FAQs

The establishment of OHPA was a key proposal made by the then Government following recommendations by Dame Janet Smith, who chaired the Shipman Inquiry. Dame Janet recommended that there should be clear separation between the power to investigate and the power to adjudicate concerns about health professionals.

When concerns are raised about the fitness to practise of a health professional it is currently the responsibility of the organisation which regulates that profession to investigate and adjudicate the case.

This would have changed had taken over the adjudication of fitness to practice cases from the General Medical Council (GMC) and from the General Optical Council (GOC). Until the legislation is repealed, OHPA remains an independent body created under the Health and Social Care Act (2008).

OHPA became a legal entity on 25 January 2010. Had the programme gone ahead, OHPA would have taken over responsibility for hearing cases of fitness to practice from the General Medical Council (GMC) and from the General Optical Council (GOC) some time in 2011 or 2012.

The needs and rights of patients were to be a priority for OHPA. Independent adjudication was intended to bring many benefits and patients would have had the opportunity to participate in key consultation activities. Information about future consultations would have been posted on this website.

There would have been a clear separation of investigation and prosecution from adjudication. OHPA remains an independent body, wholly separate from the healthcare regulators. Our reforms were expected to reduce the time taken to bring adjudications to a close and to have reduced the costs of the process.

Had OHPA gone ahead, the General Medical Council and the General Optical Council would have remained the regulators for doctors and opticians respectively. They would have continued to exercise the following functions in relation to fitness to practise:

• Setting the standards for professional practice for doctors or opticians;
• Receiving and investigating allegations about the fitness to practise of doctors or opticians;
• Deciding whether to refer healthcare professionals to a fitness to practise hearing;
• Setting indicative sanctions guidance, i.e. the guidance that OHPA panels will use to decide which sanctions are appropriate for particular health, conduct or performance issues.

Had the OHPA programme gone ahead, there was the potential over time that the adjudication functions of other healthcare professional regulators might have transferred to OHPA.

If the OHPA programme had gone ahead, OHPA would have taken over the adjudication of cases from the General Medical Council – including those cases that have already started. To ensure a smooth transition OHPA would have used adapted GMC rules at first and then brought in its own rules. Consultation on the OHPA rules would have taken place and there would have been opportunities to participate in this.

OHPA panels would have been made up of a chair, lay members and professionally qualified members each selected from lists of eligible persons as provided for in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and OHPA Rules.

The formation of panels was to be in line with the current adjudication arrangements of the GMC and the GOC.

OHPA became a legal entity on 25 January 2010. Walter Merricks CBE was appointed as chair and Stephen Shaw CBE joined as chief executive in May 2010. They are on the five-member board which also has three non-executive members: Andrew Colquhoun, Pamela Charlwood and Dame Janet Finch.  A small team, reporting to the board, was in place had it been decided to make OHPA operational.

The Department of Health (England) will continue to oversee and fund OHPA during our set-up phase.

OHPA was initially to be funded by a grant-in-aid to cover its establishment costs. Once fully operational, it would have secured its funding from the regulatory bodies using its services.

More information about the intended funding arrangements for OHPA can be found in the Health and Social Care Act 2008.