Background

• Sending candidates to their own or just any GP (doctor) can create a conflict of interest! This can jeopardise the quality and objectivity of the report. The use of just any GP can cause extensive inconsistency in how the candidate is processed and, as most GP’s are set up to treat the ill, health assessment candidates are often left with a long wait while the ill are given priority.
• Utilising a wide range of providers and Doctors delivers inconsistent reporting! Making accurate decisions difficult.
• Employing organisations expect value for money and require accurate data and evidence for correct decision making! Too many reports only provide a “fi t for work” or “not fit for work” assessment without either explaining why or providing the evidence to back up the recommendation.
• Lack of available booking times when often desperately needed to coincide with other employment requirements or selections along with untimely or slow reporting! This problem commonly leads to employers having to continue the selection process and, not infrequently, making the appointment before receiving the assessment or report.
• Receiving a large paper based health assessment report through the post. Paper based reports take up a lot of space making review more difficult, let alone the precious time that it takes to receive the report through the postal system.
• Having a provider that can deliver quality, consistent, reproducible, on time, cost effective reports; a provider that delivers fully integrated systems and ‘add-ons’ and ongoing research to improve testing techniques; a provider that can deliver customized health assessments and outcomes.
• Having a provider that optimizes the use of technology for all aspects of the process, including the easy management of DATA, delivering a user friendly, integrated, efficient process. In short – a more professional approach is both needed and available.