This alphabetical list of the medical specialty recommendations link to 57 combined fact and summary sheets published as part of the Shape of the medical workforce: Informing medical specialty training numbers report. The fact and summary sheets are available to download below.

Allergy
Anaesthetics
Audiological Medicine
Cardiology
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Chemical Pathology
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Clinical Academic
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Neurophysiology
Clinical Oncology
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Clinical Radiology
Community Sexual and Reproductive Health
Dermatology
Emergency Medicine
Endocrinology Diabetes
Forensic Psychiatry
Gastroenterology
General and Acute Internal Medicine
General Practice
General Psychiatry
General Surgery
Genitourinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Haematology
Histopathology
Immunology
Infectious Diseases
Intensive Care Medicine
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Medical Oncology
Medical Ophthalmology
Medical Psychotherapy
Neurology
Neurosurgery
Nuclear Medicine
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS)
Ophthalmology
Otorhinolaryngology
Paediatric Cardiology
Paediatric Surgery
Paediatrics
Palliative Medicine
Plastic Surgery
Psychiatry of Learning Disability
Psychiatry of Old Age
Public Health
Rehabilitation Medicine
Renal Medicine
Respiratory Medicine
Rheumatology
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Urology

The project aims to provide robust, evidence-based assessments of workforce requirements to support decision making across the health workforce.

Each report describes the key issues facing the different professions over the next three years, and aims to support local decisions on future education and training commissioning.

The reports are being submitted to the Department of Health in several tranches.

The reports that we have published so far as part of the WRO ECRS 2012 project are available to download below.

Adult nurses
Applied psychologists
Arts therapists
Child psychotherapists
Children’s nurses
Chiropodists / Podiatrists
Diagnostic radiographers
Dietitians
Healthcare science workforce
Health visitors
Learning disability nurses
Mental health nurses
Midwives
Occupational therapists
Operating department practitioners
Orthoptists
Paramedics
Pharmacists
Physiotherapists
Practice nurses
Prosthetists and orthotists
School nurses
Speech and language therapists
Therapeutic radiographers.

As part of this programme we have also analysed the supply and demand for social workers over the next three to five years.

A technical report providing more detailed and technical information of the modelling and engagement approaches used by the CfWI in the WRO ECRS 2012 project is also available to download..

The healthcare science workforce is currently in a period of transition. Modernising Scientific Careers (MSC) is at a critical stage of implementation, with several key outputs due this year and work ongoing to integrate the programme with the imminent NHS reorganisation. Following discussions with Professor Sue Hill and her team, it was decided that holding a workforce risks and opportunities (WRO) workshop for healthcare scientists would be inappropriate in this cycle.

The CfWI will work closely with the Department of Health (DH) healthcare science team over the coming months to transfer knowledge and, where appropriate, support future work and projects. Healthcare science will be fully included in subsequent WRO cycles.

MSC policy sets out to

• develop a highly effective, integrated healthcare science workforce
• improve workforce information and modelling tools for the healthcare science workforce
• provide appropriately commissioned training and education for scientists
• have consistent and proportionate regulation of healthcare scientists.

More than 40 'early adopter' organisations (representing all 10 SHAs) have been implementing and examining various aspects of the MSC programme. These sites are looking at local implementation, informing elements of the national programme. MSC aims to introduce a clear and coherent career pathway and structure for the healthcare science workforce, standardising and streamlining existing training and education arrangement.

MSC training for genetics began in 2009 in England. Learning from this pilot scheme, the majority of other training programmes will commence in the 2011/12 academic year, with the remainder to follow in 2013/14.

Other work includes:

• the development of a ‘gold standard’ benchmark for workforce re-profiling in pathology services  – this will consider new models of care, scientific and technological progress at the departmental, regional and network levels
• an integrated workforce planning tool
• an improved workforce coding system for healthcare scientists, currently being designed in collaboration with the NHS Information Centre
• the DH is aiming to establish the minimum workforce data set required for the move towards ‘any qualified provider’ of services.

The outcomes of this work will be covered in the next WRO cycle.

Building on this project, the CfWI will be working with the Department of Health to scope the information architecture of the future system.

The Information Architecture Project interim report and the latest map of the information architecture are available to download.

The CfWI collates information from SHAs summarising their position relating to workforce QIPP (Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention) projections.

QIPP is an essential element of the integrated planning process in the NHS. The CfWI has a role to coordinate and support the interpretation of SHA workforce plans and liaise with the DH workforce, and the wider DH QIPP team to bring greater coherence and understanding to workforce planning. The outcomes enable

• the DH to review current projections against national perspectives and earlier returns
• the SHAs to compare their projections.

The planning process involves a quarterly round of template design, data collection, collation, dissemination and analysis to inform the planning process. The process aims to provide linkages between bottom-up planning exercises currently run by SHAs with trusts, and national planning perspectives. It also provides a basis for integrating service activity projections, related workforce requirements and the financial implications of plans. Work in this year has developed to consider the quality and safety assurance of QIPP workforce plans.

The CfWI, in discussion with the DH, will continue to develop the approach in 2011/12 working with the emergent workforce planning system.

For further information and to be kept informed about this and other related QIPP work, please email enquiries@cfwi.org.uk

The maternity workforce project aims to conduct an assessment of the maternity planning and benchmarking tools that are currently available. The findings of this research will be used to inform the Department of Health (DH) in the development of their Maternity Matrix tool and to inform the CfWI's future plans on developing an integrated maternity workforce model.

The CfWI has identified a range of tools that are currently in use and engaged with tool designers and end users to understand their functionality and relative metrics. These findings will then be incorporated into a summary of the overall findings. The tools and approaches examined cover a range of workforce issues with functionality including data modelling, workforce planning, service design and benchmarking.

For further information on this project please contact Joe Nguyen at joe.nguyen@cfwi.org.uk.

The CfWI is working on the development of a social worker supply and demand model for England. This is part of the social work reforms being led by the Social Work Reform Board. The expectation is that the model will be used by policymakers and local planners to forecast future need accurately.

Accurate data is critical for workforce modelling. The CfWI is therefore currently mapping and reviewing what information is available, and how quality could be assessed and improved.

As part of this work, we have identified more than 60 data sources and collections. From these, we have selected the ones that the CfWI has found most useful for workforce modelling and planning. These are all in the list of identified data sources and collections below, and can also be accessed from our resources database. Note that not all of this information is available to users outside the NHS.

Go to the CfWI resources database

In line with our work on maturity measures for workforce models, the CfWI is also looking at corresponding measures for data collections. This is likely to be based on the six dimensions of data quality as defined by the Audit Commission in the report Figures you can trust – a briefing on data quality in the NHS.

The regulatory authorities and professional bodies for the different health and social care professions hold registers of their members. These can be a very useful source of workforce information. Some of the professions that hold registers are in the second list, of regulatory authorities and professional bodies below.

The CfWI has access to a wide range of published and unpublished data collections and it may be possible to supply data, provided that this is permitted by the governance arrangements. We may also be able to recommend sources of data for specific modelling needs.

List of identified data sources and collections

Association of Public Health Observatories (APHO)

APHO provides information on people’s health and health care, highlighting issues and trends. They provide health profiles for all regions, strategic health authorities and local authorities in England. See for example: Health profile of England 2009 (PDF) Health profiles interactive maps

Care Quality Commission (CQC)

The CQC is the independent regulator of health and social care in England. It holds a database of registrations and inspections of providers of adult social care and independent health care providers. Useful reports include those on the quality and capacity of adult social care services (England 2008/09) NHS patient and staff surveys, and on NHS patient and staff surveys.

Connecting for Health: Secondary Uses Service (SUS)

Connecting for Health provide the Secondary Uses Service (SUS). SUS is designed to provide anonymous patient-based data for purposes other than direct clinical care, for example healthcare planning, commissioning, public health, performance improvement and national policy development.

NHS Information Centre (NHS IC)

NHS IC holds a wide range of statistics and data collections including on hospital care, mental health, population, primary care, social care and the workforce. The following are particularly useful for workforce modelling:

• Health Poverty Index (HPI)
• Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)
• NHS staff numbers, earnings and turnover
• NHS and GP vacancies
• Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)
• Personal Social Services Expenditure and Unit Cost.

NHS iView

This resource provides aggregated and social care data to authorised NHS users

nomis

nomis is a web-based database of labour market statistics run on behalf of the ONS by the University of Durham. It provides customised queries and downloads, and access to a wide range of ONS data.

Skills for Care National Minimum Data Set for Social Care (NMDS–SC)

Skills for Care maintains the National Minimum Data Set for Social Care (NMDS-SC), which provides comprehensive information on the services and the social care workforce.

Skills for Health: Health Functional Map

Skills for Health is the sector skills council for the health sector. They provide a range of information relevant to workforce modelling including:

• Health Functional Map of competences
• NHS Benchmarking Database
• Labour Market Information resource.

UK National Statistics

National statistics for areas including the economy, health and social care, the labour market, migration, and population.

Office for National Statistics. The ONS produces independent information on the UK’s economy and society, and is the government’s largest statistical provider, for example:

• Annual Business Inquiry (ABI) – Section Q: Human health and social work activities
• Focus on Health (report)
• Health Statistics Quarterly (HSQ)
• Inter-Departmental Business Register
• Labour Force Survey.

Warwick Institute for Employment Research (IER)

The Warwick IER performs labour-market and socio-economic research. Projections of labour-market developments focusing on occupational change are available in the Working Futures series of reports.

World Health Organisation (WHO)

The WHO provides leadership and research in public health across a wide range of areas, including the health workforce.

List of regulatory authorities and professional bodies

General Dental Council (GDC)

The GDC regulates dental professionals in the UK.

Health Professions Councils (HPC)

The HPC currently regulates 15 health professions: arts therapists, biomedical scientists, chiropodists/podiatrists, clinical scientists, dietitians, hearing aid dispensers, occupational therapists, operating department practitioners, orthoptists, paramedics, physiotherapists, practitioner psychologists, prosthetists /orthotists, radiographers, and speech and language therapists. New professions are added to this list from time to time.

General Medical Council (GMC)

General Optical Council (GOC)

Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB)

Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMWC)

General Osteopathic Council (GOsC)

General Chiropractic Council (GCC)

British Medical Association (BMA)

Chartered bodies:

Chartered Society of Physiotherapy

College of Emergency Medicine

College of Optometrists

Royal College of Anaesthetists

Royal College of General Practitioners

Royal College of Midwives

Royal College of Nursing

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Royal College of Ophthalmologists

Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

Royal College of Pathologists

Royal College of Physicians of London

Royal College of Psychiatrists

Royal College of Radiologists

Royal College of Surgeons of England

In workforce planning, a model is a mathematical representation of the essential aspects of the system that is under investigation – for example, workforce supply or demand. These models can take many forms, from spreadsheet-based calculations to stochastic models running on specialist software.

Whatever the form, all models are simplified and limited representations of the real world. Consequently it is not possible to perfectly validate or verify a model since they all differ from reality in some way.

However, workforce planners need to know whether a model is a sound basis for decision-making. Our aim is to enable planners to choose the best model available for the purpose in hand, ensuring they are informed of the limitations so that they do not misuse the model.

Consequently, we have developed a simple set of metrics to help users select workforce planning models, and to help model developers improve model quality. Understanding a model’s limitations allows it to be improved. Ultimately it will enable us to provide or recommend the best available models.

Maturity metrics

Model users need to understand the overall suitability of a model for their purpose. They need to establish whether a model is well-defined, credible in terms of the structure, robustness and sensitivity, and is easily usable.

Most users do not have the time or experience to examine each potential model and determine if it is suitable. To help them we have defined a simple set of measures called workforce model maturity measures and applied them to real-life models.

Selected workforce models have been tested to see if they are:

• well-defined, meaning if the expected capabilities of the intended users are known, and the purpose and boundaries of the model are clearly defined
• credible, so the model does what it says it will do, and so the physical and decision-making structure of the model is appropriate to the intended purpose.
• usable, in that the model is practical, easy to use, well documented and produces useful outputs.

Three levels of maturity have been defined:

• Level 1 is the base or minimum acceptable level. Models at level 1 will be reliable and easy to use.
• Level 2 models are at an improved level of maturity, better defined and more robust.
• Level 3 models are the most optimised level, rigorously defined, tested and reviewed.

The Workforce Model Maturity measures are listed in table 1.

Table 1: Workforce Model Maturity measures

These measures allow the user of a potential model to assess risk.

A model at Level 1 may be a better model for a particular purpose than one at Level 3, but one at Level 3 may be less risky for an inexperienced user as it must be fully documented and peer reviewed.

A model must meet or exceed the maturity measures of a particular level in order to achieve that level. For example, a model that achieves Level 2 for ‘definition’ and ‘credibility’, but is only at Level 1 for ‘usability’, is still considered to be at Level 1.

Workforce model assessment

The CfWI and our partners have assessed over 50 workforce models against the workforce maturity metrics measures, and identified those which have achieved a level of 1 or higher.

The models selected for assessment were those that CfWI and partners were most familiar with. Due to time constraints, this assessment has excluded models from other countries. We intend to extend the model assessment over time to include a wider range of UK and non-UK models.

Table 2 provides a brief description of the scope and purpose of each model. Contact us if you would like more information about these models.

Table 2: Workforce Model Maturity

The CfWI intends to publish updates to this list as existing models are refined and further models developed. We are also working on a more comprehensive approach to evaluating model quality, and will be providing guidance to model authors on how to achieve a higher maturity level.

The vision and objectives of the CfWI information architecture project are explained below.

The project provides the foundation for designing a simpler, more effective workforce planning and development system.

The objectives are:

• to provide a clear picture of the information architecture as it is now and how it could be in the future
• to identify improvements that will strengthen workforce planning and development, and
• to gain broad partner support for the best improvement option.

A clear picture in this context means that the information architecture should be:

• revealing, useful, relevant and inviting
• establishing ownership, responsibilities, processes and links
• highlighting gaps to fill, links to make, desirable simplifications and expansions.

The objective of identifying improvements to strengthen workforce planning and development include:

• making it easier to access, reducing the burden of data collection, increasing data quality, and board-level engagement
• making more effective use of data, strengthening links to the strategic agenda, stimulating better practice, and understanding gaps across the whole system.

Partner-supported changes mean:

• being Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention (QIPP)-aligned
• operating in the most practical, affordable, cost-saving, waste-reducing and productive way.

Next page

Project initiation

To gain project approval and establish the project team.

Current state mapping

To map the data sources, flow, influences and impacts in the workforce planning and development system.

Review of requirements

To determine how well the data sources fulfil the intelligence needs of organisations seeking to develop future workforce strategies.

Blueprint development and testing

To build a future state information architecture. To identify improvements to the current state, including new data sources and flows that would fill unmet needs.

Future planning

To investigate the options for making the blueprint information architecture a reality and report recommendations.

Project closure

To record the lessons learnt and handle the maintenance of the architecture to the CfWI business as usual.

Previous page

The process consists of the following steps:

1. To achieve a closer integration between service, financial and workforce planning.
2. To form stronger links between overseeing bodies.
3. To achieve whole system planning, including the independent sector.
4. To carry out leadership and board-level engagement.
5. To achieve simpler, more accessible workforce planning.
6. To provide a foundation for continuous improvement.
7. To culturally transform data-capture processes.
8. To ensure the whole system is aligned to strategic imperatives, thereby supporting the Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention (QIPP) agenda.

Next page

Previous page

With strengthened workforce planning, we will be seeking the following outcomes:

1. To fill in gaps in data and improving processes for its capture.
2. To drive up data quality to improve reliability and accuracy.
3. To make better use of data to add rigour to the planning process.
4. To increase sophistication in analysing and modelling future workforce.
5. To contribute and share better practice.
6. To understand where the real pressures in the system are.
7. To accumulate evidence to inform policy.
8. To have partners across health and social care understand improvements are possible, leading to partner-supported changes.

Next page

Previous page

With a clear blueprint for the information architecture, we will be seeking the following outcomes:

1. To access what data is available and how it can be accessed.
2. The best sources of data are highlighted.
3. The sources and causes of waste are better understood.
4. The gaps in data are identified, along with how they might be filled.
5. New data to be captured and/or shared is identified.
6. Data quality is assessed for its fitness for purpose.
7. Bodies within the system and the links between them show their influence upon the system.
8. An improved means to understand the workforce and its development is achieved, leading to strengthened workforce planning.

Next page