Review of Supervisory/Educational Competence

The collegial nature of the clinical pastoral education profession requires that practitioners mutually monitor each other’s professional competence and take action when concern about incompetence, impairment, or misconduct arise (See Code of Professional Ethics for Members of ACPE) such that student safety, justice, or the CPE program’s quality is compromised. Informal, collegial consultation is strongly encouraged. ACPE has established the following when a more formal process is required due to the educator’s unwillingness or inability to work with less formal feedback or the seriousness of the concern.

1. Request for review – A source in a relationship of professional responsibility to an educator (e.g., former student, member of Community of Practice, member of peer review committee, Accreditation Commission, administrative supervisor) sends a written request for review of supervisory/educational competence to the Certification Commission chair, of no more than 5 pages, clearly stating why the source believes the educator currently fails to meet applicable outcomes or competencies and referencing the specific outcome(s) or certified educator competencies at issue. .

2. Determination if a review is warranted – The Commission chair, in consultation with the Professional Ethics Commission chair, ACPE Executive Director, and legal counsel if appropriate, decides if a review is warranted. If it is determined that no review is warranted, the process ends here. If it is determined that a review is warranted, a list of the competencies in question from the written request deemed justifiable for review of the educator’s supervisory/educational competence will be sent to the educator.

3. Contact with person lodging request – The Commission chair, in consultation with the Professional Ethics Commission chair, ACPE Executive Director, and legal counsel if appropriate, decides whether to direct the educator in question not to have contact with the person(s) lodging the request.

4. Review time frame – If a review is warranted, the Commission Chair appoints a review committee to act on behalf of the Commission and designates the time and place for a meeting with the educator in question to occur within 45 days of receiving the request for review of competency. The committee will consist of five persons, one serving as presenter and a sixth person who records meeting process notes but has neither voice nor vote, compose the review committee.

5. The educator can appeal a negative decision of the review committee to the Commission. (See Appeal of Certification Commission Decisions.)

*The educator may identify a support person not connected to the Certification Commission. This person would serve as a support to them during the weeks/months of the review process but would not attend the actual review meeting with the committee.

Materials for the Review

The Commission chair, in consultation with review committee members, requests written materials for the review committee from the educator.

1. A statement responding to each ACPE competency at issue, how the educator understands the stated concern(s) about each outcome or competency, how they understand the congruence of their practice with each outcome or competency, and any actions being taken to remediate the concerns raised.
2. Any additional documents as determined by the Certification Chair and the review committee.
3. The educator may also choose to submit video or a presentation in response to the request for materials.

*Written materials should be submitted using a standard 1-inch margin and a 12-point Times New Roman or Calibri font. Responses should be concise and to the point, not to exceed five (5) single-spaced pages. Supplementary materials such as verbatims, bibliography, etc. do not count in the page limit. Materials should be cited as needed. Note: Only the Use of Clinical Materials Consent Form is acceptable for obtaining students’ written permission to use personally identifiable material.

!Please note that failure to submit the requested materials by the assigned date will result in the immediate suspension of the educator’s credentials.

After the Review

1. The review committee action report is sent to the educator in question no later than ten business days after the meeting, with copies to the Commission Chair, Professional Ethics Commission Chair, and ACPE Executive Director.

2. The committee action report specifies the means for determining that the requirements of the ruling have been satisfied and defines further action should the educator fail to satisfy the requirements imposed.

3. Possible Rulings and Outcomes– The Review Committee
   1. confirms competence; the review is ended.
   2. expresses concerns, with specific recommendations for enhancing competence.
   3. counsels and gives specific instructions for remediation to be followed under the direction of the Certification Commission for a designated period of time. This may include a return to meet a subcommittee of the Certification Commission for review. Failure to comply with specific instructions for remediation could result in the suspension of the educator’s credentials.
   4. suspends the right to practice CPE supervision. Within three years of the date of the suspension of their credentials, persons will have the opportunity to start the process over and apply to be a CEC in a center that is accredited for Certified Educator CPE. If the person is accepted to an accredited center, then they will be eligible to apply for the ACPE Certification process. The applicant will bear the burden to demonstrate both their desire and ability to re-engage in the certification process from the beginning.

4. Notifications: The Commission informs all directly involved parties of the disposition.