2018-09-21

Page Content

Background

The scope of TIS was developed in 2015 through a requirements gathering process that involved all teams.  A lot has happened since 2015, so we need to re-verify what we understand to be TIS.  This will help us plan the future objectively.  Part of the future planning will be process alignment, so that when we start to look at new developments we do so with assurance that we have already agreed a standard approach. 

Agenda

Link to Agenda

Attendees

Link to Attendee list

Morning session - High priority components

Key: Current, Near, Further, Future, Ongoing

Additional notes:

• Reference tables management raised as an issue to be addressed
• Show & Tell - Priority of requirements to be raised with Business Managers and Show & Tell, or speaking to Rob Pink. 
• Priority of new developments against stabilisation of existing functionality was raised. Upon discussion, only 1 person found it of a priority to prioritise stabilisation over new developments. 

• Case Study - Post Funding, work to address Post Funding:

  • Settled on when trying to work out a Post occupancy report
  • Revealed Inconsistencies in Data due to variation in practice across teams.
  • Invlove National Finance to get their steer

Afternoon session - Process Alignment notes

Interim Assessments

• Recording of PYAs - process for recording this on TIS requires alignment (Joanne Watson (Unlicensed))
• Terminology alignment and National Taxonomy definition for TIS
• Recording of Interim Assessments v.s. Educational reviews
  • Do we need to record Interim type?
  • Interim assessment is not an assessment but an event and should ideally be part of event recording
  • Agreement by the audience was - Do not record interim reviews.
  • SOP to be reviewed to reflect these and communicated. Sharepoint to be updated.
  • Educate Local area staffs on Procedures
• API - Integration with E-portfolio, this require data sets to be analysed and agreed as a Longer term piece of work to avoid duplication of work in recording assessment. Link to share information.

Trainee leavers Process

• Leaving destination - recording where trainees are going
• Why do we need to record this? - To track retention rates for Programmes
• Leaving Destination to be a list of rationalised Reference values for TIS
• Leaving reason v.s. Leaving destination
  • Leaving training v.s. leaving due to a higher ranked competing Programme preferences (upgrade) to a different Programme.
  • How to record this on TIS as part of the Programme membership?
  • This would eliminate the need to record Status of the Trainee INACTIVE/DELETE etc. 
• IDT Data Process alignment required (Joanne Watson (Unlicensed))
• ESR - How is this captured on ESR?
• Programme Resignation Form raised as a suggestion
  • Difficulty in recording this with an Assessment Outcome of 6
• SOPs to be clear and communication regarding the Trainees Leavers Process (Rob & team)
• Agreement was to get rid of recording Status field for trainees.
• Programme End Date - to be considered when building an Archiving Process. 
  • Programme End Date to be the only date to be recorded on TIS.
  • Automatic updated of Placement dates and other dates as a result of updating Programme End date raised as a requirement
• Model of trainee flow for Academic Curriculum was an idea raised - for this to be shared when we have one.
• Status if 'DELETE' - There's been previous work done with the data leads to rationalise how records are deleted on TIS and where to maintain a status of DELETE. Further details can be found here

Placements - ITP Posts

• ITP posts are GP focused
• Definition of ITP posts is to be agreed
• ITP Posts Vs Accrued Annual Leave
• Dave Rayner gave a description of ITP posts being one where there is splitting of sites and is a complex post
• 'Main site' and 'Other sites' recorded within placement is not currently sufficient to capture such Post/Placement
• Ability to record multiple funding within the Post
• Naming of the 'Other sites' was raised as a possibility to record ITP, however James mentioned that this should not be confused with the actual purpose of recording 'Other site' on TIS for GP posts.
• An Additional Site within Placement/Post raised as a suggestion  for recording ITP.
• London have Posts specific to record ITP placements
• ITP is for Placement not Posts.
• Local variations is okay if it  satisfies the below: 
  • Consistent Recording across Regions
  • Ability to report Nationally  

Placement types (additional)

• Period of Grace - no additional type required
• Accrued Period of Leave
  • Taken after parental leave for GPs
  • Trusts are required to know
  • Needed for Public health as well (London SE)
  • How to record this and is it actually needed? Is there a possible national requirement?
    • It was agreed for this to be looked at how to record this at a Regional Level on TIS
  • How many Local Offices have a Lead Employer?
    • How is this information recorded on ESR?
    • Positions can be recorded on ESR with Lead or Host Employer information, however this is not consistently being recorded on ESR.
    • Where this detail exists and positions have been created with, these flow in the TIS-ESR interface 

Walls/Pictures/Post-it's