College of Kinesiologists of Ontario

Complaints and Discipline

The College receives complaints, concerns and reports about the practice or conduct of kinesiologists. All complaints are reviewed by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) and a decision is made on how to proceed. The Registrar may also initiate an investigation based on other information coming to the College’s attention if there is reason to believe a kinesiologist has committed an act of professional misconduct, or is incompetent or incapacitated. Registrar’s Reports are also reviewed and decided by the ICRC. Not all information received results in an investigation, and some information is about individuals not registered with the College but who are using the restricted title “kinesiologist”.

The ICRC is a screening committee and determines whether or not an allegation warrants a referral to the Discipline Committee for a hearing. If a referral is not warranted, there are other options available to the ICRC. These include ordering a kinesiologist to complete a specified continuing education or remediation program (SCERP), requiring a kinesiologist to appear before the Committee to be cautioned in person, or issuing written advice. The ICRC can also decide to take no action on a matter.

Matters received by the ICRC

On the complaint received in 2016/2017, a panel of the ICRC took no action on five incidents and issued written advice on one incident. Of the 10 QA referrals, nine were dealt with informally by the ICRC and no formal investigation was initiated. One QA referral ended in an investigation where an oral caution was ordered. The three Registrar’s Reports are still outstanding at the time of writing.

Health Professions Appeal and Review Board

Decisions made by the ICRC can be appealed to the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB). The complaint from 2016/2017 was appealed and a hearing is pending.

registrar's inquiries

Any information that comes to the attention of the Registrar that is not a formal complaint from a member of the public, a kinesiologist or other healthcare professional is assessed as to whether a formal investigation is required. In some cases, informal measures are taken, such as meeting with a kinesiologist to discuss the concerns and provide direction, and the file is closed.

In 2016/2017 the College received nine mandatory self-reports and five other non-mandatory reports from various sources. Three of these reports resulted in formal investigations. One report ended in a resignation and agreement to never practise again. The remaining reports were either closed and no further action was taken, or involved meetings between the kinesiologist and the Registrar and/or the Director, Professional Conduct.

The College received 16 formal reports of misuse of title and followed up with the individual and/or the employer.

DISCIPLINE

The Discipline Committee received its first referral in June 2016, which involved three different investigations about one kinesiologist. Even though the kinesiologist resigned in April 2016, the ICRC retains jurisdiction over any conduct that occurred before the resignation and the Discipline Committee has the full range of penalty options before it when the matter is heard.

The allegations involved submitting false and/or misleading invoices, failing to cooperate with the College’s investigation, failure to keep records, and practising while suspended, among others. The summary of the hearing and the Committee’s decisions and reasons is published on the College website.

The kinesiologist received an oral reprimand. The penalty also included a 10 month suspension with a two month remission should the other terms of the penalty be fulfilled, which included meeting with a mentor and submitting to inspections. This penalty will only come into effect if and when the former kinesiologist applies and is granted a new certificate of registration. One of the principles of penalty is to ensure that it serves as a general deterrent to the membership at large and to educate the profession on the standards of acceptable practice and conduct. The penalty in this case will serve as a baseline should the Discipline Committee receive similar allegations in which they make findings.