Approaching the September 2026 Clinical Competency Portfolio Review

With the September 2026 Clinical Competency Portfolio Review (CCPR) approaching, trainees and partially comparable specialist international medical graduates (SIMGs) are encouraged to review the key dates, transition arrangements and eligibility requirements. 

The CCPR is a holistic, evidence-based review of a candidate’s performance across Stage 3 training. We recognise that candidates may have questions or concerns about how their performance in an Independent Observed Clinical Activity (IOCA) may affect their overall outcome. An IOCA is one of several sources of evidence considered through the CCPR; no single IOCA rating, assessment result or other data point automatically determines the outcome. 

How portfolios will be reviewed 

The CCPR considers the complete body of evidence accumulated by a candidate, including all completed and recorded Stage 3 In-Training Assessments (ITAs), Observed Clinical Activities (OCAs), IOCAs and associated narrative feedback. 

This evidence is considered against the required end-of-Stage 3 standard across the CanMEDS roles and relevant Fellowship competencies. The review considers: 

• the overall pattern and consistency of performance 
• the trajectory of performance during Stage 3, including evidence of improvement 
• the sufficiency and quality of the available evidence 
• quantitative ratings and narrative feedback 
• evidence across the CanMEDS roles and relevant Fellowship competencies 
• any relevant contextual information. 

Individual ITAs, OCAs and IOCAs contribute evidence to the portfolio; they are not treated as separate pass-or-fail assessments for determining the CCPR outcome. The portfolio as a whole must provide sufficient evidence that the required end-of-Stage 3 standard has been achieved. 

An isolated instance of lower performance does not automatically result in an unsuccessful outcome where the broader portfolio demonstrates the required standard. Conversely, recurring concerns, insufficient or inconsistent evidence, or concerns in key competency areas will be considered as part of the overall progression decision. 

Screening and contextual review 

Each portfolio is initially considered against the published screening criteria. Where a portfolio does not meet one or more criteria, or where potential concerns are identified, it will undergo a contextual review by two calibrated Panel Assessors. 

Referral for contextual review does not, in itself, indicate an unsuccessful outcome. It allows the evidence to be examined in greater detail and supports fair, consistent and transparent decision-making. 

During the contextual review, the Panel Assessors synthesise the quantitative ratings, narrative feedback and relevant contextual information before providing recommendations to the Progression Competence Panel. The Progression Competence Panel considers this advice and makes the final progression decision. 

Further information 

Candidates should review the following resources before applying 

• CCPR webpage 
• Assessment criteria  
• Policy and procedure 
• FAQs.

For further enquiries, contact clinicals@ranzcp.org.