Guide news
All Latest News →Current developments
03
Build the plan
Curriculum gap analysis and an individual development plan
Turn a large curriculum into a controlled evidence map that identifies what is demonstrated, what is weak and what requires new experience.
A useful gap analysis maps every required outcome to evidence quality, currency and verification—not just to a filename. It should distinguish evidence already strong enough, evidence needing better assessment, and experience that has not yet occurred. The development plan then converts genuine gaps into agreed opportunities and review dates.
By the end of this module, you should be able to:
- Build an outcome-level curriculum map.
- Distinguish an evidence gap from an experience gap.
- Translate weaknesses into specific, assessable development activity.
Map every outcome
Start with the highest-level curriculum outcomes and specialty-specific requirements, then create a row for each. Record what the outcome means in practical work, the level expected, current evidence, date, context, verifier and remaining weakness. Page references should eventually point to the exact place that supports the claim.
Do not map one generic certificate to many unrelated outcomes. A course may show attendance or knowledge; it rarely proves sustained workplace performance. Where one item genuinely supports several outcomes, explain its different relevance to each.
- Use one controlled master map.
- Map exact page or section references.
- State what each item demonstrates and does not demonstrate.
Three different gap types
An experience gap means the doctor has not practised a required area or at the necessary level. An assessment gap means the experience occurred but was not observed or evaluated robustly. A documentation gap means valid evidence exists but is inaccessible, poorly indexed, unverified or unclear.
The solution depends on the gap. Experience requires supervised access or rotation; assessment requires an appropriate assessor and method; documentation requires retrieval, authentication, translation, redaction or better explanation. Collecting more of the wrong evidence does not close the right gap.
- Name the gap type.
- Match the intervention to the gap.
- Do not substitute quantity for relevance.
Use ratings that mean something
A red-amber-green system is useful only if definitions are explicit. Green could mean current, directly relevant, independently supported and ready for verification. Amber may mean partial scope, older evidence, weak assessment or missing corroboration. Red should identify absent experience or evidence.
Add a confidence note and the next action. A portfolio with many green labels but no rationale is false reassurance. Review ratings with someone who understands the specialty standard and is willing to challenge assumptions.
- Define the rating rules.
- Record the reason for each rating.
- Invite constructive challenge.
Turn gaps into a development plan
Each plan item should specify the outcome, required experience, location, duration, supervision, assessment method, evidence expected and completion review. ‘Gain more acute experience’ is not actionable; ‘complete a six-month agreed acute attachment with observed assessments, case mix review and supervisor report’ is.
The plan should be proportionate and compatible with patient safety, employment arrangements and workload. Some gaps can be addressed within the job plan; others require a secondment, cross-site work, project, course plus application, or a future post.
- Define opportunity, assessor and output.
- Agree protected time and governance.
- Review whether the activity actually closed the gap.
Sequence by dependency and lead time
Prioritise opportunities that take longest or depend on external access: rotations, on-call breadth, examinations, research governance, teaching cycles and quality-improvement measurement. Shorter documentation tasks can run alongside them. Avoid opening the application merely to create a deadline before these dependencies are secure.
Use realistic buffers for leave, rota changes, assessor availability, document verification and employer approval. Recheck the curriculum at defined intervals, especially before paying and before final submission.
- Start long-lead gaps early.
- Build contingency time.
- Set formal review points.
Govern the project
Treat the application as a multi-year quality project. Use one evidence register, a version convention, a decision log and regular review meeting. Record who has agreed access, what has changed and which risks could delay submission.
A supporter can help coordinate, but the applicant remains responsible for accuracy and completeness. Avoid delegating the whole map to an administrator or assuming the GMC will reorganise poorly presented evidence.
- Maintain one source of truth.
- Document decisions and changes.
- The applicant owns the final submission.
Which of your red or amber rows needs a new clinical opportunity rather than another document?
Keep in mind
Three takeaways
- 1Map every outcome to quality, currency and verification—not only to a file.
- 2Experience, assessment and documentation gaps require different solutions.
- 3A governed development plan protects time and prevents late surprises.
Situational judgement exercise
Check your understanding
Six questions on Curriculum gap analysis and an individual development plan test process and practical judgement. This is educational: it does not assess your health, evidence sufficiency or decide a legal issue.
Question 1 of 6
Choose one answer to continue.
Recommended workbooks
Use only authorised, anonymised information. These files remain on your device.
Check the source
Page last reviewed 7 September 2026. Independent educational guidance; not a GMC, College or individual application assessment.Official and professional guidance
Use the current specialty-specific guidance and live GMC instructions at submission.