Describe all your medical work, then map relevant supporting information to it. An index of evidence and gaps is more useful than an indiscriminate document store.
By the end of this module, you should be able to:
- Describe scope without relying on grade labels.
- Map the six evidence categories to a varied working life.
- Distinguish a missing item from an agreed alternative.
Describe what you actually do
GMC: supporting information and declarations ↗
UK · Relevant requirements and explanatory sections · Substantive check: 2026-09-09. Reviewed for the specific appraisal teaching; not certification of every linked statement.
Start with a role inventory: work setting, activity, responsibility, frequency and relevant changes. Include clinical practice alongside teaching, supervision, leadership, management, research and other medical services where applicable. Identify paid and unpaid work rather than assuming that only your largest contract matters. Explain boundaries: what you do independently, where you seek advice and which activities are outside your scope.
A title such as “Specialty Doctor” is not a complete scope statement. Two doctors with the same title may work in very different services. A better description explains the patient or service group, normal work, occasional duties and relevant interfaces. Avoid exaggerating autonomy or concealing supervision. The purpose is to make your working life understandable to a reader who does not share your rota.
Use categories as prompts, not six disconnected folders
GMC: supporting information and declarations ↗
UK · Relevant requirements and explanatory sections · Substantive check: 2026-09-09. Reviewed for the specific appraisal teaching; not certification of every linked statement.
The GMC identifies CPD, quality improvement, significant events, patient or service-user feedback, colleague feedback, and complaints and compliments. Their collection and review frequencies differ; they are not six identical annual quotas. Review the current category-specific guidance and the arrangements agreed for your scope. Information about work, previous appraisals, development plans, health and probity also matters.
An original example helps illustrate overlap. An evaluation of teaching may provide quality-improvement evidence; feedback from learners may inform development; learning from that evaluation may shape CPD. These are different explanations of one piece of work. Cross-reference the source and make each inference explicit. Do not count one generic certificate several times as if it independently proves several unrelated capabilities.
Build a small, usable evidence index
For each item record a neutral reference, approximate period, relevant role, evidence category, learning or action, and where the approved source can be found. Add a status such as available, requested, planned, or alternative to agree. You usually need a route back to the source, not another uncontrolled copy. Use neutral labels in the website tool; put identifiable details only where authorised.
For example, “E03, teaching evaluation, spring term, education role, review completed, follow-up planned” is a useful planning entry. “Evidence of excellent teaching” is a conclusion without a source or limitation. A well-maintained index helps you notice whether an attractive portfolio is mostly about one role while a substantial second role has little supporting information.
Check relevance, currency and ownership
GMC: supporting information and declarations ↗
UK · Relevant requirements and explanatory sections · Substantive check: 2026-09-09. Reviewed for the specific appraisal teaching; not certification of every linked statement.
Ask four questions of an item: what does it show, how does it relate to your work, when was it generated, and what was your contribution? Team activity can be relevant, but it needs an honest account of your part. A committee report with your name in the attendance list does not necessarily demonstrate that you designed or delivered the improvement.
A useful comparison is between a presentation slide deck and evidence of the resulting change. The slides establish that a topic was presented; an agreed action and later review may establish how it affected practice. Neither needs to be inflated. Recording that an intervention did not work, and explaining the next step, can support a more thoughtful appraisal than an unsupported claim of success.
Make gaps visible and actionable
A gap may mean evidence is missing, the work has not yet been done, the evidence is not relevant, or a different approach needs approval. Those are different problems. State which applies and who can help. Do not quietly relabel an unavailable item as “not applicable”. Agree alternatives or a collection plan with the appropriate appraisal or responsible-officer team.
For a short-term doctor, the obstacle may be access to centrally held feedback after leaving a placement. The next action could be a request through the governance office and an agreed discussion of available evidence. For a doctor entering a new role, the next action may be prospective collection. Honest dates and limitations are more useful than retrospective paperwork made to look contemporaneous.
Keep the portfolio navigable
GMC: supporting information and declarations ↗
UK · Relevant requirements and explanatory sections · Substantive check: 2026-09-09. Reviewed for the specific appraisal teaching; not certification of every linked statement.
Use a clear summary, an index and selected supporting material. Give filenames or references that have meaning without exposing a patient or colleague. Remove duplicated copies only through approved arrangements, preserving required originals and version histories. A reader should be able to find the evidence for a statement without searching through dozens of loosely named attachments.
Before submission, ask a simple usability question: could an appraiser identify your scope, current development plan, main learning, unresolved gaps and requested support in a few minutes? If not, improve the signposting rather than merely deleting detail. The evidence map on this site is a planning aid, not an algorithm for deciding sufficiency or a substitute for the official portfolio.
Link the role, evidence and next action
Use one row for a useful role-and-category combination. A row or attachment is not proof of sufficiency; discuss the proportionate evidence needed.
Use neutral planning notes only. Do not enter names, GMC numbers, identifiable cases, health details or confidential employer information. Entries stay in this open page, are not saved automatically and are lost when you leave or reload. Download only on a trusted device and store the file appropriately.
Which part of your working life is least visible in your current evidence?
Three takeaways
- 1Map work before selecting evidence.
- 2Explain contribution and limitations.
- 3Agree gaps and alternatives openly.
Check your understanding
Six questions on Map your whole practice and organise supporting information test process and practical judgement. This is educational: it does not assess your health, evidence sufficiency or decide a legal issue.
Recommended workbooks
Use neutral planning notes and keep completed workbooks on a trusted device. Do not enter identifiable cases or confidential material.
Official and professional guidance
Confirm current GMC requirements and the approved arrangements for your designated body and nation.