Important – Please Read

Some time ago – the Board took the decision to look closely at registration with the Professional Standards Authority (PSA).

This decision was taken in order to provide improved confidence in Trichology as a sector of the health care profession, to be recognised as a more professionally accepted and closely ‘governed’ health care provider – thereby ‘safe’ for a patient to visit; thus provide the IOT Trichologist a better standing with other health care professionals and patients alike.

The recommendations (from the PSA) in-order for the IOT to continue to successful application are provided below. It is important to note, that these will have have an impact on the IOT as an organisation – but also (in varying degrees) on you as an IOT practitioner.

As a Board, we can certainly see the advantages to the PSA’s recommendations – and therefore intend to continue implementing many of them to further advance our on-going quest of improving our processes and procedures, public confidence and overall professionalism – regardless of the success of our PSA registration.

Please read carefully the following: We have provided the relevant points raised by the PSA that need addressing – followed by what these changes may mean for you.

Costings – it will currently cost the IOT approx: £12,000 p/a for PSA registration. This is a cost that can be incorporated (without an extra charge to your membership fees) within our forecasted budgeting.

The PSA have noted the following actions that need to be addressed:

“The functions of an accredited register (such as the IOT) need a clear focus on public protection and confidence”.

* At present – the register is focussed on being able to find a registrant rather than on public protection. For example, the register is located on a page that does not include information about complaints.
* What checks does the IOT have in place to assure itself that its registrants are equipped to list the specialisms noted on the register?
* The IOT’s education course is currently the only route to the register which could present a conflict of interest.
* The mentorship process was not clear so was unable to clarify how people moved between membership grades and what the criteria were for successful upgrades. It was not clear what would happen if a registrant did not successfully compete the mentorship process.

In order to address the above – and in order to improve our professional standing and protection offered to the public (patients) – we are considering the following actions:

The creation of independent ‘governance groups’ to make decisions relating to public interest, including on registration and complaints (these decisions will not require ratification from the Board). These groups should consist of appropriate ‘lay involvement’. This could include people with lived experience as a service user of trichology as well as those with relevant experience such as in regulation and finance.

The IOT will improve the clarity around the ‘curricula’ for its course, to demonstrate: how this is a mitigation for risks and how this equips its registrants to practise specialisms listed on the register (such as expert legal witnesses and working with textured curly hair).

The IOT will review and update its complaints and disciplinary procedures so that it is clear how the IOT will deal with different types of concerns. The IOT will consider:
a) The test it will apply, whether ‘no case to answer’ or ‘realistic prospect’ is clear.
b) The criteria and process for escalating complaints from informal to formal so it is clear to the public.
c) Information about support that is offered to complainants and other witnesses throughout the process.
d) Who is informed of the outcomes and whose responsibility it is.
e) Providing information about what happens following an agreed outcome if the registrant is non-compliant.
f) Providing information about the publication of interim suspension orders.
g) Reviewing the timeframe in which complaints can be considered and whether complaints outside of this timeframe will be considered if it is in the public interest.
h) The ability for the complainant to appeal an outcome.

4. The IOT is currently developing its ‘Recognition of Prior Learning’ pathway in order to accept registrants from other Trichology organisations.

Please email with any queries you have – we will attempt to answer all.

Thank you – from all the Board.

If you have any queries, or if there is anything we can help with at all, please do not hesitate to contact us on admin@trichologists.org.uk.