (30 mins).
- Feedback comments to trainer and candidates (15 mins).
- Completion of the External Verifier’s report.
7. Approval of the Laboratory for Pre-registration Training
The Institute has published ‘Clinical Laboratory Standards’ that a laboratory must conform with in order to maintain its IBMS training status. Based on these standards the laboratory tour gives the verifier an opportunity to judge that the laboratory has the appropriate requirements for training against the checklist on their report. Following the submission of the report / feedback, the Institute will take any further action it feels necessary. A new training certificate will only be issued if the current one is due to expire.
The role of the verifier is to act as a representative of the Institute and make a recommendation in the verification report. The verifier is not expected to judge the laboratory against CPA standards but to confirm by observation whether or not the laboratory meets the IBMS training laboratory criteria.
8. Verification Procedure
A. Informal Interview with Candidate and Training Officer (15-20 mins)
This is an opportunity for everyone to be put at ease. The verifier will ask questions that give them a feel for the routine work of the laboratory (DGH, teaching, or specialist such as National Blood Service) and the normal workload.
It is important that the trainee is encouraged to talk about their training and give their view of the training provided. A judgement is made of the quality of the training support to see if it was effective. (Was it 1-1? Was there one trainer, designated trainers, rotation and secondment if needed?). The verifier shall discuss the production of the portfolio evidence with the trainee and the training officer, including whether there were any difficulties.
Please note specialist laboratories are not to be disadvantaged as the HPC standards are generic.
B. Portfolio Verification (maximum 90 mins)
This needs to be done in a quiet room, with refreshments available. The verifier must look for evidence that all the HPC standards of proficiency for biomedical scientists have been met. The time allowed should be sufficient for a professional judgement to be made regarding the sufficiency of the evidence to demonstrate that the candidate has met the standards as assessed by the training laboratory.
The following documents must be seen.
i. Letter of qualification evaluation outcome from the Institute
- If the letter states the requirement for additional education (i.e. conversion or ‘top-up’) evidence of this must be provided as an official university document.
ii. Departmental Training Manual/Programme
iii. Completed portfolio (Version 1)
- Section 2 (Record of Completion) signed by training officer, trainee and if appropriate university tutor.
- Section 3 (Training) completed with answers to questions in spaces provided.
- Additional evidence as appropriate to the standards (i.e. where space in section 3 was not sufficient).
or
Completed portfolio (Version 2 or 3)
- Evidence of Achievement signed by training officer, trainee and if appropriate university tutor.
- Additional evidence as appropriate to the standards.
C. Tour of Laboratory (30 mins)
This must be conducted by the verifier with the trainee only. It gives the trainee an opportunity to show that they understand the work of the department and how they contribute to service delivery. The verifier should not be expecting the candidate to go into too much detail and the tour should not normally exceed 30 mins. An overview of facilities, equipment and environment can be taken. An assessment of the training culture can be made, for example: are there up to date notice boards for training? Do they reflect a positive attitude towards training?
D. Feedback Comments to Trainer and Candidates (15 mins)
The verifier shall offer feedback at the end of the portfolio verification and laboratory tour to both the trainee and training officer, although the verifier may request to see the training officer in private prior to this, if there are some major concerns: e.g. is there an issue over continued approval of the laboratory for training?
This is also an opportunity for the verifier to make constructive feedback. For example, the portfolio evidence or training strategy could be improved by encouraging the trainee to spend a day in other laboratories, or by developing a collaborative and co-ordinated approach to training across the disciplines. Maximising the use of resources can avoid the same training being replicated unnecessarily to a number of trainees.
The verifier must inform the trainee and training officer whether or not they are satisfied that evidence of competence has been met. If the verifier is satisfied the minimum standard has been met, this recommendation should be made to the Institute within your report.
Please note from September 2010 Certificates of Competence are no longer awarded to the candidate on the day of the visit.
If the verifier feels additional evidence is required (this does not mean the candidate has ‘failed’) they must indicate the nature of this and agree a deadline for submission for review. The verifier will be required to use their professional judgement to decide what a reasonable timescale is, based on the perceived ability of the candidate and the level of support afforded by the laboratory.
As an external representative of the Institute, the verifier must adhere to the Institute’s guidelines and represent the Institute’s standards. Whilst promoting good practice it is important to resist any temptation to impose their own standards and opinions on the training laboratory.
Some laboratories may wish to seek further guidance from the verifier with regard to advice about evidence and completing the portfolio. This is at the discretion of the verifier and should be taken outside of the normal verification process. It should also be noted that some of this advice may be based on the personal knowledge and experience of the verifier and may therefore vary between verifiers.
9. Completion of the External Verifier’s Report
The verification report is for draft completion during the verification and then completed for submission to the Institute within two weeks of the visit.
There is an opportunity to bring recommendations regarding the laboratory training to the attention of the Institute for further action if required. Expenses can be reclaimed for reasonable travel and subsistence expenses only.
Please email a copy of the report to both the Institute and the Laboratory Manager.
10. Laboratory Feedback
Each training officer is provided with a feedback form to provide them with the opportunity to communicate their, and the candidate’s, experience of the verification process. Completion of this form is now a mandatory requirement for continued approval of the laboratory for training and is to enable the Institute to audit all aspects of the verification process and to maintain consistency and parity of verifiers on a national level. It is designed to be constructive. The training officer must provide a copy of the report to the verifier by email in order for them to receive feedback.
11. General points about Verification:
a) An-depth knowledge of a single discipline is not needed.
b) Rotation around all disciplines is not required. Evidence of some departmental collaboration in respect of training does, however, complement the biomedical science degree and is recommended by the Institute as it gives the student a more complete experience of the profession.
c) The amount of evidence can be expected to fill one A4 size lever arch folder to capacity. It should be sufficient to enable the training officer to sign the standards off and to enable a considered verification of the portfolio to be made.
d) There should be enough evidence to show consistent achievement of competence. The spaces for questions in section three in version 1 of the portfolio is indicative of the amount that probably should be written. It is preferable for the evidence to be handwritten rather than word-processed, as this does show it is the trainee’s own work. This does not exclude work completed electronically but such work must be authenticated as originating from the candidate.
e) Supplementary evidence can be included and it is perfectly acceptable to cross-reference evidence within the portfolio. Policies and procedures should be referred to without reproducing the entire document.
f) Evidence should be valid, authentic and appropriate to the standards and competencies being evidenced.
g) Look at the nature of the material. Laboratory reports must be anonymous. It is better that they are annotated and explained, rather than merely used.
h) It important to see if a holistic approach to training has been taken, i.e. see evidence that the trainee has been integrated into the team working of the laboratory and that they attend meetings where appropriate.
i) If some evidence is missing or scanty there may be an opportunity on the laboratory tour to rectify this and confirm the HPC standard has been met.
j) Finally, it should be remembered that this is an important day for the candidate and the appropriate degree of professionalism must be maintained at all times.
Further information
Application Form to become an External Verifier
Guidance for External Verification (PDF)
External Verifier Training (Powerpoint: 1.5 megabytes)
Contact registration@ibms.org
Tags: Get involved, Professional & workforce, Media and publications