RCPsych Dean Elections 2026  ·  Voting: 27 May – 10 June 2026

If no independent body is accountable for training standards,
who protects the patient?

As Health Education England was absorbed into NHS England, and NHS England into DHSC, the body specifically mandated to provide independent educational quality oversight has disappeared. The draft GMC Order 2026 consultation — closing 23 June — is the opportunity to address this.

Dr Raoof — Candidate for Dean, Education, Training, Workforce & Research
Royal College of Psychiatrists  ·  Stability and Change
Scroll to explore
Our Foundation

A century of purpose, not privilege.

In 1841, a group of doctors working in asylums came together not to advance their professional standing, but because patients with mental illness had no independent voice advocating for the quality of their care. That founding purpose has shaped the Royal College of Psychiatrists ever since.

In 1926 the College received its Royal Charter as the Royal Medico-Psychological Association. In 1971, a Supplemental Charter formally established the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Through every era, the College's three founding aims have remained constant: teaching, research, and public education — all in service of patients.

"The case for maintaining a strong College voice in the draft GMC Order 2026 is not about institutional self-interest. It is about ensuring that an independent, expert, non-governmental body remains accountable for the quality and safety of psychiatric training."

That is what is at stake in the consultation on the draft GMC Order 2026 and the NHS 10-Year Plan's proposals for postgraduate training. This is a question of patient safety architecture, not professional territory.

Historical context

How independent oversight of
medical education has evolved

A progressive shift in where accountability for training quality has resided — and what has been lost along the way.

1518–1841
Royal Colleges as sole quality body

Before any national regulator, the royal colleges were the only organisations setting, examining, and enforcing standards in medicine. Their authority was wholly independent of government or employers.

Independent professional authority
1841
RCPsych founded (as AMOA)

Psychiatry's founding body established to raise standards for patients in asylums — a patient safety mission from the outset. Royal Charter received 1926; College formally established 1971.

Patient safety mission from day one
1858
GMC created — co-governance model

A national regulator forms, but 18 of its 24 founding council members come directly from the royal colleges. Colleges shape the GMC from within — co-governance rather than displacement.

Colleges: co-governors of standards
1948–2003
NHS era — colleges anchor specialist training

Colleges develop postgraduate training pathways, fellowship examinations (MRCPsych, MRCP, FRCS), and training post inspections. They remain the primary independent quality body for specialist education.

Primary independent quality guardians
2003
PMETB — first transfer of formal authority

A government body (PMETB) takes formal oversight of postgraduate curricula. Colleges retain design and examination roles but lose regulatory equality. Independent professional oversight begins to be mediated through government-appointed structures.

Independent space: first reduction
2010
PMETB merges into GMC

GMC absorbs all postgraduate education oversight. Colleges become approved curriculum providers — designing within GMC-set frameworks rather than setting the framework. Application of standards formally leaves the profession.

Colleges: approved providers only
2012–2023
HEE → NHSE → DHSC consolidation

Health Education England absorbed into NHS England. Education functions progressively consolidated into DHSC structures. The body specifically created to hold independent responsibility for education quality is absorbed into the machinery of government and employer priorities.

Independent education oversight: vacuum created
2025–2026
NHS 10-Year Plan & draft GMC Order 2026

Portfolio Pathway (formerly CESR) proposed as expanded default route. CCT no longer the primary pathway. Formal college examinations de-emphasised. Modular, competency-based progression proposed. Alternative non-college providers introduced. The draft GMC Order 2026 must clarify and protect the college's role in this new landscape.

College role in new framework: undefined
The core challenge

A structural gap in independent oversight.

Government and NHS employers have legitimate priorities — workforce numbers, service delivery, throughput. These are necessary functions. But they are not the same as educational quality. When the body specifically tasked with independent educational oversight is absorbed into government structures, a critical function is lost — even when no displacement was intended.

The question is not who holds power, but who is independently accountable for the standard. Royal Colleges hold no government accountability and no employer interest. Their charter duty is to standards and public education. In the current landscape, they are among the few remaining institutions able to fulfil this function.

Government / DHSC

Accountable for NHS performance, throughput, workforce numbers, and political delivery. These are legitimate and necessary goals — but they are distinct from independent educational quality assurance.

NHS Employers

Accountable for service delivery and filling posts. Equally legitimate — but the natural pressure is towards training completion and workforce availability rather than the depth and rigour of specialist formation.

⚠ Who speaks independently for quality and patient safety?

As HEE was absorbed into NHSE, and NHSE into DHSC, the independent mandate for educational quality has been lost. Royal Colleges — with charter-based duties to standards, teaching and public education — are now among the few remaining institutions able to fill this function. The draft GMC Order 2026 must formalise and protect this role.

The shifting balance

Where independent oversight has resided — and where it is headed.

An illustrative representation of the qualitative shift in authority over postgraduate medical education standards across five eras.

Pre-1858 — Colleges eraNear-total independent authority
1858–1948 — Co-governance eraColleges shape GMC from within
1948–2003 — NHS specialist eraColleges dominant in postgraduate space
2003–2010 — PMETB eraFirst significant reduction in independent college authority
2010–2023 — Post-merger + HEE absorbedColleges as approved providers; independent education body disappears
2026 proposed — if colleges not protected in draft GMC OrderIndependent quality voice at serious risk
Royal Colleges (independent professional authority)
GMC / national regulator
Government / NHS England / DHSC
Supporting the Portfolio Pathway

Flexibility and rigour are not in conflict.

Since November 2023, the Portfolio Pathway (formerly CESR) has replaced equivalence-based assessment with demonstration of Knowledge, Skills and Experience (KSE). This is a welcome development, particularly for SAS and Locally Employed Doctors who have historically lacked a structured, supported route to specialist registration.

RCPsych should be a champion of the Portfolio Pathway — but championing it means ensuring it is delivered with the same rigour and college-led quality assurance as the CCT route. Expansion of access is only meaningful if the standard is maintained.

The proposal: a structured online portfolio for SAS and LED doctors

  • Develop a dedicated, accessible online portfolio platform for SAS and Locally Employed Doctors — mirroring what exists for Resident Doctors
  • Structured guidance mapped to the Portfolio Pathway KSE framework for psychiatry
  • Supported progression with clear milestones and college-led assessment
  • Equity of access and equity of standard — both matter equally

Why college leadership of the Portfolio Pathway matters

  • Consistency of standard across all routes to specialist registration in psychiatry
  • Independent quality assurance not subject to workforce or service pressures
  • Expert assessment with the clinical depth to evaluate psychiatric KSE meaningfully
  • A pathway that supports genuine career development, not box-ticking
The consultation

What the profession should raise

Key questions for the draft GMC Order 2026 — framed around patient safety and educational quality.

Who is independently accountable for the standard?

If formal college examinations are de-emphasised and the Portfolio Pathway expands as the default route, what independent mechanism assures the public that a specialist doctor has reached the required standard?

The draft Order must name the body independently accountable for this assurance.

Portfolio Pathway governance at scale

The Portfolio Pathway is a necessary and welcome route for SAS, LED, and internationally trained doctors. As it expands, a college-led quality framework must accompany it. Flexibility and rigour must coexist.

The consultation must define the quality assurance framework for PP at scale.

Separating education from service pressure

With DHSC now holding education policy alongside NHS delivery, the principle that training standards cannot be compromised to fill workforce gaps must be actively protected.

The draft Order must enshrine the independence of educational quality from service delivery targets.

Formal college voice in the new framework

The college's formal statutory voice within the GMC has diminished progressively since 1858. The draft GMC Order 2026 must not reduce it further — it should formalise a mechanism by which independent professional expertise shapes regulatory decisions on education standards.

A statutory consultation requirement with colleges on all education standards decisions should be written into the Order.

Oversight of alternative training providers

The NHS 10-Year Plan introduces alternative training providers outside the traditional college and deanery structure. A clear inspection and accreditation framework, led by colleges with the relevant clinical expertise, must be a condition of their approval.

Who will inspect, accredit, and hold these providers to account?

Equity that does not compromise safety

Broadening access to specialist registration for SAS, LED, and internationally trained doctors is the right objective. But equity of access must not come at the cost of equity of standard — both are patient safety issues requiring college-led quality assurance.

How will consistency of standard be maintained as routes diversify?
Raoof for Dean · RCPsych 2026

Experienced leadership for a critical moment.

Why these reforms matter to me

I bring over 30 years of NHS experience, rooted in frontline clinical work as a trainee, SAS and consultant psychiatrist. I have also served in a wide range of educational leadership roles, including SAS Tutor, Clinical Tutor, Director of Medical Education, and Vice Chair of the Mental Health Act Approval Panel (NHS Midlands and East).

Within the College, I have contributed extensively through committees and by leading major programmes, including the International Congress, Mental Health Act approval courses, supervisor training, and the National Autism Training Programme for Psychiatrists (NATPP) — supported by Faculties, Divisions and incredible colleagues.

As Associate Dean, I led the establishment of RCPsych Learn and oversee a significant proportion of the College's educational delivery, including Certificate and Diploma courses and MRCPsych eLearning. I am currently leading the MPAC Review and the International Congress.

I sit on the BJPsych Advances Editorial Board and the College's Digital Strategy Group.

This is a particularly challenging time for our profession. Workforce shortages, service pressures, NHS reform, evolving regulatory structures — including the draft GMC Order 2026 and the Medical Training Review — and increasing divergence among the devolved nations all raise real concerns about who will continue to uphold standards should training systems change. In this context, the College's role as a trusted, independent voice becomes even more critical.

We must also engage robustly with Mental Health Act training and implementation, and foster international collaboration and bidirectional learning.

"I have always believed the College should feel like a professional home — a community that stands alongside us and supports us at every stage of our careers to do our best for our patients."

"The Dean's role is not just about training, curricula and examinations, but about ensuring that sense of belonging, development and support throughout our professional lives."

"Supporting Colleagues. Safeguarding Standards in Uncertain, Changing Times."

Key priorities as Dean

Safeguard standards in service, training and assessment — and lead RCPsych's response to the draft GMC Order 2026
Develop a structured, accessible online Portfolio Pathway for SAS and Locally Employed Doctors — ensuring equity of access and equity of standard
Structured, equitable support for SAS, Locally Employed and Resident Doctors at all career stages, not only during training but as a lifelong professional partner
Ensure MRCPsych examinations and recruitment processes are fair, forward-looking, and fit for purpose
Robust engagement with policymakers on the Medical Training Review, GMC reforms, and Mental Health Act training
High-quality, accessible CPD for colleagues in all grades and settings via RCPsych Learn and beyond
Implementation of the College's Academic Strategy — promoting a research-active culture and evidence-based practice
Foster international collaboration and bidirectional learning via the International Congress and global partnerships

Your vote. Our future.

The RCPsych Dean election is open now. Vote for the leadership you want for the College — and for the independent voice that matters for our patients and our profession.

RCPsych Dean Election 2026
Vote Raoof
27 May – 10 June 2026
Also — respond to the draft GMC Order 2026 consultation
Closes 23 June 2026
Supporting Colleagues  ·  Safeguarding Standards in Uncertain, Changing Times