Health and Care Professions Council determination — review hearing
HCPTS extends Jennifer Ward's conditions of practice for a further year
The HCPTS review panel found continuing impairment and added a return-to-practice requirement. The varied substantive conditions run from 5 September 2026.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 3 August 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026
Conditions on practice (practising with restrictions) — 1 year
Data last checked: 22 September 2026Report a correction
What does “practising with restrictions” mean?
Conditions of practice allow the practitioner to keep working but only subject to specific restrictions — for example, supervision, limits on certain procedures, or required reporting to the regulator.
Concerning Jennifer Ward, speech and language therapist (Health and Care Professions Council SL32091).
Decision date: 3 August 2026 · Hearing started 3 August 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel extended speech and language therapist Jennifer Ward's conditions of practice for 12 months from 5 September 2026. It found continuing impairment following earlier clinical and recordkeeping misconduct, with insufficient progress in remediation. The varied conditions add a return-to-practice requirement and retain supervision and competency requirements. The panel noted a possible voluntary-removal application, but no removal was granted at this hearing.
Charges
The review concerned earlier misconduct findings involving assessment, recordkeeping, escalation and working outside the scope of practice in the care of four patients. Conditions of practice were first imposed in 2020 and extended at earlier reviews.
Findings
The current panel found continuing impairment on both personal and public grounds, with insufficient further remediation and a risk of repetition. It varied and extended the substantive conditions for 12 months from 5 September 2026, adding a return-to-practice requirement to address deskilling. Although the page's outcome label says interim conditions, the reasoned decision and formal order expressly concern a substantive Article 30 review. Voluntary removal was anticipated but had not been granted.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.