Welcome again to another edition of the newsletter. In February I announced the beginning of a busy schedule of monitoring using the new Risk based approach. Well, we have now completed 77 monitoring events in England, Northern Ireland and Scotland and I’m sure we all know a lot more about the new approach now, than we did at the beginning. Thank you for all the time and energy you have displayed in completing this tranche of work and for the continuing participation in programme approvals which are now in full swing.

The Risk Based approach has been well received by universities and reviewers, primarily for its transparency. The Review Plan provides reviewers and those reviewed with very clear guidance as to what is to be examined. It has also meant that a great deal of evidence has been sifted and this is apparent in the scroll of evidence detailed in the monitoring reports. The Key Risks and Risk Indicators have also given greater structure to the reports, which has enabled a greater level of analysis which we have been able to report to the NMC. This level of detail will inform decisions regarding the nature of monitoring in 2008-09 and has resulted in a great deal of rigour, improving consistency considerably.

Two years experience of programme monitoring is also having an influence on the rigour with which approval events are being undertaken. Reviewers are now bringing their programme monitoring experience to bear on the conduct of approval events. It is pleasing to note the level of attention being paid to those Key Risks/Risk Indicators that have demonstrated weaker control systems and the underpinning standards and guidance. Examples include teachers with recordable qualifications, ‘live’ registers of mentors, sign-off mentors, numeracy testing, moderation of assessors’ judgements and the engagement of external examiners in the assessment of clinical practice. This synergy of quality assurance processes is the real test of a robust quality assurance model. It means that ‘getting it right’ at the beginning will result in evidence of stronger risk control measures at future monitoring events, improved experiences for students and greater protection for the public.

As you should all now know, this will be my last editorial as I stand down from the position of Director of Reviews. The last two years has been very exciting, challenging, and at times tiring. But I leave with a tremendous feeling of pride and achievement in establishing a system which you have all contributed greatly to operationalising. I am also pleased to be handing over the leadership to Janet James who has served a challenging apprenticeship and in whom I have every confidence in taking the work forward as we enter new phases of quality assurance in nursing and midwifery education.

Please join us at the Annual Conference to be held on Thursday September 18th in Manchester when we will be celebrating the efforts of the past year, learning how monitoring will be conducted next year, sharing experiences and further developing key reviewing skills.

Goodbye and best wishes to you all

Janet D Duberley