Skip to Content


Introduction

In September 2013, Ontario’s Office of the Fairness Commissioner (OFC) performed a targeted assessment of the way the College of Medical Laboratory Technologists of Ontario (CMLTO) registers people who apply for a licence to practise in Ontario, to ensure that the registration practices are fair and continue to improve.

Assessment is one of the Fairness Commissioner's mandated roles under the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (RHPA).

Assessment Cycle

To hold regulatory bodies accountable for continuous improvement, the OFC assesses their licensing practices using a two-year assessment cycle.

Assessment cycles alternate between full assessments and targeted assessments:

  • Full assessments address all specific and general duties described in the RHPA.
  • Targeted assessments focus on the areas where the OFC made recommendations in the previous full assessment.

This approach establishes continuity between the assessment cycles.

Top

Focus of This Assessment and Report

The September 2013 targeted assessment of the CMLTO focused on the areas where the OFC made recommendations in the full assessment it completed in January 2012.

The OFC’s detailed report captures the results of the targeted assessment. The assessment summary provides the following key information from the detailed report:

  • duties that were assessed
  • an overview of comments for specific-duty practices
  • commendable practices
  • recommendations

Top

Availability of Report

The OFC encourages the CMLTO to provide the detailed report to its staff, council members, the public, and other interested parties.

To receive a copy of the detailed report, click here.

Top

Assessment Methods

Assessments are based on the Registration Practices Assessment Guide – For Health Regulatory Colleges. The guide presents registration practices relating to the specific duties and general duty in the RHPA.

A regulatory body’s practices can be measured against the RHPA’s specific duties in a straightforward way. However, the general duty is broad, and the principles it mentions (transparency, objectivity, impartiality and fairness) are not defined in the legislation.

As a result, the specific-duty and general-duty obligations are assessed differently (see the Strategy for Continuous Improvement of Registration Practices).

Specific Duties

The OFC can clearly determine whether a regulatory body demonstrates the specific-duty practices in the assessment guide. Therefore, for each specific-duty practice, the OFC provides one of the following assessment outcomes:

  • Demonstrated – all required elements of the practice are present or addressed
  • Partially Demonstrated – some but not all required elements are present or addressed
  • Not Demonstrated – none of the required elements are present or addressed
  • Not Applicable – this practice does not apply to this regulatory body

General Duty

Because there are many ways that a regulatory body can demonstrate that its practices, overall, are meeting the principles of the general duty, the OFC makes assessment comments for the general duty, rather than identifying assessment outcomes. For the same reason, assessment comments are made by principle, rather than by practice.

For information about the OFC’s interpretations of the general-duty principles and the practices that the OFC uses as a guideline for assessment, see the Registration Practices Assessment Guide – For Health Regulatory Colleges.

Commendable Practices and Recommendations

Where applicable, the OFC identifies commendable practices or recommendations for improvement related to the specific duties and general duty.

Sources

Assessment outcomes, comments, and commendable practices and recommendations are based on information provided by the regulatory body. The OFC relies on the accuracy of this information to produce the assessment report. The OFC compiles registration information from sources such as the following:

  • Fair Registration Practices Reports, audits, Entry-to-Practice Review Reports, annual meetings
  • the regulatory body’s:
    • website
    • policies, procedures, guidelines and related documentation templates for communication with applicants
    • regulations and bylaws
    • internal auditing and reporting mechanisms
    • third-party agreements and related monitoring or reporting documentation
    • qualifications assessments and related documentation
  • targeted questions/requests for evidence that the regulatory body demonstrates a practice or principle

For more information  about the assessment cycle, assessment process, and legislative obligations, see the Strategy for Continuous Improvement of Registration Practices.

Top

Assessment Summary

Specific Duties

Specific duties assessed

As a result of the recommendations made in the full assessment completed in January 2012, the CMLTO has been assessed in the area(s) marked below:

None Unchecked
Information for Applicants Unchecked
Internal "Review" Unchecked
Information on Appeal Rights Unchecked
Documentation of Qualifications Unchecked
Assessment of Qualifications Checked
Training Unchecked
Access to Records Unchecked

Outcomes

The CMLTO has demonstrated all of the practices in the following specific-duty area(s):

  • Assessment of Qualifications

Top

General Duty

Assessment Method

The CMLTO selected the method marked below for the assessing of its adherence to the general-duty principles, and informed the OFC:

a. OFC assesses based on the practices listed in the assessment guide Unchecked
b. Regulatory body self-assesses based on the practices in the assessment guide Unchecked
c. Regulatory body self-assesses using a system-based approach, in which it explains what it does to ensure that its practices are adhering to the general-duty principles Unchecked

Principles assessed

As a result of the recommendations made in the full assessment completed in January 2012, the CMLTO has been assessed on the principle(s) marked below:

None Checked
Transparency Unchecked
Objectivity Unchecked
Impartiality Unchecked
Fairness Unchecked

Top

Commendable Practices

A commendable practice is a program, activity or strategy that goes beyond the minimum standards set by the OFC assessment guides, considering the regulatory body’s resources and profession-specific context. Commendable practices may or may not have potential for transferability to another regulatory body.

The CMLTO is demonstrating commendable practices in the following area(s).

Assessment of Qualifications

  • maintaining the following agreements for services provided by the Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science (CSMLS):
    • a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the provision of prior learning assessments
    • a contract for the provision of examination services
      These agreements help clarify the CMLTO’s expectations of the CSMLS and provide an opportunity for the CMLTO to ensure that these services further the CMLTO’s fair registration efforts.
  • regularly influencing CSMLS decisions, through active involvement on the CSMLS’s Professional Standards Council. The CMLTO`s involvement enables it to influence decisions about language requirements and about acceptable third-party language-assessment agencies for the CSMLS’ qualifications-assessment process.

Top

Recommendations

The OFC has not made any recommendations for this assessment period.
The OFC expects that the CMLTO will continue maintaining its standards in the future.
In the spirit of continuous improvement, the OFC encourages the CMLTO to continue its efforts towards a more transparent, objective, impartial and fair registration process.

Assessment History

In the previous assessment, the OFC identified one recommendation for this regulatory body.

This recommendation has been implemented.

Top