Sarah Sikpa

Preliminary matters

Hearing in private

1. At the outset of the hearing, the Registrant applied for any reference to her financial situation to be heard in private.

2. Ms Bass, on behalf of the HCPC, agreed with this course of action.

3. The Panel had in mind the HCPTS Practice Note entitled “Conducting Hearings in Private” and accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor.

4. The Panel decided that any information relating to the Registrant’s financial situation would be heard in private in order to protect her private life, in accordance with Rule 10(1)(a) of the HCPC Conduct and Competence Committee (Procedure) Rules 2003 (“the Rules”).

Background

5. At the time of the allegations, Ms Sikpa (“the Registrant”) worked as a Band 8a Practitioner Psychologist with the Black Country Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”). She initially worked at the Trust through an employment agency from October 2015, but was employed directly by the Trust from 1 November 2016. The Trust merged with Dudley and Walsall Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust in April 2020 to form Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, which is what the Trust is now known as.

6. The Registrant was suspended by the Trust pending investigation in March 2018. The investigation included conducting an audit of her clinical caseload.

7. On 25 April 2018, the HCPC received an anonymous referral about the Registrant which identified a number of concerns about her practice.

8. The HCPC contacted the Trust about the concerns. The Trust supplied information to the HCPC in August 2018 which appeared to confirm that the Trust had identified issues with record-keeping, including that the Registrant did not complete care plans and risk assessments for some service users.

9. On 29 January 2020, an Investigating Committee panel of the HCPC determined that the concerns should be referred to the Conduct and Competence Committee.

10. At a substantive hearing held on 7-16 June 2022 and 27-30 September 2022, the panel made findings of fact and that some of the facts found proved amounted to misconduct. The panel determined that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of her misconduct on both the personal and public components, on the basis of the need to protect the public as well as to uphold public confidence in the profession. A Suspension Order for a period of 12 months was imposed.

11. At a first substantive review hearing held on 27 September 2023, a reviewing panel decided that the Registrant’s fitness to practise remained impaired on both the personal and public components, for the same reasons set out in the decision of the substantive panel. In coming to its decision, the reviewing panel noted that the Registrant had not provided any of the written material recommended by the earlier substantive panel. The Suspension Order was extended for a further period of 6 months.

12. At a second substantive review hearing held on 25 March 2024, the reviewing panel concluded that the Registrant’s level of insight had developed since the last review. However, it was decided that the Registrant had not demonstrated full insight and she also had not had the opportunity to demonstrate that her learning and insight had been embedded in her practice. The panel therefore concluded that there remained a risk of repetition of similar conduct and therefore a potential risk of harm to service users. Further, it was decided that public confidence in the profession would be undermined if the panel were to conclude that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was no longer impaired.

13. The panel therefore concluded that the Registrant’s fitness to practise remained impaired on the basis of the personal component and the public component. The panel decided that a Conditions of Practice Order for a period of 18 months should be imposed as follows:

The Registrar is directed to annotate the Register to show that, for a period of 18 months from the date that this Order comes into effect (“the Operative Date”), you, Ms Sarah Sikpa, must comply with the following conditions of practice:

1. You must not undertake professional practice as a sole Practitioner Psychologist.

2. You must inform the HCPC within seven days if you take up any professional work as a Practitioner Psychologist.

3. Within 14 days of taking up employment as a Practitioner Psychologist, you must place yourself and remain under the supervision of a workplace supervisor who is a Senior Practitioner Psychologist registered by the HCPC and supply details of your supervisor to the HCPC. You must attend upon that supervisor as required and follow their advice and recommendations.

4. You must work with your workplace supervisor to formulate a Personal Development Plan designed to address the following areas:

• All aspects of record-keeping, with particular reference to:

­- Care plans;
­- Risk assessments;
­- Timely discharge.

• Reflection on the importance of the above to your professional practice.

5. Within three months of taking up employment as a Practitioner Psychologist you must forward a copy of your Personal Development Plan to the HCPC.

6. You must meet with your workplace supervisor on a monthly basis to consider your progress towards achieving the aims set out in your Personal Development Plan.

7. You must allow your workplace supervisor to provide information to the HCPC about your progress towards achieving the aims set out in your Personal Development Plan.

8. You must arrange for an audit of the following areas of your practice by your supervisor (monthly for the first six months of taking up employment as a Practitioner Psychologist, and thereafter every three months):

• All aspects of record-keeping, with particular reference to:

-­ Care plans;
­- Risk assessments;
­- Timely discharge.

This audit to be measured against:

• the policies and procedures of any organisation by whom you are employed as a Practitioner Psychologist;

• the HCPC Standards of Proficiency for Practitioner Psychologists;

• the HCPC Standards of Conduct, Performance, and Ethics.

You must send the HCPC a copy of the results of each audit within seven days of receipt.

9. You must inform the HCPC within seven days of becoming aware of:

A. any patient safety incident you are involved in;

B. any investigation started against you; and

C. any disciplinary proceedings taken against you.

10. You must inform the following parties that your registration is subject to these conditions:

A. any organisation or person employing or contracting with you to undertake professional work;

B. any agency you are registered with or apply to be registered with to undertake professional work (at the time of application);

C. any prospective employer for professional work (at the time of your application).

11. You must allow the HCPC to share, as necessary, details about your performance, compliance with, and/or progress under these conditions with:

A. any organisation or person employing or contracting with you to undertake professional work;

B. any agency you are registered with or apply to be registered with to undertake professional work (at the time of application);

C. any prospective employer for professional work (at the time of your application);

12. You will be responsible for meeting any and all costs associated with complying with these conditions.

13. Any condition requiring you to provide information is to be met by you providing such information to the HCPC marked for the attention of the relevant HCPC Case Manager.

Submissions

14. Ms Bass submitted that the Registrant’s fitness to practise remained impaired. Ms Bass referred to the primary concerns arising out of the facts found proved, namely failures in relation to care plans, risk assessments, and timely discharge, and submitted that the Registrant had not demonstrated that she had addressed the deficiencies in any documentary evidence. Ms Bass submitted that the Registrant’s insight and reflections had not developed since March 2024. However, Ms Bass pointed to the Registrant’s expressed commitment to working under conditions and invited the Panel to continue the Conditions of Practice Order for a period of 12 months. Ms Bass asked the Panel to bear in mind that if it amended the conditions, any amendments had to ensure that conditions were targeted at the areas of concern and were measurable and verifiable.

15. The Registrant gave evidence under Affirmation. She told the Panel that she had changed both as an individual and as a registered professional as a result of the regulatory proceedings. In addition, she explained that her insight and reflection into the misconduct found proved had changed and developed. While initially she did not engage with the allegations as she felt she had done what was in the best interests of the clients, over time her thinking had shifted as a result of the proceedings and she began listening to the allegations, and recognised the needs of her team in terms of proper record-keeping, and that the team needed to be able to understand her records and the situation with the client, particularly, for example, if she was off sick. The Registrant recognised the need to take on board the needs of her colleagues and the service and this meant that she had taken the misconduct on board, learnt as a result, and was glad that she had learnt.

16. The Registrant told the Panel about her voluntary work with two organisations. The first, Burton House Angels, is an organisation which the Registrant volunteered with one and a half days a week, and at which she provided support and advocacy services to people discharged from inpatient mental health services. The Registrant told the Panel that as part of this work she wrote and contributed to risk assessments, using skills that were relatable to her professional practise. She also wrote associated care plans. She had completed approximately 30 risk assessment in the last year. The Registrant had group sessions with her manager and other volunteers once a month, at which there were group discussions, and also met with her manager individually.

17. The second organisation, Handsworth Friends, is an organisation which provides a community food club as well as well-being support, and at which the Registrant worked one and a half days a week. The Registrant met with her manager to discuss any matters on an ad-hoc basis.

18. When asked questions by the Panel, the Registrant recognised that it may be possible to obtain some documents evidencing her records from Burton House Angels, suitably redacted, to demonstrate her records, and that her manager could provide a report about her record-keeping.

19. The Registrant evidenced some 43 attempts at finding a professional role but told the Panel that it was not possible to find a role, in that employers did not want to consider her with the conditions in place. She told the Panel that this was just a snapshot of her attempts to find employment and that she had mostly sought roles at Band 8a, but that recently she had made a couple of applications for lower grade roles. When questioned by the Panel about seeking work at a lower Band 7, which may assist in helping employers be able to implement the conditions, the Registrant said that she would be open to this and that this made her more hopeful about the prospect of finding work.

20. The Registrant asked the Panel to lift the conditions of practice but also stated that she had always been willing to comply with conditions, had done so previously under interim conditions, and evidenced previous supervisors’ reports obtained under a previous interim conditions of practice order which showed that she had complied well.

21. The Registrant told the Panel that she had previously completed formal training which addressed her record-keeping failures. She said that since the last review hearing she had read relevant articles and done online training in the form of watching lectures and YouTube videos. She said that she was unable to fund more formal training due to financial constraints.

22. The Registrant told the Panel about the considerable financial difficulties she had experienced as a result of not being able to find work and provided some documentary evidence.

23. Both parties made closing submissions. Ms Bass reiterated the HCPC position. The Registrant referred to her developing insight, her willingness to engage in the process, and the difficult impact of these proceedings on her.

24. The Panel took into account the HCPC bundle, the Registrant’s bundle, which included testimonials from her managers at the organisations at which she undertook voluntary work, and a written submission document from the Registrant, as well as some evidence relating to the Registrant’s financial situation.

Impairment

25. In undertaking this review, the Panel took into account the documentary evidence, the submissions from both parties, and the Registrant’s oral evidence.

26. The Panel accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor as to the proper approach it should adopt. The Panel was aware that its purpose today was to conduct a comprehensive review of the Registrant’s fitness to return to unrestricted practice and considered the HCPTS Practice Notes entitled “Review of Article 30 Sanction Orders” and “Fitness to Practise Impairment”. The Panel must exercise its own independent judgement with regard to impairment. Only if impairment remained would the Panel then go on to consider what sanction, if any, to impose.

27. The Panel first considered whether the Registrant’s fitness to practise was currently impaired. The Panel took into account all of the material and evidence before it.

28. The Panel considered the Registrant’s level of insight. The Panel took into account the Registrant’s written reflection in an email dated 13 October 2025, as well as a previous undated reflection written by her.

29. In her oral evidence today, the Registrant demonstrated that she had been on a journey in respect of her insight and the Panel accepted that this journey had progressed to accepting her misconduct and why it was wrong. The Panel also noted from the Registrant’s evidence that she had put this understanding and reflection into practice in her voluntary work. This was evident in the risk assessments and care plans she wrote for Burton House Angels. Furthermore, in her work at Handsworth Friends she was trying to introduce risk assessments, and also went as far as making a note as to recommendations and a statement of risk at the end of her notes. This demonstrated her understanding of the importance of charting the level of risk generally even if no risk assessments per se were part of the paperwork at that organisation.

30. Having considered all of the evidence, the Panel decided that the Registrant’s insight had developed further and was at a good level. However, the Panel had no documentary evidence before it that she had addressed the concerns arising out of the misconduct. She has not practiced under the conditions and has not embedded any learning or development in her understanding and reflection. The Panel considered that it would have been assisted by seeing the documentation, including risk assessments, care plans, and other records completed as part of her voluntary work, as well as a detailed report from her managers about the quality of her voluntary work.

31. In light of the absence of such information, the Registrant had been unable to demonstrate in a practical and real sense that the Registrant has addressed the concerns. On that basis, the Panel was unable to conclude that there was no longer a real risk of repetition of the misconduct.

32. Therefore, the Panel determined that the Registrant’s fitness to practise remained impaired on the personal component.

33. The Panel went on to consider the public component. Due to the ongoing risk of repetition, the Panel found that the need to uphold standards and confidence in the profession would be undermined if no finding of impairment were made.

34. Accordingly, the Panel found that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was impaired on the public component.

Sanction

35. The Panel approached the question of sanction from the least restrictive upwards. It was aware that the purpose of sanction is to protect the public and uphold the public interest and not to punish. It exercised the principle of proportionality, being mindful that the least restrictive sanction necessary and sufficient to address the concerns and risks, and no more, should be imposed. The Panel has accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor and took into account the HCPC Sanctions Policy.

36. As a matter of proportionality, the Panel took into account the Registrant’s evidence of the impact upon her financially of not being able to obtain work, as well as the impact more generally of the ongoing proceedings and on her right to practise.

37. The Panel first considered whether to take no action. It concluded that this would be wholly inappropriate and would provide no restriction on the Registrant’s practice, which would be needed to protect the public. Nor would it be sufficient to address the public interest concerns in the case. A Caution would be insufficient for the same reasons, bearing in mind the level of seriousness of the misconduct and the real risk of repetition.

38. The Panel next considered conditions of practice. The Panel carefully considered the conditions currently in place. The Panel took the view that Condition 8 was unnecessary, in that the requirements of the PDP and monthly supervision sessions were sufficient to address the concerns and provide sufficient safeguards. Condition 8 therefore added an unnecessarily onerous provision.

39. The Panel was satisfied that the current conditions, with the removal of Condition 8, were sufficient and also necessary to address the concerns, protect the public, and uphold the public confidence in the profession while allowing the Registrant to work subject to the necessary safeguards.

40. The Panel determined that this varied Conditions of Practice Order should run for a period of 12 months to reflect the seriousness of the misconduct, which has not yet been addressed. Such time will also allow the Registrant to find work (potentially at a level where the Registrant may be supported in complying with the conditions), to demonstrate that she has embedded her learning in her practice, and to prepare evidence to present to a review panel.

41. The Panel went on to consider a Suspension Order but decided that this would be disproportionate in light of the Registrant’s further developments in her insight and reflection, the transferable skills she is developing in the voluntary sector, and her commitment to returning to her profession.

42. The Panel also considered that, in addition to the information required by the Conditions of Practice Order, a further reviewing panel would be assisted by the Registrant providing the following:

i. A detailed log of online training or learning and any training certificates;

ii. A further written reflection;

iii. Detailed testimonials from the Registrant’s managers at her voluntary work, including reference to the nature and quality of risk assessments and care plans written by the Registrant;

iv. Examples of risk assessments and care planning, suitably redacted, written by the Registrant in her voluntary work;

43. The varied Conditions of Practice Order will take effect from 28 October 2025.

44. This Order will be reviewed again before its expiry on 28 October 2026.

The Registrar is directed to vary the Conditions of Practice Order against the registration of Ms Sarah Sikpa for a further period of 12 months on the expiry of the existing Order. The conditions are:

1. You must not undertake professional practice as a sole Practitioner Psychologist.

2. You must inform the HCPC within seven days if you take up any professional work as a Practitioner Psychologist.

3. Within 14 days of taking up employment as a Practitioner Psychologist, you must place yourself and remain under the supervision of a workplace supervisor who is a Senior Practitioner Psychologist registered by the HCPC and supply details of your supervisor to the HCPC. You must attend upon that supervisor as required and follow their advice and recommendations.

4. You must work with your workplace supervisor to formulate a Personal Development Plan designed to address the following areas:

• All aspects of record-keeping, with particular reference to:

­ - Care plans;
­ - Risk assessments;
­ - Timely discharge.

• Reflection on the importance of the above to your professional practice.

5. Within three months of taking up employment as a Practitioner Psychologist you must forward a copy of your Personal Development Plan to the HCPC.

6. You must meet with your workplace supervisor on a monthly basis to consider your progress towards achieving the aims set out in your Personal Development Plan.

7. You must allow your workplace supervisor to provide information to the HCPC about your progress towards achieving the aims set out in your Personal Development Plan.

8. You must inform the HCPC within seven days of becoming aware of:

A. any patient safety incident you are involved in;

B. any investigation started against you; and

C. any disciplinary proceedings taken against you.

9. You must inform the following parties that your registration is subject to these conditions:

A. any organisation or person employing or contracting with you to undertake professional work;

B. any agency you are registered with or apply to be registered with to undertake professional work (at the time of application);

C. any prospective employer for professional work (at the time of your application).

10. You must allow the HCPC to share, as necessary, details about your performance, compliance with, and/or progress under these conditions with:

A. any organisation or person employing or contracting with you to undertake professional work;

B. any agency you are registered with or apply to be registered with to undertake professional work (at the time of application);

C. any prospective employer for professional work (at the time of your application);

11. You will be responsible for meeting any and all costs associated with complying with these conditions.

12. Any condition requiring you to provide information is to be met by you providing such information to the HCPC marked for the attention of the relevant HCPC Case Manager.

The Order imposed today will apply from 28 October 2025.

This Order will be reviewed again before its expiry on 28 October 2026.

History of Hearings for Sarah Sikpa