2021/2022 CRPO Annual Report

The College periodically reviews its criteria and processes for determining whether an applicant meets its registration requirements, against best practices

(e.g., how a College determines language proficiency, how Colleges detect fraudulent applications or documents including applicant use of third parties, how Colleges confirm registration status in other jurisdictions or professions where relevant etc.)



On the recommendation of the Registration Committee, Council approved a clinical experience recognition program that allows psychotherapy education and training institutions to have the clinical experience components of their programs evaluated by the College for the purpose of accepting hours toward registration requirements. The recognition of clinical experience from a program communicates to the public the program offers quality clinical experience training in conjunction with their training in theory.

The process for recognition evaluates:

placement site criteria and approval process

supervisor criteria and approval process

supervisory contracts, including the supervisor’s

obligation to report changes in their standing with a regulatory body

what determines successful completion of hours

All policies, standards of practice, and practice guidelines are up to date and relevant to the current practice environment (e.g., where appropriate, reflective of changing population health needs, public/societal expectations, models of care, clinical evidence, advances in technology).



Council approved a policy review cycle to ensure that a codified approach is in place to direct regular evaluation of policies, standards and guidelines to determine that they are appropriate and relevant to the current regulatory and practice environment.

Triggers for this evidence - initiated review process include:

stakeholder feedback

legal review

research

changes in practice of other regulators and professional associations

subject matter expert opinions

internal data monitoring / mining

time -based requirement that reviews are done within three years in the case
of most policies (five years for practice standards) if not reviewed through the
evidence-initiated process

Triggers for this evidence - initiated review process include:

position statement on access to care

policy on succession planning policy

executive limitations policies (financial condition and reserve fund)

committee appointments policy

council observer guidelines

language proficiency policy

returning to active practice policy

examination appeals policy

pre-registration conduct policy

governance role descriptions

position statement on access to care

Professional members are eligible to stand for election to Council only after meeting pre-defined competency and suitability criteria; and attending an orientation training about the College’s mandate and expectations pertaining to the member’s role and responsibilities.



In September 2021, Council approved by-law amendments requiring any RP wishing to be a candidate for a Council position to complete a pre-candidacy orientation training process that includes submitting a questionnaire that tests their knowledge of relevant regulatory and governance concepts. This process is intended to ensure that anyone elected will have the required understanding and commitment to effectively carry out their fiduciary duties.

Since CRPO is committed to removing barriers for RPs who wish to contribute to the work of Council, while ensuring that anyone standing for election meets competence and suitability criteria, the College developed multiple ways for interested RPs to complete the required orientation training. These include:

a live webinar to be presented annually by staff and two current Council members

written materials in an accessible format

narrated video

Council regularly assesses its effectiveness and addresses identified opportunities for improvement through ongoing education.



CRPO’s Council spent the year further implementing a comprehensive evaluation framework that allows the assessment of individual member competence, committee and panel function, and overall Council effectiveness. The framework includes:

Council efficacy evaluation tool used annually on a three-year cycle with every third year
including a comprehensive external evaluation.

Operating from the position that Council “effectiveness” needs to be evaluated in a way that is connected through the standards under each domain, the evaluation tool incorporates measures including whether or not:

Council and statutory committee members have the knowledge, skills, and commitment needed to effectively execute their fiduciary role and responsibilities pertaining to the mandate of the College

Council work enables the College to use best practices across all critical attributes of regulatory excellence

the College acts to foster public trust through transparency about decisions made and actions taken

Council decisions are made in the public interest

Council completed the tool for the second year, providing a relevant baseline for the third year, external evaluation, which will take place in 2023 to review performance in calendar 2022.

meeting and panel evaluation tool used at every Council, committee, and panel meeting to evaluate:

meeting materials

meeting quality / Chair performance

decisions made in the public interest

This component of the framework is in place and fully operational. Council now receives quarterly reports that identify opportunities to refine and improve on a rapid-cycle basis to confirm that meetings are productive and support the public protection mandate at a ‘front-line’ level.

individual competence evaluation tool

This is the final component of the framework. Work in 2021 was completed to allow a launch in 2022. Council members will complete a self-reflection and be assessed by a committee chair and senior staff member against the Council competence matrix, with results being used to provide an individual competence development plan to inform ongoing education for each member.

Results from the evaluation elements have informed Council, committee and individual education and professional development that included:

bias training session led by CRPO’s employer partner, the Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion

a full day education session on trauma (the neurobiology of, Indigenous intergenerational trauma, intimate partner violence related, and trauma related to anti-Black racism)

a half day education session on regulating in the public interest, a primer on the importance of land acknowledgments and effectively chairing meetings