1. SIGGINS MILLER REPORT – TRAINING NETWORKS DoT Workshop Sydney, May 2014

2. Background ◦ 2008/2009 implementation of new curriculum ◦ simultaneous introduction of network based training ◦ simultaneous evaluation  Training networks support implementation and delivery of curriculum 2

3. Methodology ◦ October 2012 – February 2014 ◦ Data sources  Face to face interviews, N=173 respondents, 23 training sites  Online survey, 88 respondents (78.5% completion)  Document review  Website statistics 3

4. Strengths and Weaknesses  High engagement by TNDs, DoTs, ESOs and Trainees  High congruence between survey responses, consultation findings and document reviews  High confidence that evaluation is representative  Low engagement by clinical supervisors  Estimated 30% participation  Good response rate relative to other colleges (!) 4

5.  NGCs  TND and ESOs  Network Accreditation Site Visits  Workforce Issues  Training Resources  Support  Work-Readiness 5 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS

6. NETWORK GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE – Findings  Implementation of training networks highly successful  NGC participants felt NGC provided effective governance  Clinical supervisors and trainees reported lack of communication and transparency of decision making  Allocation of training terms  Views not sought  Recommended increased communication to non- members(clinical supervisors and trainees); formal opportunities for members to provide feedback 6

7. NETWORK GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE – Recommendations  Increased communication with network participants not involved in meetings  Circulation of minutes  Open and inclusive meetings  Formal processes for network participants to provide feedback from clinical supervisors and trainees  Identification and sharing of good practice  Clearer guidelines on rotation  More explicit role in assessment / discussion of ‘trainees in difficulty’ 7

8. TND and ESO Roles – Recommendations  Draw on experience of most successful ESOs to tailor and clarify responsibility and expectations  Sharing of best practices – increased communication  Funding placement within health services of each network  Service training networks across radiology and radiation oncology 8

9. Network Accreditation Site Visits  Seen as necessary and useful opportunity to improve training standards 9

10. Workforce Issues - Findings  Networks helped address workforce issues by  Making regional sites available for training  Increasing accredited regional training positions  Impact on broader workforce issues currently unknown.  Evidence suggests favourable trainee experience in regional centres improves likelihood of their seeking employment in regional areas  Barriers exist to taking up regional positions  Social factors (partners / families)  Lack of financial support 10

11. Workforce Issues – Recommendations  Better support of trainees  Moving costs / accommodation 11

12. Training Resources  Increased access to educational resources / teaching programs  Site specific learning activities accessed via rotation schemes  Possible opportunity to deliver training nationwide  May allow clinical supervisors to advocate for improved range of training resources / opportunities 12

13. Support – Findings  Trainees – reported positive experience in network training  Diverse settings  Different consultants methods / approaches  Different patient profiles / case mix  Level of DoT support high  Some clinical supervisors not engaged in training program  Low clinical supervisor engagement with formative assessments  Financial and social costs high  DoTs  High support 13

14. Support – Recommendations  Improved planning and communication around rotations  More transparent process of allocation  Strategies to negate perceived disadvantages of rotation to smaller centres  Online / videoconferencing with clinical leaders in speciality areas  Use national meetings as platform for sharing of good practice in education between clinical supervisors (RACP) 14

15. Work-Readiness  Improved through exposure to broad range of experiences  Promotion of clinical / research fellowship positions  Equalisation of opportunity across networks (regional centres) 15

16. 16