Ahpra notification · All 15 National Boards
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals for Health Practitioners facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation
The allegation concerns your honesty — a record, a claim, a declaration or an account said not to be true.
- Records — a record altered, backdated, or missing what looked bad
- Impairment — a health condition not declared, or managed alone
- Claims — a Medicare claim or timesheet not matching what happened
- Credentials — a title, a qualification or experience overstated
- Interests — a business, a product or a referral interest never declared
- Account — an incomplete answer to a patient, an employer or Ahpra
- Speaking up — a concern about a colleague you knew of and did not raise
- Any other — concern about honesty, or allegation of dishonesty
Facing an allegation of dishonesty or misconduct like these — from your National Board, Ahpra, a panel or a tribunal?
Help with an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation starts here. This CPD course helps you remediate — and demonstrate the remediation, with a dated certificate for your written response, your portfolio or a Board, panel or tribunal direction.
Immediate access · certificate on completion · twelve months' access
- 2 CPD hours
- Self-paced
- Every registered profession
- CPD certificate
- Bulk buy: any 5 for A$850 · any 10 for A$1,400
At a glance
- Who it is for
- Any registered practitioner facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation, a National Board investigation, a panel or a tribunal hearing about honesty or integrity — a record altered or left incomplete, a claim or a timesheet, a title or a CV overstated, an undeclared interest, an incomplete account, or a concern not raised
- Regulators covered
- Ahpra and all fifteen National Boards, plus the NSW Councils, the HCCC and the OHO
- Length
- 6 sections, 22 lessons, 2 CPD hours
- Format
- Self-paced, online, immediate access, twelve months from purchase
- Certificate
- Issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses on completion, dated, with the course title and 2 CPD hours
- Price
- A$200 · any 5 for A$850 · any 10 for A$1,400
Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics CoursesRemediation courses for regulatory processes.
Who this course is for
Facing an allegation of dishonesty
Or of a breach of probity or integrity: Ahpra’s letter says a record, a claim, a CV or an account was not true. Probity is assessed as character rather than competence — whether your word and your record can be relied on — and it is assessed whether or not anyone was harmed. This course is how you answer that question, and show the account corrected.
Dealing with an Ahpra notification or complaint
A patient, a colleague, your employer, an insurer or a mandatory notifier has told Ahpra, and you have been asked for a written response — often with the record, the claim or the CV beside it. In a probity matter the response is read for its own honesty before anything else; this course sets out what a regulator weighs in a probity matter: insight, remediation, candour during the process, and whether there is a pattern.
You were not candid the first time
An answer to your employer, Ahpra or the Board that left out the hardest part, or did not match the record. Candour during the process is assessed in its own right, and a tribunal called one doctor’s denials to his employer, the Board and the tribunal “a significant breach of his professional obligations of candour and honesty”. A correction you make yourself, explained and dated, is read very differently from one made for you; take advice before you write it.
Under investigation, or under immediate action
Ahpra is investigating, or your Board has suspended your registration or imposed conditions while it does. An investigator reads the record, the claim, the roster or the system log beside your account, and an account the documents do not support becomes a probity question of its own, whatever the original concern was.
Facing a panel or a tribunal hearing
A panel has been convened, or your Board has referred you to the tribunal in your state or territory for professional misconduct. Dishonesty goes to whether you are a fit and proper person to hold registration — a GP who altered more than 4,000 record entries after a Medicare review had his registration cancelled — and correction and remediation completed before the hearing, dated and documented, are weighed every time.
Directed to complete probity training or remediation
Conditions on your registration, an undertaking, a panel or tribunal order, or your employer’s process require education in probity, ethics or honesty. The certificate records two dated CPD hours on probity and honesty, with the Boards’ codes of conduct quoted on honesty and integrity — the probity training such a direction names.
The concerns this course speaks to
Records altered, backdated or left incomplete
A note added later and dated as if written at the time, an entry changed after a complaint, an examination recorded that was not done, an entry left out because it would have looked bad. Clause 8.3 of the shared code requires records made at the time or as soon as possible afterwards; a dated later entry is ordinary practice, and an altered one is falsification. A GP who altered more than 4,000 record entries after a Medicare review had his registration cancelled. The course treats omission as falsification too.
Impairment — a health condition not declared
A condition not disclosed when it should have been, an impairment managed alone, alcohol or drugs behind a lapse explained another way. Impairment is one of the four grounds for a mandatory notification under the National Law, and clause 9.1 of the shared code asks a practitioner with a condition that could affect their judgement not to rely on their own assessment of the risk. It becomes a probity matter when the declaration was not accurate; a condition declared first, with a plan behind it, is read as insight.
Claims and hours that do not match what happened
A Medicare item for a service not provided or a consultation longer than it ran, a double bill, a timesheet or an on-call claim for hours not worked. Clause 8.11 of the shared code requires honesty and transparency in financial dealings, and a Medicare matter runs in the Commonwealth’s compliance process as well as Ahpra’s, with repayment, fines or criminal charges among the consequences. An employer misled by a timesheet is still misled. The course gives financial impropriety a lesson of its own.
Qualifications, a title or experience overstated
A specialist title the Board has not conferred, “Dr” used without the registration behind it, procedures listed that were only observed, a CV or a practice profile that claims more than was done. Clause 8.5 of the shared code bars advertising that is false, misleading or deceptive wherever it appears, and the course treats misrepresentation as a serious breach whether it was intentional or negligent. Correcting every copy — the CV, the website, the directory listing — with the date, is the first step.
An interest that was never declared
A share in a service you referred patients to, a product sold from the practice, a referral arrangement, a gift or hospitality from a company. Clause 8.10 of the shared code requires you to tell patients where you hold an interest that could affect, or be seen to affect, their care, and not to accept inducements; the test is declaration and management, not the absence of any interest. The course’s lesson on conflicts asks you to recognise and declare actual, potential and perceived conflicts, and is clear that an undeclared one can lead to disciplinary outcomes even where no harm results.
An account that was not complete — to a patient, an employer or Ahpra
An answer accurate in what it said and misleading in what it left out, an explanation that changed as the evidence arrived, a correction made later without saying why. Clause 3.2 of the shared code asks you to communicate honestly, and candour during an investigation is assessed in its own right: a tribunal reprimanded a doctor who opened a colleague’s records and denied it to his employer, the Board and the tribunal, after the Board had suspended him for 14 months. The course defines honesty as not misleading others by what is said or by what is left out, and counts full disclosure to a regulator as part of it.
A concern about a colleague you did not raise
Conduct you knew about and said nothing of, a record you signed off knowing it was not right, a colleague’s impairment noticed and left. Clause 8.1 of the shared code covers reporting obligations, and the National Law requires a notification where you form a reasonable belief that a colleague has practised while intoxicated or placed the public at risk through impairment or a significant departure from accepted standards (sections 140 and 141); Ahpra recorded 1,542 mandatory notifications in 2024/25. The course gives speaking up a lesson of its own.
Boundaries, and any other account said not to be true
A boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague concealed or denied, any other record, claim or statement said not to be true. A boundary matter becomes a probity matter when the account of it is not true, and dishonesty during the process goes to whether you are a fit and proper person to hold registration; it comes back from there when the account is corrected. Any probity allegation is measured against your own Board’s code, and the course pairs boundaries with trustworthiness: a practitioner who cannot be trusted to uphold boundaries has their integrity called into question.
Facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.
Buy this course — A$200.00What the course covers
Six sections and 22 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first five and a post-course assessment at the end.
Introduction to probity in healthcare
Four lessons: what probity is; why it matters in healthcare; how it relates to professionalism and ethics; and the regulatory expectations around it.
Core principles of probity
Four lessons: honesty, integrity and transparency; accuracy in documentation and record-keeping; truthfulness in communication with patients, colleagues and regulators; and declaring and managing conflicts of interest.
Probity in practice
Five lessons: examples of probity breaches in clinical and non-clinical settings; misrepresentation of qualifications or experience; falsifying records or data; financial impropriety and Medicare fraud; and boundaries and trustworthiness.
Regulatory and legal considerations
Three lessons: what Ahpra and the National Boards expect; notifications and the consequences of probity breaches; and how probity is assessed in fitness to practise investigations.
Promoting a culture of probity
Four lessons: encouraging openness and transparency in teams; the role of leadership and role modelling; speaking up and whistleblowing; and building trust with patients and the public.
Conclusion, key takeaways and assessment
The takeaways drawing the course together, then the post-course assessment. Your certificate is issued on completion and carries the date.
Show every lesson title
- Section 01 · Introduction to Probity in Healthcare
- What Is Probity?; Why Probity Matters in Healthcare; How Probity Relates to Professionalism and Ethics; Regulatory Expectations Around Probity.
- Section 02 · Core Principles of Probity
- Honesty, Integrity, and Transparency; Accuracy in Documentation and Record-Keeping; Truthfulness in Communication with Patients, Colleagues, and Regulators; Declaring and Managing Conflicts of Interest.
- Section 03 · Probity in Practice
- Examples of Probity Breaches in Clinical and Non-Clinical Settings; Misrepresentation of Qualifications or Experience; Falsifying Records or Data; Financial Impropriety and Medicare Fraud; Boundaries and Trustworthiness.
- Section 04 · Regulatory and Legal Considerations
- Expectations from Ahpra and National Boards; Notifications and the Consequences of Probity Breaches; How Probity Is Assessed in Fitness to Practise Investigations.
- Section 05 · Promoting a Culture of Probity
- Encouraging Openness and Transparency in Teams; Role of Leadership and Role Modelling; Speaking Up and Whistleblowing; Building Trust with Patients and the Public.
- Section 06 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways
- Conclusion; Key Takeaways.
How to respond to an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation
Ahpra, your National Board, a panel and a tribunal read a probity response for its own honesty before anything else. Ahpra says it needs to understand how you responded to the event — accepting accountability, declaring and sharing information about what happened, actively reflecting and updating your knowledge and skills, and being able to say how you would respond in similar circumstances in future. The course names what a regulator weighs alongside them in a probity matter: insight, remediation, candour during the process, and whether there is a pattern.
In a probity matter, the response is itself evidence of the thing in question.
- What was not right, said firstThe record, the claim, the CV or the account, and what was so — plainly, in the first person, with the record beside it and nothing qualified away.The course defines honesty as telling the truth and not misleading others, by what is said or by what is left out.
- Why, named as what it wasThe reason — the pressure, the habit, the belief that no one was harmed — described as what happened, not as an excuse, and named as dishonesty where it was.The course separates deliberate misconduct from errors of judgement, oversight or pressure, and treats both as breaches.
- Who relied on itThe patient, the next clinician, the employer, Medicare, the Board: the trust placed in your word, and what the inaccuracy cost them, in their terms.The course’s lessons on why probity matters and on building trust with patients and the public set out who relies on your word.
- The correction, and what stands behind itThe record or the CV corrected and the correction dated, the claim repaid, the interest declared — and a records audit with a before and after, supervision, probity CPD.This course is the dated item you attach — and it names probity training and supervision among the remediation a regulator looks for.
A correction you make yourself is a different event from one made for you.
Take advice from your indemnity insurer or defence organisation, your union or professional association, or a lawyer before you respond to anyone.
Facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.
Buy this course — A$200.00How this course helps with an Ahpra notification
The Board reads for reliance before it reads for harm
A probity matter is assessed whether or not anyone was harmed, because the question before the Board is whether you can be relied on: a competence concern asks whether you could do the thing, a probity concern whether your word and your record can be trusted. The course names four things a regulator weighs — insight, remediation, candour during the process, and whether there is a pattern — and only the last looks back at the events themselves. Three of the four are decided after the letter arrives. An isolated lapse that is acknowledged, explained and remediated is read as far less serious than a denial or a cover-up, and practitioners who show insight, take responsibility and engage in remediation are treated differently from those who deflect blame or repeat the behaviour.
Reflection has a structure, and the Board can tell when it is absent
A probity account has an order, and a Board reads for it: what was written or said that was not right, stated first and plainly; why, as far as you know it, with pressure, habit or the belief that no one was harmed described as conditions rather than excuses; who relied on the record, the claim or the account, and what it cost them; what it has been corrected to, and when; and what now stands behind the correction. The course builds reflection into every section — a reflective quiz closes each of the first five — and is direct that an isolated documentation error that is acknowledged, explained and followed by remediation is far less serious than a denial or a cover-up: how you respond, in its words, matters just as much as the event itself. A statement such as “it was an oversight” will not satisfy a Board; a corrected record and an audit that shows the change held will.
Remediation that stands up
A probity lapse is remediated by correction and by evidence someone else can check — the record, the CV or the claim corrected and the correction dated, the interest declared, the repayment made — and the Board, a panel and a tribunal all weigh it the same way. The course names probity training and supervision among the steps a regulator looks for. Counts: a reflective statement that names the clause of your own Board’s code and says first what was not right; CPD targeted to the lapse, this course’s dated certificate among it; a records or claims audit with a before and after, repeated after an interval; supervision or mentoring with written reports; feedback from patients and colleagues gathered on purpose. Counts for little: an apology followed by “but”, a character reference in place of an account, CPD hours on another subject, a reflection written by someone else, a promise where evidence should be. For the stages from the first letter to a tribunal, see the Ahpra investigation process, explained.
Read the primary sources
- Shared Code of conduct — twelve National Boards
- Good medical practice — Medical Board of Australia
- Codes of conduct for nurses and for midwives — NMBA
- Code of conduct for psychologists — effective 1 December 2025
- If a complaint has been made about you in New South Wales — HPCA
- Ahpra: has a concern been raised about you
Who wrote it
In short
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals is a self-paced remediation course of 2 hours for practitioners registered with any of Australia's fifteen National Boards facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation. It is written for concerns about honesty and integrity: records altered or omitted, qualifications or experience overstated, billing that does not match what happened, undeclared interests, incomplete answers, a concern not raised, and conduct during the investigation itself. Probity is assessed as character rather than competence, and is pursued even where no harm occurred. It is not accredited by Ahpra or any National Board, and no course determines the outcome of a notification.
How you answer is part of the answer
In a probity matter, how you answer is part of the answer. Probity is honesty, integrity and transparency in every professional dealing, and the Boards assess it as character rather than competence: the question is whether your word and your record can be relied on, and it is asked whether or not anyone was harmed. Every code says so in its own words — the shared Code of conduct that twelve National Boards use asks for professional behaviour that warrants the trust and respect of the community, including practising ethically and honestly, and Good medical practice, the NMBA codes and the Psychology Board’s code say the same for their professions. Because candour during an investigation is assessed in its own right, a failure to cooperate honestly can become a probity issue whatever the original concern — and a full, checked and promptly corrected account is remediation in its own right, beginning with the first letter you send.
Two things are Australian. The first is Medicare: a claim is made to the Commonwealth as well as to the patient, so a billing matter can run in the Medicare compliance process and in Ahpra’s at the same time, with consequences that differ in kind — repayment, fines or criminal charges, the loss of a provider number — and what goes to one may reach the other. The second is the National Law: a probity concern travels the same route as any notification — assessment, immediate action where the risk is current, investigation, a panel or a tribunal — and in New South Wales and Queensland it is the HCCC and your profession’s Council of NSW, or the Office of the Health Ombudsman, that hold the file first. Throughout, dishonesty goes directly to whether you are a fit and proper person to hold registration. In a written response, say what was not right first, say what it has been corrected to and when, and attach the change that stands behind the correction. The Board reads for the first sentence.
What these words mean
The four terms that matter most here, and the other words on this page.
- Notification
- Ahpra’s word for a complaint or a concern about a registered practitioner, from a patient, a colleague, an employer or a mandatory notifier. Every notification is assessed for risk to the public; you are told of it and asked for a written response, and that response is read at every later stage. In 2024/25 Ahpra received 13,327 notifications across the 16 registered professions.
- Immediate action
- The step a National Board may take at any stage under section 156 of the National Law where it believes a practitioner poses a serious risk: suspending registration or imposing conditions while the matter continues. A protective step, not a finding, and reviewable.
- Probity
- The quality of having strong moral principles, particularly honesty and integrity — in healthcare, an unwavering commitment to truthfulness and transparency in all professional interactions. A competence concern asks whether you could do the thing; a probity concern asks whether you can be relied on.
- The four National Law grounds
- Fitness to practise is the phrase practitioners use for the whole process. The National Law names four grounds on which a Board acts: impairment (a health matter, not a conduct finding), unsatisfactory professional performance (knowledge, skill, judgement or care below the standard of a peer), unprofessional conduct (conduct below what peers and the public reasonably expect) and professional misconduct (substantially below that standard, found only by a tribunal). Which one your letter uses tells you how the matter is being treated.
Candour, insight, falsification, misrepresentation, financial impropriety, pattern, reliance and the other terms the course uses
- Candour
- Truthfulness and cooperation during the investigation, which the course names as one of four things a regulator weighs. It is assessed separately from the original concern, and a failure of candour can be treated as a probity issue in its own right.
- Insight
- Recognising the seriousness of what happened and its effect. Not agreement with the outcome, and not an apology. It weighs in favour of retaining registration even after a breach, though nothing about an outcome is assured.
- Falsification
- Altering, backdating or omitting information in a record. Omission is the form less often recognised as falsification: a record accurate about everything it mentions can still be dishonest about what it leaves out.
- Misrepresentation
- Overstating qualifications, titles, registration or experience — intentionally or negligently. Intent affects how a matter is characterised; it is not the threshold for whether there is one.
- Financial impropriety
- Billing for services not provided, claiming longer consultations than occurred, inducements for referrals, double billing, false item numbers. Handled in the Commonwealth’s Medicare compliance process as well as by Ahpra, with consequences that differ in kind.
- Pattern
- The fourth thing weighed: whether this is an isolated lapse or part of a broader concern about conduct. It is why a small matter may attract more scrutiny than its size suggests, and why the first response matters beyond itself.
- Reliance
- What a probity matter assesses: whether the Board and the public can rely on what you say and record. It is assessed whether or not harm occurred, and it is answered the same way whatever the episode led to — the account corrected, the reasons understood, and the change shown.
The clauses a probity concern engages
Read off the shared Code of conduct, which twelve National Boards use; if you are a doctor, a nurse, a midwife or a psychologist, your own code covers the same ground under different numbers, so check yours before citing anything. No clause is headed “probity”: honesty runs through the code’s professional behaviour section, which asks for behaviour that warrants the trust and respect of the community. The four clauses a probity response is written to, then the others a probity concern engages.
3.2 — Effective communication
The clause opens by asking you to communicate courteously, respectfully, compassionately and honestly with patients and those close to them, and to endeavour to confirm that a patient understands what has been communicated. On a probity matter the last of the four words carries the weight: an answer that is technically accurate and materially incomplete does not meet it, whoever it is given to, and an explanation that changes as the evidence arrives is read the same way.
For this course: truthfulness in communication with patients, colleagues and regulators is a lesson of its own in the course, and fully disclosing relevant information to a regulator is part of it.
8.3 — Health records
Records that are accurate, up to date, factual, objective and legible, reporting what was found, what the patient was told and what was done, made at the time or as soon as possible afterwards. On a probity matter the record is read before the account: a later entry clearly dated as later is ordinary practice, an entry made to look as if it was written at the time is not, and an entry left out because it would have looked bad is falsification by omission.
For this course: the course counts falsifying, altering or omitting critical information among the most serious breaches of probity, and accepts a later alteration only when it is clearly noted with the date and time.
8.10 — Conflicts of interest
A conflict arises where a practitioner entrusted with acting in a patient’s interests also has financial, professional or personal interests with third parties that may affect, or be perceived to affect, the care of the patient. The clause asks you to act in patients’ best interests when referring, to tell patients where you hold an interest that could be perceived to affect their care, and not to ask for or accept any inducement, gift or hospitality that may affect the way you treat, prescribe or refer.
For this course: declaring and managing conflicts of interest is a lesson of its own in the course — actual, potential and perceived conflicts recognised and declared — and the declaration made and recorded is what a response shows.
8.11 — Financial and commercial dealings
The standard is short: practitioners must be honest and transparent in financial arrangements with patients, and must not exploit the vulnerability or lack of knowledge of patients when providing or recommending services. A billing claim is a statement of what happened; one that does not match the service, the time or the record engages this clause whatever the reason, and a Medicare claim brings the Commonwealth’s compliance process in beside it.
For this course: billing for services not provided, consultations claimed as longer than they were, inducements for referrals and double billing are the course’s financial impropriety lesson, with the Medicare consequences beside them.
Also engaged: 1.1 — providing good care: scope, training or experience represented as more than it is · 1.3 — decisions about access to care: unnecessary services with a financial incentive behind the pattern · 4.9 — professional boundaries: a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague, and the account given of it afterwards · 5.1 — respect for colleagues: openness in teams, and what you raised, with whom · 6.1 — use healthcare resources wisely: whether the service claimed was needed at all · 7.3 — maintaining and developing professional capability: a CPD declaration that the certificates support · 8.1 — reporting obligations: a concern you knew about and did not raise is assessed as probity · 8.5 — advertising: a title, a qualification or experience claimed on a website, a directory or a CV.
What happens after a probity notification reaches Ahpra
The same stages as any notification, set by the National Law, whichever Board registers you — and at every one the reader asks whether your word can be relied on now, reading the response itself for its honesty before anything else.
Assessment: does the account match the record, and what has changed?
Ahpra and the Board assess every notification for risk to the public, tell you about it and ask for your written response. The first reading on a probity matter is of the account against the record; a response that says plainly what was not right, with the correction made and the audit, the declaration or the supervision already in place, can end a matter here, with no further action or advice.
Immediate action, where the risk is current
At any stage, where the Board believes a practitioner poses a serious risk, it may suspend registration or impose conditions while the matter continues (section 156). A protective step, not a finding, and reviewable — and the response to it is read like any other. On a probity matter immediate action can follow where the dishonesty suggests a current risk to patients — a record that cannot be relied on, a title that misleads, a claiming pattern that continues — and a response that shows the risk already controlled is read as the risk controlled.
Investigation: does the account hold, and was it given with candour?
Where more is needed, Ahpra investigates (section 160): some information is gathered through a case discussion at which you may be represented, some under compulsory powers. The investigator reads the record, the claim, the roster, the CV or the system log beside your account; an account the documents do not support is assessed as candour in its own right, and a correction made by you, explained and dated, reads very differently from one extracted later.
Health or performance assessment: was there something beneath it?
Where the concern is about health or about performance rather than conduct, the Board may require a health assessment or a performance assessment (sections 169 and 170) instead of an investigation. Impairment is a health matter under the National Law, dealt with under its own route with support, and a condition declared early, with a plan behind it, is read as insight. Alcohol, drugs, exhaustion or a condition behind the lapse makes a probity matter a health matter as well, and a condition that was not declared when it should have been becomes a probity question of its own.
A panel: does the practitioner understand why reliance mattered?
The Board may refer a matter to a performance and professional standards panel or a health panel (sections 181 and 182), which meets you and can caution, impose conditions or refer the matter on — it cannot cancel registration. On a probity matter it asks whether you can see why reliance mattered — to the patient, the employer, Medicare and the Board — and whether the candour in the response is the same in the room.
The tribunal: what should follow?
The most serious matters go to the tribunal in your state or territory (section 193), which can reprimand, impose conditions, fine up to A$30,000, suspend, cancel registration and disqualify (section 196). In 2024/25, 94.3% of the matters closed after a tribunal referral ended in disciplinary action. The tribunals weigh insight, remediation and conduct since the events in every decision, and their orders — education, mentoring, audits, supervision — are made of the same instruments a remediation portfolio holds. Dishonesty goes to whether a practitioner is a fit and proper person to hold registration: a GP who altered more than 4,000 record entries after a Medicare review had his registration cancelled, and a tribunal that disqualified a doctor who forged a colleague’s signature on prescriptions noted his limited remorse and insight. The course’s own distinction holds there too: an isolated documentation error, acknowledged and remediated, is far less serious than a denial or a cover-up.
Who investigates in New South Wales and Queensland
Two states run their own arrangements for every one of the sixteen professions. A New South Wales conduct matter does not go to Ahpra: your profession’s Council of NSW manages standards and conditions and the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) investigates and prosecutes; a probity matter arising from a Medicare claim may also be in the Commonwealth’s Medicare compliance process. In Queensland every complaint goes first to the Office of the Health Ombudsman (OHO), which keeps what it keeps and refers the rest to Ahpra and your Board. Ahpra sets both out at reporting concerns in New South Wales or Queensland. Read the letterhead before you write a word, and on a probity matter write it with your insurer.
Facing an Ahpra notification, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.
Buy this course — A$200.00Whatever your profession: Ahpra and the National Boards regulate 16 professions under the National Law, and the process is the same for all — courses for every registered profession →
Frequently asked questions
What does my Board want in a response to a probity notification?
The fact first, then the correction, then the change. What was written or said that was not right, stated plainly and before any context; why, as far as you know it; who relied on it and what that cost them; what it has been corrected to, and when; and what now stands behind the correction — a records audit with a before and after, a CV or profile corrected, an interest declared, supervision or probity CPD, each dated. The course names four things a regulator weighs: insight, remediation, candour during the process, and whether there is a pattern. Three of the four are decided by the response and what follows it.
Should I take advice before I respond to Ahpra?
Yes — and on a probity matter before you give any account at all, to the patient, your employer, Ahpra or your National Board, your profession’s Council of NSW or the HCCC, the OHO, or a panel or tribunal. Candour during the process is assessed in its own right, so the account is given once, checked against the records, with your indemnity insurer or defence organisation and a lawyer reading it first. Where a Medicare claim is involved, take legal advice as well, because the Commonwealth runs its own process. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and no course determines the outcome of a notification.
Can a probity lapse be remediated — and will Ahpra or my Board accept this course as part of it?
Yes: the account corrected, the reason understood, and the change shown — an audit, a corrected profile, supervision — each dated. No provider is accredited by Ahpra or any National Board, and no course decides a matter. What the Board, a panel and a tribunal weigh is dated, targeted remediation with reflection that engages the standard — and this course names the four things a regulator weighs in a probity matter (insight, remediation, candour during the process and whether there is a pattern), so the connection is plain on the certificate and in your reflective account. Check the wording of any condition, undertaking or direction with your indemnity insurer or defence organisation, your union or professional association or a lawyer before you rely on it.
What can my Board do about a probity concern — and does a finding end a career?
After an assessment or an investigation your Board may take no further action, caution you, accept an undertaking or impose conditions (section 178), refer you to a panel, or refer the most serious matters to a tribunal (section 193), which can reprimand, impose conditions, fine, suspend, cancel registration and disqualify (section 196). Dishonesty goes to whether you are a fit and proper person to hold registration, and a GP who altered more than 4,000 record entries after a Medicare review had his registration cancelled. A finding need not end a career: the course records that demonstrated insight and a commitment to ethical behaviour weigh in favour of retaining registration, even after a breach, though no outcome is assured.
Who handles a probity notification in New South Wales or Queensland?
Not Ahpra, in either case. In New South Wales your profession’s Council of NSW and the Health Care Complaints Commission manage conduct, health and performance matters between them, and Ahpra does not investigate registered practitioners there. In Queensland every complaint goes first to the Office of the Health Ombudsman, which decides what it keeps and what it refers on to Ahpra and the Board. The letterhead tells you which body has your file, and the same response — the reasoning, the standard, the remediation — is what each of them reads for. A probity matter arising from a Medicare claim can be with the Commonwealth’s compliance process at the same time, in every state.
Nobody was harmed. Why is this being pursued?
Because what is being assessed is whether you can be relied on, and the course is explicit that a probity matter is assessed whether or not harm occurred. A record, a claim or a CV is relied on by people who never meet you — the next clinician, Medicare, an employer, the Board — and the question is whether they can trust it. The remediation does not depend on how the episode turned out either: the account corrected, the reason understood and the change shown can be done, and evidenced, whatever the outcome for the patient or the size of the sum.
I did not mean to overstate it. Does intent matter?
It affects how the matter is characterised; it is not the threshold. The course treats misrepresenting credentials, titles or experience as a serious breach whether it was intentional or negligent, so how it happened is part of your account rather than the whole of it. What answers the concern is showing that you understand the obligation now, that the CV, the title, the website and every directory listing have been corrected, with the date, and that something concrete has changed — the difference between an explanation and a remediation.
Can the way I respond make things worse?
It can, and it can also help. The course states that failure to cooperate honestly during an investigation may be treated as a probity issue in itself, regardless of the initial concern — which means candour during the process is read in your favour when it is there. The method is the same in every profession: ask for the question in writing, check the records before you answer, say plainly where you cannot recall rather than reconstructing, correct anything you get wrong the day you notice it, and take advice before the first response rather than after it.
I gave an account and now I am not sure it was complete. What should I do?
Speak to your indemnity insurer today, and correct it yourself. A correction you make, explained and dated — what was said, what the records show, why the first account fell short — is read as candour, and candour is one of the four things the course names a regulator weighing. A correction extracted later reads the other way: a tribunal treated one doctor’s continued denials to his employer, the Board and the tribunal as a significant breach of his obligations of candour and honesty. Correcting it yourself is a different event from having it corrected for you.
I completed a record late. Is that falsification?
Not by itself. Clause 8.3 requires records made at the time or as soon as possible afterwards, and a clearly dated later entry made to protocol is ordinary practice. What the course calls falsification is altering, backdating or omitting: an entry made to look as if it was written at the time, a note changed after a complaint, something left out because it would have looked bad. Omission is the form less often recognised — a record accurate about everything it mentions can still be dishonest about what it leaves out. Never improve an old entry; add a dated one.
A billing matter has been raised. Is that just an Ahpra issue?
No. A Medicare matter runs in the Commonwealth’s compliance process as well as Ahpra’s, and the consequences differ in kind: repayment of claims, fines or criminal charges, and loss of a provider number, beside any regulatory outcome. The two can run at the same time, an admission to one may be seen by the other, and a finding in one does not decide the other. Clause 8.11 asks for honesty and transparency in financial dealings either way. Take legal advice, not only indemnity advice, before responding to either; the Financial Integrity course goes into billing in depth.
How is this different from the Financial Integrity course?
They overlap where a claim was not true, and they are often taken together. This course works from honesty inwards: records altered or left incomplete, qualifications and titles, accounts to a patient, an employer or the Board, undeclared interests, a concern about a colleague not raised, and candour during the process itself. Financial Integrity works from the billing outwards: the item and its descriptor, time-based notes, bulk-billing, financial consent, delegated billing and the Medicare process running alongside. If the letter uses the word dishonesty, start here; if it names item numbers, start there — and where it does both, take both.
Does this count towards my CPD?
Each National Board sets its own continuing professional development registration standard, and targeted CPD on the subject of a notification is among the remediation the Board and the tribunals recognise. The certificate records the course, the 2 CPD hours and the date, which is what a CPD portfolio needs; how the hours count towards your requirement depends on the standard’s categories, so check them.
How long does it take, and how long do I have access?
The course is 2 CPD hours, self-paced, with twelve months’ access from purchase. The certificate is issued on completion, dated, with the course title and the CPD hours, for a response, a portfolio or your CPD record.
Courses that work alongside this one
A notification can raise more than one issue. These are the courses that pair with this one.
Ethics for Healthcare Professionals
The eight categories of ethical breach, including records and title.
Documentation for Healthcare Professionals
What a record must contain, and how a correction is properly made without altering the original entry.
Dealing with a Complaint or Investigation Professionally
How to conduct yourself once a Board or a state body has written to you.
Duty of Candour for Healthcare Professionals
What is required once something has gone wrong: the disclosure, the apology and the review.
Financial Integrity for Healthcare Professionals
Billing, referrals, inducements and conflicts of interest in depth.
Professional Ethics Course
The foundations and the sustaining of ethical practice, across clinical and non-clinical roles.
Rebuilding Trust of Patients, Colleagues, Public and Healthcare Regulator
The stage after: insight, targeted remediation and the evidence of change a review asks for.
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals
This course. Records, qualifications, billing, undeclared interests, incomplete answers, and how conduct during the investigation is assessed in its own right.
See all CPD courses for healthcare professionals in Australia →
Start today, finish at your own pace
Immediate access on purchase. Twelve months' access, a dated certificate on completion, and 2 CPD hours issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses.