Domain 1—delivering a high quality service | Evidence should show achievements in delivering a service which is safe, has measurably effective clinical outcomes, provides good patient experience and where opportunities for improvement are consistently sought and implemented. |
0 (Does not meet contractual requirements or when insufficient information has been produced to make a judgment.) | |
2 (Meets contractual requirements) | Performance in some aspects of the role could be assessed as ‘over and above’ expected standards. But generally, on the evidence provided, contractual obligations are fulfilled to competent standards and no more. |
6 (Over and above contractual requirements) | Some duties are performed in line with the criteria for ‘Excellent’, as below. However, on the evidence provided, most are delivered above contractual requirements, without being in the highest category. |
10 (Excellent) | Applicants could show evidence of performance over and above the standard expected in one or more of the following (this list is not exhaustive):
|
Domain 2—developing a high quality service | Evidence should show how applicants have significantly enhanced clinical effectiveness (the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness) of services locally and more widely within the NHS if this is the case. |
0 (Does not meet contractual requirements or when insufficient information has been produced to make a judgement) | |
2 (Meets contractual requirements) | The applicant has fully achieved their service-based goals and provided comprehensive services to a consistently high level. But there is no evidence of them making any major enhancements or improvements. |
6 (Over and above contractual requirements) | The applicant has made high quality service developments, improvements or innovations that have contributed to a better and more effective service delivery. This could be demonstrated by:
|
For this score, the activity would be expected at local and possibly regional level—especially if in the face of difficult circumstances or constraints. | |
10 (Excellent) | In addition to some or all of the achievements listed in 6, applicants could show evidence of performance over and above the standard expected in one or more of the following (this is not exhaustive):
|
Domain 3—leadership and managing a high quality service | Evidence should show how applicants have made a substantial personal contribution to leading and managing a local service or national/international service or health policy development. |
0 (Does not meet contractual requirements or when insufficient information has been produced to make a judgement) | |
2 (Meets contractual requirements) | Applicants should receive this score if they provide evidence of successfully contributing to the running of a trust or unit, especially in difficult circumstances, and maintaining excellent staff relations—by encouraging colleagues in nursing and other professionals ancillary to medicine. |
6 (Over and above contractual requirements) | To score 6 points, applicants must show successful management skills, especially in innovative development and hard pressed services. They may also have been involved in recognised advisory committee work, at area and particularly national level (especially if as secretary or chair). Other criteria that would merit this score include effective chairing of a trust or university committee as, for example, clinical director. Look also for examples of how applicants have carried out appraisals for peers/non-career grade doctors or been involved in major reviews, enquiries or investigations or as part of a College/Specialty Advisory Committee. ACCEA does not expect to reward membership of such committees in itself. You should look for evidence that the contribution made by the applicant has been over and above expectations. |
10 (Excellent) | In addition to some achievement acquiring a score of 6, applicants scoring 10 in this domain will have shown evidence of outstanding administrative achievement in a leadership role—as confirmed by their employer and/or other citations. Medical directors and other clinical managers should not be given this score purely because they hold the post—there must be clear evidence that they have distinguished themselves by leadership in advancement of health policy and delivery. |
Other evidence that could merit this score includes (this list is not exhaustive):
| |
Domain 4—research and innovation | Evidence should show how applicants have made a contribution to research or the evidence/evaluative base for quality or service innovation including the translation of evidence in to practice. |
Assessors should note evidence of the impact of research on improvement in healthcare and health. | |
0 (Does not meet contractual requirements or when insufficient information has been produced to make a judgement) | |
2 (Meets contractual requirements) | If the applicant is an academic consultant, they should be considered by their employer to be ‘research active’—at a level commensurate with their contract. This rating would be based on the applicant's research output and associated publications within the past 5 years. |
If he or she is an NHS consultant, they will have undertaken clinical research, alone or in collaboration, which has resulted in publications. Or they may have collaborated actively in basic research projects established by others. They may also have actively encouraged research by junior staff and supervised their work. | |
6 (Over and above contractual requirements) | There will be evidence of the applicant having made a sustained personal contribution in basic or clinical research which could be demonstrated by:
|
10 (Excellent) | In addition to some or all of the achievements listed in 6, applicants could show evidence of performance over and above the standard expected in one or more of the following (this list is not exhaustive):
|
Domain 5—teaching and training | Evidence should show how teaching and training forms a major part of the contribution applicants make to the NHS, over and above contractual obligations. |
0 (Does not meet contractual requirements or when insufficient information has been produced to make a judgement) | |
2 (Meets contractual requirements) | Evidence of having fulfilled the teaching/training expectations identified in the job plan, in terms of quality and quantity. |
6 (Over and above contractual requirements) | Applicants could present evidence in the following areas: |
| |
10 (Excellent) | In addition to some or all of the achievements listed in 6, applicants could show evidence of performance over and above the standard expected in one or more of the following (this list is not exhaustive):
|
ACCEA, Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards.