Decision Making Tools and Strategic Documents
Decision Making Tools
The College is committed to fairness and transparency, and this commitment is why we will be posting our decision making tools online.
Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement
Our Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) Statement is our new tool for policy development.
Our regulatory impact assessment is an assessment of the expected impact of each regulatory or policy initiative that must be done before any regulatory measure is introduced or revised. The results of this analysis are, in effect, a justification of the need for regulation. Regulatory impact assessment is designed to help decision-makers (e.g. staff, Committees):
- Understand the impact of decisions;
- Structure ideas,
- Test assumptions; and
- Think beyond a regulation-based solution as the default.
Every policy proposal designed to introduce a regulatory tool must be accompanied by a regulatory impact assessment (RIA) statement. This tool is designed to encourage rigour and better policy outcomes from the beginning and addresses the following questions:
- What is the problem you are trying to solve? Is it about risk of harm?
- Are the risks you have identified currently managed?
- Are there any alternatives to regulation that mitigate identified risks? Can the issue be resolved locally?
- Will the burden imposed by regulation be greater than the benefits of regulation?
- What regulatory measures are you recommending to introduce?
- How are you planning to implement and evaluate your proposed policy option?
Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee Risk Assessment Framework
The College of Midwives of Ontario’s Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee (ICRC) investigates public complaints and information the College receives through reports regarding concerns related to professional misconduct, incompetence, or incapacity. Based on this, the Committee decides whether the concerns warrant a referral to the Discipline or Fitness to Practise committee or if some other action would better serve the public interest.
The College is committed to fairness and transparency. This commitment led to the development of the ICRC Risk Assessment Framework, and to the College’s decision to post decision making tools online. Designed to guide panels in their assessment of complaints and reports, this tool aids panel members in making fair, consistent and transparent decisions, and assists panel members when considering clinical and/or practice issues that may be raised in complaints and reports, along with the risk of harm they pose to clients and the public interest.
Risk is categorized into one of four categories: No or minimal risk; low risk; moderate risk; or high risk. By categorizing all actions into risk categories, decision makers on the panel are able to uniformly assess each complaint and report, enabling transparent, consistent and fair decision-making.
For each complaint and report, the ICRC panel will assess the concerns using the following categories:
- Demonstrating Professional Knowledge & Practice
- Providing Person-Centred Care
- Demonstrating Leadership and Collaboration
- Acting with Integrity
- Being Committed to Self-Regulation
In each situation there can be aggravating factors and mitigating factors, which will be considered by the panel. Some examples of aggravating factors include prior history, intent, and harm to the client. Some examples of mitigating factors include willingness to address the issue(s), cooperation, remorse, and no harm to the client.
Click here to read the full ICRC Risk Assessment Tool. For more information on the College’s complaints process, please see here.
Quality Assurance Program Non-Compliance Decision-Making Tool
This framework guides decision-making regarding Quality Assurance Program (QAP) non-compliance thereby enabling a transparent, consistent and fair process. The tool guides Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) panels in their evaluation of a member’s demonstrated accountability to the QAP.
Click to review the QAP Non-compliance Decision Making Tool
Registration Panel Risk Assessment Tool for Determining Requalification Programs
All members and applicants re-entering active practice are required to demonstrate clinical competence in accordance with the requirements set out in the Registration Regulation, made under the Midwifery Act, 1991. Where a member or an applicant has a clinical experience shortfall or deficiency, a requirement for clinical experience may be met by successfully completing a requalification program that has been approved by a panel of Registration Committee for that purpose.
This tool is designed to support registration panel consistent decision-making when:
- Assessing the extent to which deficiencies identified in a member’s or an applicant’s clinical experience affect their ability to provide competent midwifery care, and
- Identifying what measures should be taken to satisfactorily address the deficiencies in the applicant’s or the member’s clinical experience.
Click here to review the Registration Panel Risk Assessment Tool for Determining Requalification Programs.
Registration Panel Risk Assessment Tool for Determining Active Practice Requirements Shortfall Plans and Outcomes
To maintain a General certificate of registration, all members in the General class are required to actively practise the profession in accordance with the s. 12 of the Registration Regulation, made under the Midwifery Act, 1991. Where a member has a shortfall in birth numbers and does not meet the active practice requirements (APR), the member is referred to a panel of the Registration Committee for consideration of a shortfall plan, existence of extenuating circumstances or the need for a term, condition or limitation to be imposed on the certificate of registration.
This tool is designed to support registration panel consistent decision-making when:
- Assessing the extent to which shortfalls in members’ active practice affect their ability to provide competent midwifery care, and
- Identifying what measures should be taken to satisfactorily address the deficiencies in the member’s active practice.
Strategic Framework & Strategic Plan
The 2021-2026 Strategic Framework is a high-level statement of the College’s vision, mission, outcomes and key priorities over the next five years. It paves the way forward for the organization, builds a stronger sense of common purpose and direction and a shared understanding of why we exist, what guides our work, and what we want to achieve as an organization.
2017-2020 Strategic Plan and Framework
Click here to read our archived 2017-2020 Strategic Framework.
Click here to read our archived 2017-2020 Strategic Plan.
Public Engagement Strategy
The role of the College of Midwives of Ontario is to set standards of education, training, conduct and performance necessary to ensure that clients receive high quality midwifery care. Our regulatory activities are driven by our duty to act in the public interest, meaning that we put public at the forefront of all of our work. Our mandate and vision reflect this, as does our Strategic Plan and the associated strategic priorities.
In our 2017-2020 Strategic Plan (see above), we identified Public Participation & Engagement as one of our strategic priorities.
To help us achieve our priorities, and to make sure we are regulating appropriately in the interests of the public and clients of midwifery services, we have developed a strategy around public participation and engagement. This strategy sets out the principles and model we will work to starting from 2018 onwards.
Click to read our Public Engagement Strategy
Stakeholder Engagement Strategy
The role of the College of Midwives of Ontario is to protect client safety and maintain public confidence in midwifery services. To achieve this, we register qualified midwifery professionals, set professional standards and standards for continuous education and professional development, and investigate complaints and reports about professionals’ competence, conduct and fitness to practise.
We cannot effectively fulfil our mandate of regulating in the public interest without thoughtful engagement with stakeholders. We believe that we do better working with others, and that maintaining quality relationships with our stakeholders will enable us to achieve better regulatory outcomes. We recognize the limits of our own statutory powers and responsibilities. Our focus is always on the needs of the clients and the public and by building a comprehensive stakeholder engagement we will ensure that issues are dealt with by the most appropriate organization rather than simply falling outside our remit.