Gauteng |
Senior Manager: Mr. Eric Mphaphuli
Cell: 0609972857
Secretary: Mr. Vincent Skosana
012 338 3984
Inspector: Mr. Masilo Twala
Cell: 064 759 8750
Inspector: Mrs. Tanya Lindeque
Cell: 076 820 2830
6th Floor
Nedbank Plaza Building
361 Steve Biko Street
Arcadia
|
KwaZulu Natal |
Inspector: Mrs. M. Julius
Administrator: Ms. Busisiwe Nguse
The Business Centre
2 Ncondo Place
Ridge Side
Umhlanga Ridge
Postnet Suite 47
4320
Tel: 031 830 5293/94
Cell: 063 694 1092 (M. Julius) |
Eastern Cape |
Inspector: Ms. M. Mamabolo
Administrator: Mrs. Hayley Smith
Regus Business Centre
Office No: 29 & 31
No: 14 Stewart Street
Berea
East London, 5241
Tel: 043 783 9734
Cell: 063 685 4726 (Ms. M. Mamabolo)
|
Western Cape |
Inspector: Mr. N. V. Vilakazi Administrator: MR. A. Botile Century City Business Centre
No 1 Bridgeway Road
Bridgeway Precint, Century
7411
Tel: 021 830 5921
Cell: 076 8220583 |
Mpumalanga |
Deputy Inspector: Ms. Keabetswe Mokwena
Tel: 012 338 3914
Cell: 072 523 1774
|
Limpopo |
Deputy Inspector: Ms. Mphai Mashala
Tel: 012 338 3978
Cell: 076 631 5074
|
Free State |
Deputy Inspector: Ms. Onicca Kekana
Tel: 012 338 3976
Cell: 081 243 9524
|
Northern Cape |
Deputy Inspector: Ms. Nomathemba Kraai
Tel: 012 338 3968
Cell: 076 396 1408
|
North West |
Deputy Inspector: Mr. Joseph Rafedile
Tel: 012 338 3994
Cell: 066 268 3699
|
Dr Munyadziwa Albert Kwinda is the Ombudsman at the Health Professions Council of South Africa, a post he has occupied since March 2014.
Before joining the HPCSA as Ombudsman, Dr Kwinda was a Medical Specialist (Family Physician) working for the Department of Health at Tshilidzini Hospital in Venda, the same hospital where he did his internship in 2002. At the same time, he was also seconded by the MEC Of Health to manage the National Health Insurance Pilot District in Limpopo.
He spent a total of 9 years at Donald Fraser Hospital in Limpopo, starting with his community service there. It was during his year of community service that Dr. Kwinda was initiated into the management cadre when he was appointed as Acting Senior Medical Superintendent, and then became the Senior Clinical Manager from 2004-2011, becoming the youngest clinical/medical manager ever in Limpopo during his time.
His exceptional achievements earned him the Award by the South African Medical Association for Commitment to the Improvement of Public Health Services in Rural Areas in 2004, Award of Best Clinical Manager for Vhembe District for the 2007/8 financial year and Award by the Rural Doctors Association of South Africa (RuDASA) for Rural Doctor of the year in 2008.
After matriculating at Phophi Secondary School, he obtained a Bachelor of Science Degree from the University of Venda in 1995, followed by an MBCHB at Natal University in 2002. In 2011 he obtained his M.Med Family Medicine from the University of Limpopo, and has an MSc Med (Bioethics and Health Law) with the University of the Witwatersrand and currently studying towards a Bachelor of Laws Degree (Third Level) with the University of South Africa. Dr Kwinda is also a certified mediator
Dr. Kwinda has been involved in different leadership roles at both a professional level and community level, some of which are:
Frequently Asked Questions |
---|
1. Who is the Ombudsman? |
“Ombudsman” means a person appointed by the council to mediate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her by the registrar for mediation. |
2. What is a minor transgression? |
“minor transgression” means conduct which, in the opinion of the registrar or preliminary committee of inquiry, on the basis of the documents submitted to the registrar or such committee, is unprofessional, but of a minor nature, and does not warrant the holding of a formal professional conduct inquiry. |
3. How does the Ombudsman carry out the mediation process? |
3.1. After receiving a complaint for mediation, the Ombudsman may call for further information in any manner he deems appropriate from any person who, in his opinion, may assist in the mediation to resolve the matter and this may include requesting a practitioner to respond to the complaint. 3.2. After receiving the information referred to in 3.1, the ombudsman considers the matter and mediate between the parties with a view of making a determination to resolve the matter between the parties. 3.3. After making the determination, the Ombudsman advises the parties of his determination on the matter and require them to indicate whether or not they will abide by the determination 3.4. If the parties agree to abide by the determination, the ombudsman confirms the determination in writing and the determination becomes binding on both parties as a final resolution of the matter. 3.5. If either party does not agree to abide by the determination, the matter is referred to the registrar for preliminary investigation. |
4. What happens to the information obtained by the ombudsman during the mediation process? |
The information obtained by the ombudsman in terms 3.1. above is confidential and privileged and, if a matter is referred for preliminary investigation in terms of 3.5. above, such information may not be considered by the preliminary committee of inquiry. |
5. What is the difference between the “HPCSA Ombudsman” and the “Health Ombud”? |
DESCRIPTION |
HPCSA ‘OMBUDSMAN’ |
HEALTH ‘OMBUD’ |
Definition |
“ombudsman” means a person appointed by the Council to mediate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her by the registrar for mediation. |
Ombud means a person appointed by the Minister in consultation with the Board of the Office of Health Standard Compliance.
|
Establishment of the Office |
Established in terms of Regulation 3 of the Regulations relating to the Conduct of Inquiries into alleged unprofessional conduct under the Health Professions Act |
Established in terms of Section of section 81 of the National Health Amendment Act |
Function |
Mediate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him by the registrar
|
Investigate and dispose of written or verbal complaints relating to norms and standards |
Jurisdiction
|
Complaints against health practitioners registered with the HPCSA
|
Complaints against health establishments including persons employed by health establishments, which may include health practitioners registered with the HPCSA
|
Powers
|
To consider the complaint and make a determination which is only binding if agreed by both parties
|
To investigate the complaint and make findings & recommendations which are binding
|
Referral powers
|
To refer matters falling outside the jurisdiction of HPCSA to relevant bodies and matters that matters that could not be mediated to the Professional Boards for preliminary investigation through the Registrar.
The Professional Boards have no duty to report progress to the Ombudsman
|
To refer matters to other bodies and such bodies have a duty to report progress to the Ombud
|
Independence |
Independent from the Professional Boards and reports to the Council through the Registrar
|
Independent from the Department of Health and CEO of OHSC AND reports to and accountable to the Minister of Health
|
6. Do I need legal representation when my matter is mediated by the Ombudsman?
|
---|
Although either party may seek legal advice or support, legal representation is not required for matters referred to ombudsman for mediation. Therefore, any communication with the Ombudsman must be in the first person (the parties themselves).
|
7. What are the common complaints that are referred to ombudsman?
|
The most common complaints mediated by the ombudsman are related to:
The ombudsman may consider any other matter depending on the outcome desired by the complainant when lodging a complaint with council, professional board and/or the Registrar.
|
8. What is the proportion of complaints referred to the Ombudsman for mediation?
|
Currently, 39% of complaints received by the HPCSA are referred to Ombudsman for mediation |
9. What is the mediation success rate?
|
On average, 96% of complaints are successfully mediated of 48% resolved telephonically with the parties including teleconferences, 43% resolved by electronic communication with the parties, and 9% resolved through contact mediation.
|
10. Can the ombudsman impose a penalty in terms of section 42(1) of the Health Professions Act.
|
The Ombudsman does not make a guilty finding and does not impose any penalty in terms of the Act. The Ombudsman can only make a determination which is only binding if agreed by both parties.
|
11. Can I lodge a complaint directly with the Ombudsman?
|
No. Complaints are lodged with the Registrar who in turn refer complaints of minor transgression to the Ombudsman for mediation.
|
12. Can a complainant request that his or her complaint be referred to ombudsman for mediation?
|
Although a complainant can make a request that his or her complaint be referred for mediation as the desired outcome when lodging a complaint, the decision to refer the complaint to the Ombudsman for mediation still lies with the Registrar.
|
13. Can a practitioner request that a complaint against him/her be referred to the Ombudsman for mediation?
|
No. This can only be decided by the Registrar and/or the Professional Board Concerned.
|
14. Does a determination by the Ombudsman constitute a record of previous conviction ?
|
No. The determination by the Ombudsman does not constitute a previous conviction on the practitioner’s certificate of status with Council
|
15. What are some of the matters that were successfully mediated by the Ombudsman and the outcomes thereof?
|
15.1. A death Notification completed wrongly. This was a case of a male who was injured on duty and was admitted at the hospital he passed away after three months of admission. The medical practitioner who completed the death notification forms registered the cause of death as “natural”. The effect of this was that the family could not receive the benefits of a death due to an injury on duty. A complaint was lodged twelve(12) years after the incident. Hospital records could not be found. The only relevant document found at the Department of Labour was the Final Medical Report of the deceased which indicated that he died of nosocomial infection. The medical practitioner acknowledged his error in writing which was accompanied by the letter from the Ombudsman to the Department of Labour and the case was re-opened, and the family received what was due to them twelve years after. This matter was resolved through a contact mediation
15.2. Wrongful use of Co-Payment. A practitioner charged the patient a Co-payment without informing the patient about the cost of services to be rendered and how much the medical scheme would cover for such costs. Information received revealed that the practitioner in fact charges a flat co-payment of R2000 for every patient. The practitioner was assisted to understand the application of co-payment in terms of Regulation 8 of the Medical Schemes Act Regulations and the patient was refunded the money paid as co-payment. This matter was resolved through a mediation by electronic communication.
15.3. Unprofessional Communication. A practitioner had an altercation with the parents of the child who was his patient and in the process told the father of the child that “you are acting like a monkey”. The complainant wanted the practitioner to apologise for using such words and not only to him, but also to the nurses who were present at the time he uttered such a statement. This matter was resolved through a contact mediation and the practitioner acknowledged that it was wrong of him to utter such a statement and a meeting was arranged with the hospital manager for the practitioner to apologize to the nurses who were present.
15.4. Claiming for services not rendered. A physiotherapist employed other physiotherapist in terms of Rule 8 of the Ethical Rules of Conduct under the Health Professions Act. After the physiotherapists rendered a service a claim was submitted to the medical scheme. On receiving the statement from the scheme, the patient disputed some of the items charged for and after failing to resolve the matter with the employer, a complaint was lodged with Council and referred to ombudsman for mediation as the complainant desired outcome was that the physiotherapist should reverse the items charged for services not rendered. This matter was resolved through a contact mediation and the physiotherapist reversed the claim for services not rendered.
Informed financial consent. An anesthesiologist failed to inform his patient about the cost of anesthesia and also of the fact that he does not belong to the designated service provider network for the patient’s medical scheme. After the medical aid paid there was a shortfall which the practitioner demanded from the patient. The matter was mediated electronically through email communication and the practitioner offered to write off the outstanding account as a way of resolving the matter. |
Health Professions Act, 56 of 1974 | click here |
Basic Conditions Employment Act | click here |
Children's Act 38 of 2005 | click here |
Choice of Termination of Pregnancy Act, 92 of 1996 | click here |
Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 25 of 2002 | click here |
Medical Schemes Act, 131 of 1998 | click here |
Medicines and Related Substance Act, 101 of 1965 | click here |
Mental Health Care Act, 17 of 2002 | click here |
Mine Health and Safety Act, 29 of 1996 | click here |
National Health Act, 61 of 2003 | click here |
National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 59 of 2008 | click here |
National Health Laboratory Services Act, 37 of 2000 | click here |