http://www.kirklees.nhs.uk/uploads/tx_galileodocuments/The_Personal_Development_Review_and_the_Knowl

THE PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS FRAMEWORK

Procedure and Guidance

Produced by the Calderdale & Kirklees KSF Group January 2006 Version 3.2

CONTENTS

Page

.1.

Introduction

4

.2.

What is the NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework(KSF)?

4

.3.

KSF training and awareness

5

.4.

The Personal Development Review process

5

.4.1. An overview .4.2. The PDR Process .4.3. Review of the Previous Year .4.4 Job Objectives .4.5. The Personal Development Plan (PDP)

5 6 7 7 8

.5.

Developing KSF outlines

9

.6.

Incremental progression

9

.6.1. Gateways 9 .6.2. Gateway Reviews 9 .6.3. The Foundation Gateway 10 .6.4. The Second Gateway 10 .6.5. Supporting Career Progression 10 .6.6 Assessment of Competence 10 .6.7. Agreement Between Reviewer and Post Holder 10 .6.7.1. The Post Holder has met the requirements of the KSF Outline 10 .6.7.2. The Post Holder has not met the requirements of the KSF Outline 11 .6.8. Disagreement Between the Review and the Post Holder 11 .6.9 Failure to Demonstrate required development at a gateway 11 .6.9.1. Where the Post Holder has not had the Opportunity to achieve the knowledge and skills required 11 .6.9.2. Where the post holder is unable to demonstrate the knowledge and skills required 12 .6.10. Continued Failure to Demonstrate Competence 13 .6.11. Progression Beyond the Second Gateway 13 .6.12. Gateway Review Delayed by Absence 13 .6.12.1. Maternity/Paternity/Parental/Adoption Leave 14 .6.12.2. Short term absence –sick leave/annual leave/carer leave 14 .6.12.3. Long term sickness absence .6.12.4. Secondment 15 .6.12.5. Career Break 15 .6.13. Redeployment and Career Development Moves 16 .6.14. Appeals 16 .6.15. Equal Opportunities 16

2

.7.

Study leave .7.1. Reviewer Responsibilities .7.2. Post Holder Responsibilities

17 17 17

.8.

Statutory and Mandatory training

18

.9.

Using the KSF for recruitment .9.1. Determining Salaries on Commencement

18 18

.10.

Induction .10.1. Preceptorship .10.2. Preceptorship in Practice

19 20 20

.11.

Confidentiality

21

.12.

Capability issues

21

.13.

The e-KSF

22

.14.

Appendix One

KSF/PDR Documentation

23

.15.

Appendix Two

Responsibilities of Reviewers and Post Holders during PDR

29

.16.

Appendix Three

Position of Second Gateway

31

.17.

Appendix Four

Gateway Monitoring Forum

32

.18.

Appendix Five

Short Term Development Action Plan

33

3

.1.0.

Introduction The NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework [KSF] is being implemented across all NHS organisations as part of the national agreement on Agenda for Change.

The Personal Development Review [PDR] process has therefore been reviewed and updated to incorporate the KSF. This document is intended to help all staff understand how the KSF fits in with other PCT policies and procedures, for example the capability procedure and study leave policy.

The KSF guidance has been produced by the Calderdale and Kirklees PCTs KSF group – a joint group of staff and management leads leading the implementation of the KSF across the PCTs. It is an important principle of the KSF that it is implemented in partnership. This document should be read in conjunction with the PDR policy. For further information about the KSF it is recommended that you refer to the NHS KSF handbook or approach your local KSF lead (contact through your HR department): This guidance is not intended to replace the need for all staff to have attended the mandatory KSF and PDR training (reviewers) or KSF awareness sessions (all other staff).

NOTE: In the NHS many terms have been used for the process of appraisal/review/IDR/IPR etc. To maintain consistency with the national documentation this process will be referred to as the Development Review throughout this guide. The Personal Development Review [PDR] policy defines the operation of this process in the PCT

.2.0.

What is the NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework [KSF]?

“The KSF defines and describes the knowledge and skills which NHS staff need to apply in their work in order to deliver quality services. It provides a single, consistent, comprehensive and explicit framework on which to base review and development for all staff” (The NHS KSF and the Development Review Process, Department of Health, October 2004) The KSF applies to all staff paid under the new Agenda for Change terms and conditions.

The purpose of the KSF is to: • Facilitate the development of services • Support the learning and development of individuals and teams, with all staff being supported throughout their careers • Support individuals to develop in their posts to be effective at work • Promote equality and diversity at work.

4

.3.0.

KSF Training and Awareness Sessions It is mandatory for all staff to attend a KSF awareness session. The purpose of these sessions is to allow staff to have the information required to develop a KSF outline for their own post, in partnership with their manager. It will also allow the individual to fairly assess their progress against their KSF outline in preparation for their development review.

It is mandatory for anyone responsible for carrying out the development review of another member of staff to attend the modular reviewers training programme. This includes a full day Reviewer KSF module which will support reviewers to work with their staff to develop KSF outlines and evaluate individual’s development against this. In addition the reviewer must complete the PDR training module.

The KSF implementation group will continue to run training courses for new staff and managers.

.4.0.

The Personal Development Review [PDR] Process

.4.1.

An Overview The PDR process is the annual cycle of review, planning, development and evaluation for post holders against the demands of their post (as described in the KSF outline). The PDR is undertaken in partnership between the individual member of staff and a reviewer. Both have responsibilities within the process to ensure it achieves its goals.

The PDR cycle consists of: 1) Reviewing how individual post holders are applying their knowledge and skills to meet the demands of their current post and identifying work objectives for the next 12 months.

2) Developing a Personal Development Plan [PDP] for the post holder, detailing the learning and development to take place in the coming months and the date of the next review.

PDRs will be held on an annual basis, with review meetings set up regularly (as a minimum twice yearly, this may be part of the usual supervision arrangements) to review progress against the PDP. The aim is to ensure that over the period of time the post holder develops within the post, and, as jobs change and develop, employees are able to demonstrate the full range of knowledge and skills required for the job.

Newly appointed or promoted staff joining a pay band under the new system will serve an initial foundation period of up to twelve months. During this initial period all staff will have at least two discussions with their manager (or the person acting as their reviewer). The first of these discussions should be held at the end of the three months induction period.

5

Post holders who are new to a role will undertake an induction and foundation development programme, which will be designed in partnership with their manager, according to an assessment of their development needs against the KSF outline for their post. On commencement into their new role they work towards a foundation subset outline from the full outline for their post. This subset outline ensures that a post holder can apply the basic knowledge and skills required from the outset in their post coupled with those needed after 12 months development and support.

Where a health professional joins the organisation on the bottom of Pay Band 5 they will be subject to a period of preceptorship and will receive an incremental increase after 6 months on demonstration of progress towards passing the foundation gateway and a further increment on completion of the gateway (operation of the gateways is detailed in section 6).

Existing staff with at least twelve months experience in post will be assumed to have met the criteria for passing through the foundation gateway, including staff who have been assimilated onto the pay system under Agenda for Change – however they will be subject to the normal second gateway review. .4.2.

The PDR Process The reviewer is usually a post holder’s line manager, though it may be that this role is delegated to another trained member of staff, senior to the post holder. The reviewer must have attended the PCTs PDR training programme before conducting any reviews.

On appointment all post holders will work with their line manager to develop a PDP using the KSF foundation subset outline, the job descriptions and current level of knowledge and skill (from previous experience) of the post holder. The post holders induction plan and programme will link into the development review at the foundation gateway.

The development review is personal and specific to each post holder. This means that although a number of individuals may have the same KSF outline for their job, each will have an individual review and PDP. This is because each post holder will have their own strengths and their own learning and development needs. Part time staff and those working outside normal hours must have equal access to the review process and development to meet their PDP. The main purpose of the development review will be to look at the way a post holder is developing with reference to: • • •

How the duties and responsibilities of the job are being undertaken based on current agreed objectives; The application of knowledge and skills in the workplace; The consequent development needs of the post holder.

During the development review process, discussion should cover the duties and responsibilities for the job that is being undertaken. This will help to define future objectives and learning needs.

6

In summary, the primary outputs of the development review will be: • a review of the individual against the agreed KSF outline for their role • A review of the individuals progress in achieving agreed objectives/outputs • Development of work objectives for the following year • A Personal Development Plan [PDP] linked to the individual’s development needs and the needs of the post It is important that post holders and reviewers understand that the development review meeting is merely the final, formal part of the process. Throughout the year there should be a monitoring of progress so that if there are concerns they are addressed immediately. There should be no surprises at the formal review meeting. .4.3.

Review of Previous Year At the development review meeting, post holders and their reviewers should use the KSF outline for the post (this will be the subset outline prior to the foundation gateway) as the basis for their discussion to review performance for the previous year and plan both work objectives and development for the next 12 months.

The first part of the process however, is to review the previous year. This will involve discussion against the dimensions identified in the outline. Both the reviewer and post holder will need to have gathered evidence of how the post holder is meeting the outline. Evidence can take a number of forms including: • • • • •

Verbal feedback from the post holder, manager or others Written work produced by the post holder Records of work The post holder’s portfolio (see point 4.5.3) Evidence of training and practical application of learning in the workplace

The reviewer will need to record clearly using the documentation how the post holder has performed against both the core and specific dimensions of their outline.

There will be circumstances where a manager may not have the specific knowledge required to judge the progress of a member of staff. For example a manager in a multi-disciplinary team may be from a different professional background. In such instances it should be agreed how progress will be assessed e.g. a submission from another professional, either another suitably qualified manager or a peer. However the reviewer remains responsible for assessing the evidence and agreeing the outcome of the review. .4.4.

Job Objectives The PDR process should reflect the PCT‘s business planning processes and so the reviewer will need to ensure that once the PCT’s business plan has been agreed local job objectives can be discussed with the post holder and their individual objectives amended where necessary (for instance to reflect a change in priority).

7

Post holders should be able to identify how their own objectives contribute to team, department and organisational goals.

Where a post holder has an incremental date that does not fit with the business planning cycle, the PDR will need to be updated at an appropriate time to include work objectives from the PCT’s business plan.

Job objectives will distinguish between goals for the year ahead and those applying in the longer term. There will be a commitment from both parties to make all reasonable efforts to meet the work objectives for the year ahead and elements not completed through force of circumstance will be carried over to the following year, unless otherwise agreed.

Failure to achieve job objectives within a PDR cycle does not provide grounds for pay deferment (at a Gateway) unless it is related to the failure to achieve the competencies required for the post (this may relate to either quality or quantity).

The reviewer will discuss performance requirements and where possible carry work objectives forward. Where the post holder remains unable to achieve their objectives, with no exceptional circumstances, the capability procedure is the formal process for dealing with poor performance .4.5.

The Personal Development Plan [PDP] A key output of the PDR is the PDP which will be agreed by the reviewer and the post holder. A PDP identifies the post holder’s learning and development needs and interests and how these will be fulfilled. Development will primarily focus on helping members of staff carry out their current job to the standard specified in the KSF outline for the post, although personal interests and opportunities for career progression will also be taken into account.

Post holders will contribute to achieving the agreed PDP through their personal effort. Individuals may be required, where appropriate, to commit personal time and resources, especially in those areas relating to longer-term career development. Where development needs are identified as essential to the post, in the person specification, there will not normally be any requirement for the employee to use his or her unpaid personal time. Further information regarding advice for development is provided in the PCT’s Study Leave Policy.

The PCT wishes to promote a culture of lifelong learning and all employees are encouraged to develop personal portfolios. These can be used to capture the learning which occurs as a result of development on a day to day basis within the working environment, as well as more formal development. These portfolios should be brought to the review meeting so a full and detailed conversation can be had about the impact of the post holder’s learning over the period. This collation of evidence will also be used to support gateway decisions.

Whilst the formal PDR meetings are organised on an annual basis, it is essential that the PDP is reviewed regularly. An evaluation of the learning should be undertaken to ensure that the post holder is developing their knowledge and skill as required within their outline.

8

A copy of the documentation is attached in Appendix XX and an outline of the responsibilities for both managers and staff is outlined in Appendix XX .5.0.

Developing KSF Outlines It is a contractual requirement under Agenda for Change that all post holders will have an agreed KSF outline. A core KSF profile can be developed for groups of staff carrying out the same role.

KSF outlines must be agreed with post holders and, to ensure consistency across the organisation, must be signed off by the KSF Group. Agreed KSF outlines should be submitted to the KSF Administrator for consideration by this group.

When a new post is advertised it will be possible to use an agreed KSF outline in the same way as a job description or person specification. However if the post is new or has been changed there must be a new outline agreed. Where there is currently no post holder the manager may develop this but it must be signed off for consistency by the KSF group.

Where services, or the demands of a particular post, change, the KSF outline(s) must again be reviewed in partnership to ensure they still capture the demands of the post.

.6.0.

Incremental Progression Incremental progression through the pay bands occurs on the employee’s incremental date. This will usually be the anniversary of their date of commencement into the post, except for staff top of scale prior to assimilation to Agenda for Change payscales, when it will be 1 October.

The Payroll department will automatically implement the post holder’s pay increase, unless they are notified otherwise. Therefore, it is important that where a gateway review is planned, a meeting is arranged at approximately eight weeks before the incremental date.

.6.1.

Gateways Gateways occur at times during a career when a particular level of application of knowledge and skills must be demonstrated by the post holder. At the two gateways on each pay band a more formal review meeting will take place, at which time the post holder’s existing knowledge and skills should fully meet those specified in the KSF outline for their post.

.6.2.

Gateway Reviews A gateway review is no different from a normal review meeting except that the post holder, in order to pass through the Gateway onto the next incremental point of their pay band, must be able to demonstrate the required level of competence as defined by either their KSF outline subset (at the Foundation Gateway) or full outline (at the Second Gateway).

9

It is not necessary to demonstrate competence against any other criteria that might also be used within the review, in order to pass through the Gateway, e.g. agreed development above that needed for the post.

Underpinning this are the following principles: • • • .6.3.

the gateways should be treated as “open”, with staff supported to get through them. the process of the personal development review should be no different for a “gateway year” than normal.

The process should operate on a “no surprises” basis.

The Foundation Gateway This is the minimum knowledge and skills required for the post. Both the post holder and reviewer must be able to demonstrate that the post holder meets the KSF outline subset within one year of being appointed to the post, at the Foundation Gateway review.

.6.4.

The Second Gateway This is the knowledge and skills required to be fully developed and competent in the post. Both the post holder and reviewer must be able to demonstrate that the post holder meets the full KSF outline at the Second Gateway review.

.6.5.

Supporting Career Progression Additional development objectives may be agreed by the reviewer and post holder, relating to the individuals career progression rather than to their current post. If there has been such an agreement between the post holder and the reviewer to add dimensions to the individual’s KSF outline, or the individual has developed extra skills that are not required in their current post, then these are not to be used in the Second Gateway review, only the requirements for the post outlined in the full KSF outline may be used.

.6.6.

Assessment of Competence Assessment at the gateway review will involve the post holder and reviewer gathering evidence against the KSF outline that applies to that gateway. The evidence collected by both parties will then be assessed against the KSF outline and a decision made collaboratively.

.6.7.

Agreement Between Reviewer and Post Holder

.6.7.1 The post holder has met the requirements of the KSF outline If it is agreed between the post holder and reviewer that the required knowledge and skills are being applied consistently with the KSF outline for the post at the gateway concerned, pay progression continues. There is no need to inform payroll or human resources. The PDP can then be updated and agreed.

10

.6.7.2. The post holder has not met the requirements of the KSF outline If it is agreed between the post holder and the reviewer that the post holder is unable to demonstrate the required competencies, then they will work together to resolve the issues. The process for this is outlined in section 6.8. .6.8.

Disagreement Between the Reviewer and Post Holder If there is a disagreement between the post holder and the reviewer about the demonstration of knowledge and skills at a gateway review, the post holder will have the right to request a review before a final decision is made.

The review should be undertaken by the next level manager (or “grandparent”) and agreed between the reviewer and the post holder. If the issues still cannot be resolved the appeals process may be invoked (see section 6.13) Any progression will be deferred whilst the issue is resolved but should the post holders concerns be supported they will have their increment backdated to their incremental date.

.6.9.

Failure to demonstrate required development at a Gateway At the two gateway reviews on the pay spine the post holder’s existing knowledge and skills should meet those specified in the: Foundation Gateway – KSF outline subset Second Gateway – full KSF outline Where the post holder and reviewer agree that the post holder is unable to demonstrate the required knowledge and skills, it must be agreed where the responsibility for this lies. Again, if this cannot be resolved then the next level manager or “grandparent” must be involved,

.6.9.1. Where the post holder has not had the opportunity to achieve the knowledge and skills required If the post holder is unable to demonstrate the application of the necessary knowledge and skills for the appropriate gateway and this is due to there being no relevant learning opportunities e.g. the post holder could not be released from the workplace to attend agreed training, the post holder will progress through the gateway.

The manager must then take actions to ensure that the post holder receives the required learning and development to acquire the knowledge and skills to meet the KSF dimensions and levels required for that post. Post holders are responsible for taking reasonable steps to ensure they achieve the development required for the levels in their KSF outline.

If, on review, the post outline is felt to not be reflective of the actual demands of the post this must be referred back to the KSF group for consistency checking.

11

.6.9.2. Where the post holder is unable to demonstrate the knowledge and skills required If it can be demonstrated that the post holder did not pursue the necessary training and development outlined in their PDP, or has been unable to demonstrate the required development, and it was not the result of management inaction, as outlined above, pay progression to the next increment on the pay spine will be deferred.

Some post holders may have difficulty demonstrating a knowledge or skill across all areas of application due to lack of opportunity e.g. child protection for staff who may not have direct involvement in such an issue during the review period. In such cases the issue should have been identified at previous reviews and opportunities sought for the post-holder to demonstrate the skill. If they have genuinely been unable to find such an opportunity then they should proceed through the gateway but with this as a continuing development need, to be addressed as soon as is practicable.

Pay progression may only be deferred where there has been a prior discussion, which should be recorded, at which the knowledge and skills the individual needs to demonstrate have been explained to them and a reasonable opportunity given to them to demonstrate the necessary development. This prior discussion may include previous development reviews and supports the principle of “no surprises”.

Gateway reviews are based on an assessment of knowledge and skills. Therefore if a post holder has not met their work objectives at a Gateway review, this does not itself provide grounds for pay deferment unless it is related to a failure to demonstrate the competencies required for the post. Where there is an on-going problem with the achievement of work objectives, the capability or disciplinary procedure may be invoked.

Deferral will be until the individual has demonstrated the knowledge and skills required to progress through the Gateway and should be for no more than 6 months in normal circumstances. Pay will not be backdated in such cases. The individual’s incremental date will not be changed for future incremental progression.

The Payroll department must be informed that the individual is not to progress through the Gateway in time for them to take the requisite actions. This is the reviewer’s responsibility. The Gateway Monitoring Form (section 14) should be used for this.

The reviewer must agree a short-term development action plan (section 14).

The development plan should clearly identify: • Reason for deferment • KSF dimensions and levels still to be achieved • Reasonable support to the post holder • Review date

12

The review will be undertaken as agreed with the post holder .The post holder will need to demonstrate achievement of the necessary knowledge and skills specified in the post KSF outline, as per the initial development review meeting.

Pay progression will resume from the date on which the review confirms that the post holder is applying the level of knowledge and skills specified in the post KSF outline. The post holder will need to complete the Gateway Monitoring Form and return it to payroll.

A Personal Development Plan should then be agreed for the remaining period. .6.10. Continued Failure to Demonstrate Competence If the post holder is unable to demonstrate they have achieved the necessary knowledge and skills within 6 months of the gateway a formal discussion must be held between the post holder and their reviewer as to the reasons for this.

If reasonable time and resources have been provided to support the post holder and at this stage the post holder is still unable to meet their KSF outline and progress through the gateway, it is recommended that the reviewer seek guidance from the Human Resources team as to whether the PCTs capability procedure should be considered.

It should be noted that where there are serious concerns about an individual’s performance the capability procedure may be invoked at any time, not just at Gateways. Please see section 12 for further guidance on the operation of the capability procedure. .6.11. Progression beyond the Second Gateway Once through the second gateway staff will continue to progress to the top of scale.

The focus of development reviews after the second gateway should focus on developmental issues, supporting the post holder to achieve their career development aims. However there should always be a review against the post KSF outline to ensure the individuals knowledge and skills remain up to date. .6.12. Gateway Review Delayed by Absence The gateway review should take place early enough for the post holder to progress on their normal incremental date. Because of Payroll Department deadlines it is recommended that is done 8 weeks prior to the individual’s incremental date. It is a joint responsibility to ensure this is done on time.

There will be circumstances when the absence of either the reviewer and/or the post holder means that the review does not take place as scheduled. The outcome of this will depend on the nature of the absence. National guidance identifies the need for robust arrangements at Gateway reviews to ensure that there is no incentive to abuse the process.

13

.6.12.1.Maternity//Paternity/Parental/Adoption leave

It is important that staff absent for these reasons do not suffer a detriment because of them. Because the organisation should have notice of the above types of leave there are two options which should be discussed with the individual. a) Bring forward the review date – this can only be done with the agreement of the post holder and would normally be appropriate where they are near the date for their review when their absence commences. If the post holder passes through the gateway this will take effect from their incremental date as usual. If they do not pass the gateway, option (b) will apply. b) Defer until after the post holder returns to work. The outcome of the review will be backdated to the date the post holder should have passed the Gateway, so they will suffer no detriment from the period of leave. The reviewer should meet with the individual soon after their return and agree a short term development action plan to identify any areas where they need to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. The Gateway review should then take place after an agreed period of time, not to exceed 6 months. If they do not pass through the Gateway the process outlined in 6.8. should be followed.

Where the reviewer is absent for any reason where there is advance notice responsibility for carrying out the review should be agreed in advance and a handover carried out to ensure a fair process. .6.12.2.Short term absence – sick leave/annual leave/carer leave etc

Where short term absence of the reviewer or post holder leads to a review meeting being missed there should be time to arrange an alternative date prior to the post holders incremental date.

Where this is not possible progression will be deferred but any decision from the review meeting will be backdated so the individual will suffer no detriment. Payroll must be informed that this decision is to be deferred using the Gateway Monitoring Form.

If there is a belief that a member of staff is deliberately avoiding the meeting a final date will be arranged and the employee informed in writing. Failure to attend that meeting may lead to incremental progression being deferred with no right to backdating.

If a manager fails to provide a reasonable alternative date the post holder will progress through the Gateway automatically.

Any dispute arising from this should be resolved by the “grandparent” in the first instance. .6.12.3.Long term sickness absence

In cases of long term absence, the process outlined for staff on maternity leave in section 6.12.1b should be followed. Reviewers may wish to identify timescales

14

when agreeing return to work plans for staff on long term sickness. An extended period of time with a right to backdating may be seen as a “reasonable adjustment” for staff who are considered to have a disability under the Disability Discrimination Act. Advice should be sought from the Human Resources department and/or Occupational Health in such situations.

If the reviewer is on long term sick leave it is unlikely any handover will have been possible. A replacement reviewer will be identified who is most suitable to complete the process. .6.12.4.Secondment

Where staff are seconded into another role or organisation there will still need to be a Gateway review at the appropriate time. It is suggested that line managers take this into account before agreeing to a secondment. This will depend on a variety of factors and it is important that the arrangements are agreed in advance and confirmed in writing as part of the secondment agreement.

The following issues should be taken into account: • • • • •

•

The length of the secondment and the proximity of the Gateway review will influence how the review may be handled The post holder must be able to fulfil the KSF outline for their substantive post, if the role develops whilst they are seconded they must fulfil the current needs of the post on their return Will the post holder be able to demonstrate some or all of the knowledge and skills required for their substantive post whilst on secondment If so, how will these be assessed and who by? (if the secondment is within the NHS the new manager should be KSF trained and it may be agreed that they conduct the review) On the post holders return it could be agreed that their gateway review will be deferred but with no detriment (i.e. backdated to the original review date) for a period of time after which they will be expected to demonstrate the required skills and knowledge. This deferment should not exceed 6 months.

In such cases a short term development action plan must be agreed with the post holder when they return to their substantive post

If the secondee is unable to demonstrate their development as agreed, their progression will be deferred without right to backdating. However any development action plan will need to take into account their circumstances and identify reasonable timescales. .6.12.5.Career Break

Staff on career break should be made aware that they will not be able to progress through the Gateway until they have returned to work and demonstrated the required knowledge and skills. These will be those that apply to the post on their return, not at the time of the break commencing. The career break agreement should always include discussion about how the individual will keep themselves upto-date. Upon their return a short term development action plan must be agreed 15

and the gateway will be deferred until the individual is ready to undertake the review. This should be no more than 6 months after their return. .6.13. Redeployment and Career Development Moves There will be occasions were staff are redeployed to other roles either at their own request or because of organisational change.

Where this happens it is likely that they will already have passed either the foundation or final gateway in their previous post and be on a rate of pay part way up or at the top of the new scale.

The individual should be given reasonable time to acquire the necessary skills for the new post and this should be agreed at the time of the move. Where they are due for a gateway review all circumstance should be taken into account in deciding how long to defer the review and whether backdating is appropriate.

Backdating would normally be offered where the individual has been redeployed through organisational change or due to health issues and would not normally be offered where the move was through personal choice.

Where a post holder is redeployed above the final gateway but cannot demonstrate the necessary knowledge and skills for the job after a reasonable period of time a short-term action plan must be agreed and failure to comply with this should be dealt with under the Capability procedure. .6.14. Appeals If the post holder is in disagreement with the reviewer at any stage of the Gateway review, they should first refer to their “grandparent� who will try to resolve the issue informally.

Where a disagreement remains unresolved, the post holder may seek a further review by putting their request in writing to the HR department. A formal meeting will be convened and a decision made by a panel consisting of a manager and a staff representative, both of whom will be KSF trained. The HR department will identify an appropriate appeal panel in consultation with the post holder and grandparent. It must be ensured that the manager and staff representative involved should have the necessary professional background to be able to make a decision but should not work directly with the post holder.

There will be no further right of appeal. .6.15. Equal Opportunities The Gateway policy and process must not discriminate on the grounds of race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, religious belief or age. The outcomes of Gateway reviews will be monitored by the KSF Group to ensure an equitable standard is maintained across the organisation.

16

.7.0.

Study Leave It is important that all study leave is agreed in accordance with the PCT policy on study leave. This will also help identify the level of financial support that will be provided by the PCT. It is an intention of the NHS, supported by the KSF agreement that the NHS must move away from a culture where all knowledge and skills are acquired in a formal classroom environment and evidenced by a certificate.

The KSF is intended to reward staff for demonstrating learning in a variety of ways – mentoring, on the job learning, learning through experience, e-learning, distance learning etc, although there will also be times when a more traditional formal course is appropriate.

Managers and staff should also understand that development takes places continuously and that learning and development activities can be prioritised over the period of time until the Second Gateway is reached.

Whilst the PCTs are committed to ensuring development for all staff; access to education and development opportunities will be prioritised for those still working towards their final gateway.

.7.1.

Reviewer Responsibilities The reviewer is jointly responsible, with the post holder, for ensuring that the development review takes place on time.

The reviewer must ensure that agreed development around the KSF is appropriate for the post holder to be able to demonstrate the required knowledge and skills.

The reviewer should also provide guidance to the post holder about what sorts of evidence they might be expected to provide to demonstrate they have acquired the knowledge/skill. The reviewer must also consider how the post holder will demonstrate learning outside the workplace through their work activities or how the post holder can demonstrate a particular skill if they do not currently have the opportunity to demonstrate it in their usual work.

Where particular training and/or learning is identified as part of the PDP the reviewer is responsible for ensuring that there is an opportunity to attend the relevant training/learning activity. Failure to provide a reasonable opportunity to attend agreed training would mean that the reviewee would automatically progress through any gateway.

The reviewer is responsible for signing off the PDP and ensuring completion of all documentation – both paper and electronic.

.7.2.

Post Holder Responsibilities The post holder is jointly responsible, with the reviewer, for ensuring that the development review takes place.

17

The post holder must complete agreed training/learning activities unless there is a reasonable explanation for why they could not.

Post holders are responsible for collecting evidence to bring to the development review meeting to demonstrate that they have acquired the required knowledge and skills. Where the training is away from the workplace this should normally include evidence of how the knowledge and/or skill has been applied to their role. .8.0.

Statutory and Mandatory Training Statutory training is training that staff must undertake by law. Fire training is a statutory requirement for all employees.

Mandatory training is compulsory for staff either through external guidance or as a local PCT requirement. The PCT requirements for mandatory training are available from the Human Resources department. These requirements will be amended from time to time and it is important that all staff are aware of their responsibilities.

It is expected that staff will be able to demonstrate they have attended all relevant mandatory training as part of their development review. This links to core KSF dimensions 2: Personal and People Development and 3: Health, Safety and Security as well as specific dimensions according to role. Failure to attend mandatory training would be a valid reason for not progressing through a Gateway.

.9.0.

Using the KSF for Recruitment A KSF outline must be developed for any post that is to be advertised, this will include the subset to be considered at the foundation gateway.

The organisation will not be able to advertise posts without a KSF outline. In the future, as NHS staff become familiar with the KSF it is likely that the outline will replace the parts of the person specification that capture knowledge, skills and experience.

Currently, the KSF outline will support the recruitment process because it will help identify the knowledge and skills required by the appointee to the post. It will therefore help determine areas for questioning at interview and where additional testing may be required, for instance through a presentation or written exercise.

.9.1.

Determining Salaries on Commencement The KSF will allow a fair assessment of the prior experience of candidates from outside the NHS. This process must ensure that new entrants are neither advantaged nor disadvantaged for not having previously worked in the NHS. Staff currently working in the NHS are appointed to a new pay band according to Agenda for Change terms and conditions i.e. “on the minimum of the new pay band or, if this would result in no pay increase, at the first pay point that would deliver an increase in pay�.

18

Staff who are new entrants to the NHS will normally be appointed at the minimum of the band. However it is recognised that there are occasions when experienced candidates move into the NHS who may have significant other knowledge and skills which will benefit the NHS and whom the appointing officer may wish to appoint on a higher increment on the pay band. In such cases the appointing officer must identify the skills and experience that justify such a decision against the KSF outline for the post and record these in writing for audit purposes. Advice may be sought from the HR department.

The individual will still be expected to go through the foundation review within 12 months of appointment in all cases. However where the new starter is appointed towards the top of scale, either within 12 months of the Final Gateway point or above it, the Foundation review will take place against the Full KSF outline. The appointing officer must take this into account in determining the individuals starting increment when making such an offer.

Where an appointment is to the top of a band there is obviously not a pay implication of failing to progress through a gateway. However if the individual cannot not meet the final gateway outline then the same process should be followed i.e. a short term action plan should be developed and failure to complete with this would be dealt with as a capability issue. .10.0. Induction The “induction crisis� is a well recognised phenomenon. Staff who are not adequately inducted into the workplace are significantly more likely to leave early.

Time spent on getting the induction process right will repay itself many times by reducing the time and expense involved in recruiting to the same post again or taking remedial action after an accident/incident.

The subset of the full KSF outline identifies the basic knowledge and skills required from the outset in a post. This should therefore be used to focus the development of the individual during their first year so they can fulfil the essential demands of the post. In identifying priorities for the induction period you may wish to refer to any exit interview information gathered from the previous post holder.

Where staff are in the same role then the subset must be the same for all of them.

As with the full outline it must focus on the post not the post holder.

The KSF process should guide the development of the individual during their induction period. During their first year in post all staff will have at least two meetings with their reviewer to assess their progress towards achieving the Foundation Gateway.

Obviously issues such as security, health and safety, policies and procedures need to be picked up almost immediately with a new starter. The PCT induction checklist should be referred to and completed. A copy of this must be placed on the individual’s personal file.

19

However once they have settled in, but still as part of the induction period, a discussion should be held to identify the immediate development needs of the post holder and the support that they will require.

It is good practice to ensure regular contact throughout the year to monitor progress. The formal foundation gateway review will then take place before the end of the 12 month foundation period. Please refer to section 6 for more information on the operation of gateways .10.1. Preceptorship It should be noted that preceptorship is a concept that applies to many posts in the NHS and is in line with good practice. However this should not be confused with the concept of preceptorship and accelerated progression under the NHS terms and conditions, which only applies in the following specific circumstances. Please refer to the PCT policy on Preceptorship The new NHS terms and conditions allow for accelerated progression through the first two increments for new entrants on Band 5 only, who will go through a 12 month period of preceptorship or supported development. Successful completion of the preceptorship period will mean that the individual advances to the second incremental point at six months service and then to the third increment when they pass through the Foundation Gateway at 12 months. Further pay progression will then be an annual process.

It has been agreed locally that the concept of preceptorship as outlined in the national agreement should apply to a wider definition of “professional� staff. This includes staff for whom there are recognised professional standards, codes of conduct and/or a regulatory body.

It is also assumed that in terms of preceptorship new entrants would be commencing at the bottom point of the scale as the accelerated progression only applies to the first two points on the band. It would not apply if prior experience meant the post holder was appointed above the bottom point on the scale. .10.2. Preceptorship in practice As part of the induction a preceptor will be identified for the post holder and their development objectives identified for their first six months in post.

Prior to 6 months service a review meeting will take place which will be informed by the preceptor. This may be either through a report to the meeting, agreed between the post holder and preceptor; or it may be through a three-way review meeting with the preceptor joining the reviewer and post holder. The decision reached at the meeting will however be agreed between the reviewer and post holder with the preceptor acting in an advisory capacity only.

If it is agreed that the post holder is on course to pass the Foundation Gateway review payroll should be informed through the Gateway Monitoring Form and the post holder will move to the second incremental point at 6 months service. Payroll

20

will not assume this increment is to be received automatically and so the manager must inform payroll of this change.

If the post holder is not on course to pass the Foundation Gateway review a development plan must be identified for them which they will work towards with their preceptor. They will receive the second increment from the date this is signed off as completed by their preceptor and reviewer.

If this is not achieved by the Foundation Gateway review the post holder will be unable to progress through the Foundation Gateway.

At 12 months the Foundation Gateway will take place as it would for any member of staff. On successful completion of this review the post holder will progress to the third incremental point. .11.0. Confidentiality All information relating to the review of the individual against their post KSF outline is confidential. This should be recorded electronically on the e-KSF forms. Where these are not yet available paper copies should be kept on the individuals personal file. Managers should therefore ensure that the review process is carried out in an appropriate environment where confidentiality can be assured.

If the individual is not to progress through a gateway then the payroll department must be informed by a returned KSF Gateway Progress Monitoring Form.

Information recorded in PDPs may be accessed by the organisation for the purposes of analysing development needs across groups of staff or across the entire organisation. .12.

Capability issues Where an issue of capability arises, this should be dealt with in line with the PCT policy on managing capability.

The KSF outline and review process should support the operation of the above policy.

Failure to pass through a Gateway will not be deemed as automatically invoking the capability procedure. However, a short term development action plan must be drawn up and if the post holder is unable to comply with this by the end of action plan review date, a formal meeting MUST be held under the PCT Capability procedure. The maximum time allowed for the development action plan to be completed is 6 months.

Where staff are undergoing a capability procedure at the time of a Gateway review meeting they will be unable to progress through the Gateway until the capability issues have been resolved.

21

Terms and Conditions allow for pay progression to be frozen at any point in exceptional circumstances: “Where significant weaknesses in performance in the current post have been identified and discussed and documented with the staff member concerned and they have not been resolved despite opportunities for appropriate training/development and support, exceptionally pay progression may be deferred at any point until the problems are resolved�.

NHS Terms and Conditions of Service Handbook, November 2004 If a reviewer feels such a situation may apply they should discuss this with the HR department. This must be linked to a formal capability process. .13.

The e-KSF The KSF is supported by an internet based software package known as the e-KSF. The e-KSF will be rolled out across the organisation in due course and training will be provided for staff in the use of the system.

The advantages of the e-KSF will be to reduce the time and paperwork involved as it will enable documentation such as PDPs to be completed on line. The system will also be able to send reminders where reviews are due and flag up to the KSF Administrator if they are overdue. This should reduce the burden on all staff to keep track of where they are in the process.

The e-KSF will also allow access to a national library of KSF profiles to help staff identify their development needs in relation to their future career progression.

.14.

Appendix 1 KSF/PDR Documentation

.15.

Appendix 2 Responsibilities of Reviewers and Post holders during PDR

.16.

Appendix 3 Position of Second Gateway

.17.

Appendix 4 Gateway Monitoring Form

.18.

Appendix 5 Short Term Development Action Plan

22

Appendix One PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 1 – Background Information

For period from and to (based on incremental date): Individual’s name

Post title and place of work

Staff Group category

Name of person undertaking the review and their position in the organisation Main aspects of the individual’s post

Is a pay progression gateway applicable at this review? If so, which? (Foundation or Full) To whom the form should be forwarded once completed (e.g. HR department)

23

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 2 – Review of Performance NHS KSF dimensions and their level – CORE (please use KSF outline to identify dimension and examples of application

Achieved (Yes/No)

Areas for development (what part of the dimension is currently not being met)

Evidence for decision

Comments

1. Communication

2. Personal and people development

3. Health, safety and security

4. Service improvement

5. Quality

6. Equality and diversity

24

Section 2 (continued) NHS KSF dimensions and their level – SPECIFIC – add those agreed for the post below

Achieved (Yes/No)

Areas for development (what part of the dimension is currently not being met)

Evidence for decision

Comments

Dimensions for career progression

Achieved (Yes/No)

Areas for development (what part of the dimension is currently not being met)

Evidence for decision

Comments

Signature of individual

Date

Name of individual

Signature of reviewer

Date

Name of reviewer

Date of next review

25

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 3 – Job Objectives Date Objective Set

Key Objective (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time bound)

Constraints Identified (what, outside of this individual’s control, might stop them achieving the objective)

Action Plan and Evaluation Process (how the objective is going to be achieved, and how it will be measured)

Status – Has the objective been achieved (Yes/No)

Comments (Why the objective has not been achieved – whether or not it should be carried forward to the following year)

26

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 4 – Personal Development Record and Evaluation Date learning objective set

Learning and development activity

Priority (high, medium, low)

Has the learning activity been a) completed & b) effective?

How will you apply this learning to your work?

Signature of individual

Date

Name of individual

Signature of reviewer

Date

Name of reviewer

Who else could you share this learning with?

27

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 4 continued – Planning Development Relevant dimensions

What is the development need/interest?

What will I do to develop myself?

How will I know I have done this?

What is the date for planned completion?

What support do I need & where will I get it?

Signature of individual

Date

Name of individual

Signature of reviewer

Date

Name of reviewer

What are the barriers & how can I overcome them?

28

Appendix Two

Responsibilities of Reviewers and Post holders during PDR They must both: •

Make a note of when their PDR meeting is due and ensure protected time and space for the review and planning stages is set aside within 8 weeks of the post holders incremental date.

•

make sure that they are fully prepared for the process including having the right materials available at the time (such as the KSF outline for the post and the gateway)

•

agree the time, location and venue of the review

•

gather information on the individual’s work against the KSF outline for the post – this could be their own views of the individual’s work, outputs from the individual’s work (eg records, accounts) or be information from other people who have worked with the individual

•

participate fully in the process

•

jointly review the information that is available on the individual’s work and come to a decision about how it meets the KSF post outline and where there are areas for development

•

record the outcomes of the review meeting and each keep a copy.

Post holder responsibilities: •

ensure that they understand the KSF outline for their post

•

reflect on their work against the KSF post outline using feedback from others as well as their own thoughts and views

•

identify the different ways they can show where and how they have met the KSF post outline

•

identify where they need further development and suggest those areas that seem to be the most important.

Reviewer Responsibilities: •

ensure that they understand the KSF outline for the post they are reviewing

• •

undertake appropriate equality training and development to ensure that they work equitably with all members of staff

•

identify if a post holder has particular needs for support to ensure that the process is fair for that individual 29

•

review the post holder’s work against the KSF outline for their post

•

identify the different ways the post holder has shown s/he has met the KSF outline for the post in which they are employed

•

facilitate a joint discussion between themselves and the post holder about the individual’s work using the KSF post outline as the basis, and managing different points of view

• •

work jointly with the post holder to identify where the individual needs further development and the areas that are most important.

30

Appendix Three

Position of Second Gateway Position of Second Gateway

Pay Band Pay Band 1

Before final point

Pay bands 2 – 4

Before first of last two points

Pay Bands 5 – 7

Before first of last three points

Pay Band 8, ranges A – D

Before final point

Pay Band 9

Before final point

31

Appendix Four

Gateway Monitoring Form This form must be completed in the following circumstances: Part 1 Deferral of Pay at a Foundation or Second Gateway review Part 2 Successful completion of preceptorship (Band 5 only) Part 3 Renewal of pay progression following a deferment Reference must be made to the KSF Policy and Guidance in completing this form.

Post Holder ______________________________ Payroll Number:____________________

Job Title: __________________________________________________________________

Reviewer: _______________________________

*Part 1 Deferral of Pay at a Foundation or Final Gateway review The above member of staff is not able to progress through their *foundation/final gateway. A review date has been agreed and I shall inform you of the outcome at this time.

Review Date: ____________________________

*Part 2 Successful completion of preceptorship (Band 5 only) The above member of staff has been assessed after 6 months service and is making satisfactory progress towards completion of the foundation gateway. They should therefore progress to the second point on Band 5 with effect from: Date of Progression: ___________________________ NB. This should be 6 months from the date of appointment unless the decision was deferred.

* Part 3 Renewal of pay progression following a deferment The above member of staff’s incremental progression was deferred at their *foundation/final gateway.

Following a further review it has been agreed that their pay progression *will continue from/be backdated to: Date: ______________________________

Signed (post holder): _______________________________ Date: _____________________

Signed (reviewer): _______________________________ Date: _____________________

Please return one copy of this form to the payroll department ensuring they have adequate notice to action the changes. The reviewer and post holder should retain copies. * Delete as applicable

32

Appendix Five SHORT TERM DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLAN This form must be completed where an individual has not been able to demonstrate the required knowledge and skills at a Gateway on their pay band. All actions identified within this plan must be achievable within 6 months.

Reference must be made to the KSF Policy and Guidance in completing this form.

Post Holder ______________________________

Job Title: __________________________________________________________________

Reviewer: _______________________________ Dimension

Agreed Actions/Support Required/ Evidence to be presented

Date to be achieved by

A copy of this form should be given to the post holder

33