The following chart illustrates the proposed single screening model:
Modernizing
the Practice
of Veterinary
Medicine
Investigations & Resolutions Process
Intake/Screening (Staff)
Resolved
INVESTIGATIONS
& RESOLUTIONS
Investigations &
Resolutions Committee
Referral to alternative dispute
resolution (mandatory process
in certain cases)
Dismiss (frivolous
and vexatious/lack of
jurisdiction)
Case Review (can appoint
investigator)
Not resolved.
Referred to I&R
Committee
resolution
reviewed and
ratified by I&R
Committee
take no
action*
issue
caution*
refer
allegations of
professional
misconduct to the
Discipline Committee
if the allegation(s)
relates to the
complaint
refer member to the
Board of Inquiry if
panel has reasonable
and probably grounds
to believe member is
incapacitated
hold that member
must undertake a
(mandatory) Specified
Continuing Educational
or Remediation
Program
refer allegations of
incapacity to fitness to
practice hearing
* can be apealed to HPARB (only cases that originated as complaints can be appelaed to HPARB, not those orginitating as
reports or inquiries.
•Screening Model•
Why is the College Considering Changes to this Concept?
The current system is cumbersome and confusing with respect to why a
specific stream is most appropriate for a particular case. The Complaints
Committee’s inability to directly appoint an investigator leads to lengthy
processing times and public dissatisfaction. Another challenge is the lack of
transparency with respect to the Executive Committee stream, as the Executive
Committee does not have the power to share information with another
party, even if a case originated with a party making a complaint, which was
transferred to the Executive Committee stream to ensure a robust investigation.
The proposed screening model eliminates the current model’s two distinct
streams with different investigative powers, levels of transparency, and appeal
processes.
The introduction of mandatory alternative dispute resolution in defined cases
will allow for facilitating mediated solutions to a dispute, which contributes
to greater satisfaction for several reasons. A solution to a complaint which is
crafted by a complainant and the veterinarian involved has been shown to
allow for faster resolution, tailored resolutions, increased compliance, and can
foster a climate of co-operation and openness even if a voluntary resolution is
not reached.
The introduction of the power to require a member to undergo mandatory
remediation and educative programs would strengthen the College’s powers
to undertake remedial solutions where appropriate, and preferable to
discipline. Current voluntary undertakings, while at times effective, can only be
offered if a discipline hearing is viable in case of an agreement for remediation
not being reached. This deters a committee from seeking remediation in cases
where it would be a preferable public protection option.
The single screening model aims to reduce the inefficiencies and lack of
transparency in the current model and strengthen education and remediation
options, while maintaining procedural fairness for all parties.
28 Achieving a Modern Approach to the Regulation of Veterinary Medicine in Ontario