Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips


  View printer friendly version

(NAR) VOL. 18 NO. 4/OCTOBER - DECEMBER 2007

[ LTO MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. RIB-2007-889, October 10, 2007 ]

CRITERIA IN THE EVALUATION OF ACCREDITED PHYSICIAN’S PERFORMANCE



In compliance to the requirement of ISO 9000-2001 and in line with the objective of the office for a continuous, effective and efficient public service, the following are established criteria in monitoring the performance of LTO Accredited Physicians, to wit:

1. MEDICAL SET-UP (10%)

This refers to the medical equipment that are used in the conduct of examination to driver’s license applicants that should be found in the clinic at any given time as well as the maintenance of the specified size and the location of the medical clinic.

a. Medical Equipments (5 points)

_____________Snellen’s Chart
_____________Ishihara plate
_____________Blood pressure apparatus
_____________Height scale
_____________Weighing scale

b. Medical Clinic (5 points)

_____________at least ten square feet
_____________located at least within 100-200 meters radius from LTO
_____________waiting area for the applicants
_____________display of valid Accreditation Certificate with recent photograph
_____________well-maintained clinic (good ventilation, clean)

2. Offenses committed by LTO Accredited Physicians pursuant to Administrative Order No. RIB-2007-012 categorized as major and minor offenses:

MAJOR OFFENSES (70 points) – these are major offenses committed by the LTO Accredited Physician pursuant to A.O. RIB-2007-012.

1. Misrepresentation in procuring the accreditation certificate.

2. Issues pre-signed medical certificate in the clinic.

3. Allowing other person/physician to conduct the required medical examination.

4. Convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.

5. Conduct medical examination to driver’s license applicants outside the jurisdiction where he is accredited.

6. Conduct actual and accurate examination to applicants prior to issuance of medical certificate.

7. Recommending issuance of a professional driver’s license to persons with disability.

8. Issuing medical certificate with expired Accreditation Certificate.

9. Overcharging of professional fee for medical certificate issued to driver’s license applicants.

MINOR OFFENSES (20 points) – these are offenses committed by the LTO Accredited Physician pursuant to A.O. RIB-2007-012.

1. Failure of the physician to hold clinic regularly within the same municipality or city of the Licensing Center/Agency where he is accredited.

2. Failure to secure permission/approval of the Regional Committee on Accreditation of Physicians in case he decides to transfer his clinic.

3. Non-compliance with the prescribed form in the issuance of medical certificate per Administrative Order No. RIB-2007-012 dated 17 May 2007.

4. Failure to keep medical records and submit report to the Regional Committee on Accreditation of Physicians within fifteen (15) days at the end of every month, copy furnished LTO Central Office Accreditation Committee.

5. Failure to file leave of absence within ten (10) days prior to his proposed leave to the District Office, Regional and Central Office Committee on Accreditation.

6. Failure to indicate in the medical certificate the limitations of the applicant.

7. Number of complaints received by the office in relation to his function as accredited physician.

EXPLANATORY NOTES:

Each item listed in the Criteria for Medical set-up has an equivalent score of one (1) point. Absence of any items indicated therein shall be given a demerit of one (1) point.

Any of the major offenses committed by an accredited physician will be given demerits equivalent to seventy (70) points.

Any of the minor offenses committed by an accredited physician as stated herein will be given demerits equivalent to twenty (20) points.

An accredited physician who garnered a total score of seventy (70) points and below does not meet the required performance evaluation criteria as LTO Accredited physician and will not be eligible for the renewal of application for accreditation.

It is understood that the herein performance evaluation report shall form part of the mandatory requirements in the renewal of application for accreditation.

For strict compliance.

 Adopted: 10 Oct. 2007

(SGD.) REYNALDO I. BERROYA
Assistant Secretary
© Supreme Court E-Library 2019
This website was designed and developed, and is maintained, by the E-Library Technical Staff in collaboration with the Management Information Systems Office.