ARCP and RITA Outcomes

ARCP and RITA

LETBs review the progress of all doctors in specialist (including GP and core) training on at least an annual basis using one of two processes, depending on when the doctor began their training programme:

1. Trainees who started before 1 August 2007 are generally covered by RITA, details of which can be found in A Guide to Specialist Registrar Training (’The Orange Guide’).

2. Trainees who started on or after 1 August 2007 are covered by ARCP, details of which can be found in A Reference Guide for Postgraduate Specialty Training in the UK (’The Gold Guide’).

HEEoE panels conduct reviews and issue each trainee with an ARCP/RITA outcome (see table below). The panel may meet with the trainee in person or conduct a paper/e-portfolio review.

In both cases, the objective is to determine the extent of the trainee’s progress against the competences described in a GMC approved specialty curriculum. This involves reviewing the evidence that trainees submit about their training, which may include:

• workplace based assessments

• a report from the trainee’s educational supervisor

• team observation summaries

• royal college or faculty professional exam results (this list is not exhaustive). 

 

Table of ARCP and RITA Outcomes

 

Type

Outcome

Reporting classification

Description

ARCP

1

Satisfactory

Satisfactory progress. Competences achieved as expected.

2

Unsatisfactory

May progress but requires specific / targeted training to achieve certain competences

3

Unsatisfactory

Has not achieved competences required to progress, up to 12m (6m in Core and GP) additional training required

4

Unsatisfactory

Released from training programme with or without specified competences

5

Unsatisfactory

Incomplete evidence provided

6

Satisfactory

Recommendation for completion of training having gained all required competences.

7

Satisfactory

Fixed term specialty outcome - specific competences achieved

7.1

Satisfactory

Satisfactory progress in or completion of the 'Locum Appointment for Training (LAT) / Fixed Term Speciality Training Appointments (FTSTA) placement.

7.2

Unsatisfactory

Development of specific competences required – additional training time not required LAT/FTSTA placement

7.3

Unsatisfactory

Inadequate progress by the trainee – additional training time required LAT/FTSTA placement

7.4

Unsatisfactory

Incomplete evidence presented - LAT / FTSTA placement.

8

Satisfactory

Out of programme, time may or may not count towards training

RITA

C

Satisfactory

Satisfactory progress. Competences achieved as expected.

D

Unsatisfactory

May progress but requires specific/targeted training to achieve certain competences

E

Unsatisfactory

Has not achieved competences required to progress, up to 12m (6m in Core and GP) additional training required

F

Satisfactory

Out of programme, time may or may not count towards training

G

Satisfactory

Recommendation for completion of training having gained all required competencies.

 

The Relevance of ARCP and RITA Outcomes

During specialist training, a trainee progresses from a basic level through a programme of teaching and training to completion of training and entry onto the specialist or GP register.

The rate at which they progress is determined both by characteristics of the trainee themselves and the environment in which they are being trained. Therefore, in postgraduate training, outcomes other than standard progress are to be expected. Trainees who do not progress at the standard rate will usually undergo another ARCP or RITA meeting within six to 12 months.

The importance of the ARCP and RITA processes is to identify where a trainee is making progress and where they are not and to prescribe action to improve the progress where necessary. Therefore outcomes termed unsatisfactory are not necessarily undesirable. They may in fact reflect a supportive educational environment which proactively identifies issues and helps the trainees to correct them or identifies a deficiency in the educational environment that needs to be corrected for the trainee to be successful. Equally, a high proportion of satisfactory outcomes may reflect a less rigorous assessment process.

 

 

X