Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member

Company: Tyrogen Limited (16884876)
Function: Independent maladministration and malpractice case adjudication
Reports to: Malpractice governance route
Accountable to: The malpractice governance route and applicable panel terms, with independence preserved from the original matter and investigation route where required
Role type: Independent panel member role
Engagement model: Standing contracted independent panel pool
Remuneration basis: Per incident / case basis, with optional chair fee or chair uplift, as set out centrally in Role Profiles section 4.4
Review cycle: Appointment and suitability reviewed at least annual, and on any material scope, conflict, or panel-performance issue

Role purpose

The Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member determines malpractice and maladministration outcomes and sanctions through an independent case-decision route. The role ensures that investigations, findings, outcomes, and sanctions are reviewed fairly, proportionately, and on the basis of the available evidence, with reasoning that is defensible and capable of scrutiny.

Role scope

The role applies to malpractice and maladministration matters allocated through Tyrogen's formal malpractice route. The role covers:

• review of investigation evidence, findings, and related records,
• independent consideration of outcomes and sanctions,
• fair and proportionate decision-making,
• and production of a clear rationale capable of review and scrutiny.

Key responsibilities

The Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member will:

• review case files, investigation findings, and supporting evidence objectively,
• consider whether findings are supported by the evidence presented,
• determine or contribute to the determination of appropriate outcomes and sanctions,
• ensure fairness, proportionality, and consistency in case decision-making,
• take account of the seriousness of the matter, evidential sufficiency, and relevant procedural context,
• document or support documentation of the decision rationale clearly,
• identify and raise any concerns about evidence sufficiency, fairness, or process integrity,
• preserve the independence and credibility of the malpractice decision route,
• and support an auditable, fair, and defensible case outcome.

Decision-making and authority

The Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member has authority to:

• consider case evidence independently,
• question the sufficiency of investigation findings or recommended actions,
• determine or contribute to the determination of outcomes and sanctions within the panel route,
• request clarification or additional information through the proper route where the case file is materially incomplete,
• require visibility of investigation-route validity, allocation checks, and prior-involvement boundaries sufficient to confirm that the decision route is independent and defensible,
• and record or support a reasoned decision outcome.

The role must operate within the formal malpractice framework and must not accept informal direction from those who investigated, approved, or were materially involved in the original matter where independence is required.

Regulatory and control context

The Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member sits within Tyrogen's control framework as part of the independent decision route for malpractice and maladministration matters. In particular, the role supports:

• the independence, competence, and case-handling expectations under Ofqual Handbook Condition A8,
• the requirement that investigators and decision-makers are not treated as interchangeable where prior involvement or personal interest would compromise the integrity of the route,
• the controlled case and panel route in Malpractice and Maladministration Policy and Malpractice Process,
• proportionate and reasoned determination of findings, sanctions, and learner-impact consequences,
• and escalation where a case reveals wider control failure, incident significance, notification relevance, or an appeal right that must be handled through connected owner routes.

Where the case route cannot be validly constituted, where independence is compromised, or where the outcome indicates wider learner, standards, incident, or regulatory consequences, the matter must be escalated through the correct governance, incident, appeals, or regulator-facing path rather than treated as a self-contained panel decision only.

Working relationships

The Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member works closely with:

• the panel chair where applicable,
• other panel members,
• the malpractice administration route,
• the Responsible Officer or governance support route where escalation or process support is needed,
• and relevant record holders where additional information is properly requested.

Person specification

The role-holder is expected to demonstrate:

Essential

• evidence-review capability and sound judgement,
• understanding of fairness, integrity, proportionality, and sanctions decision-making,
• ability to review case materials objectively and independently,
• ability to distinguish evidential strengths, weaknesses, and material facts,
• ability to explain reasoning clearly and proportionately,
• integrity, discretion, and respect for confidentiality,
• and ability to work within a documented and auditable case-decision route.

Desirable

• experience in investigations, misconduct review, complaints, adjudication, governance, regulation, or formal panel work,
• experience reading evidence bundles, findings reports, or sanction records,
• and familiarity with awarding, assessment, compliance, or public-confidence-sensitive environments.

Independence and conflicts requirements

• Panel members must not have investigated, approved, or materially influenced the original matter where independence is required.
• Case-specific conflicts must be checked before allocation and again if new information emerges.
• Any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest must be declared immediately.
• Panel members must not accept instruction, pressure, or informal influence from parties connected to the original matter or investigation.
• Remuneration must never be linked to a particular sanction or case outcome.

Measures of success / KPIs

The effectiveness of the Malpractice & Maladministration Panel Member may be evidenced through:

• cases considered within target timescales,
• decisions showing fair, proportionate, and clearly reasoned outcomes,
• case records complete enough to withstand internal or external scrutiny,
• independence preserved across allocations,
• conflicts identified and managed appropriately,
• reduction in avoidable weaknesses in rationale or record quality,
• and panel decisions contributing to confidence in the integrity of the malpractice route.

Outputs and records

The role is expected to contribute to or oversee:

• case outcome records,
• panel decision rationale,
• case review notes,
• conflict and allocation declarations,
• sanction rationale records where relevant,
• and escalation notes where evidence sufficiency, fairness, or process integrity is in doubt.

Appointment, induction, and review

Appointment to the role should be supported by:

• evidence of competence and judgement appropriate to panel work,
• independence and conflicts checks,
• role and panel-terms clarity,
• induction to Tyrogen's malpractice policy, process, and record expectations,
• and periodic review of suitability, availability, independence, and decision quality.

Linked documents

• Role Profiles
• Ofqual Handbook
• Malpractice and Maladministration Policy
• Malpractice & Maladministration Panel ToR
• Malpractice Process
• Appeals Process
• Incident Response Playbook
• Delegation of Authority
• Conflicts of Interest Policy
• Resourcing Plan for Regulated Awarding