DDO Handbook Section 5

Work with Candidates after the Panel

Contents of this Section:

• The report
• The bishop's decision
• Conveying the decision
• Data Protection Act
• The booklet Financial Information for Recommended Candidates
• Conditions
  • Medical Condition
  • Financial Condition
  • Criminal Records Condition
  • Faculty Condition
  • Reference to the Candidates Panel
  • A Report Condition
  • Pre-Theological Education Condition
  • Overview of PTE
  • Mentors
  • Funding

• Conveying conditions to the candidate

  Work with non-recommended candidates

• The non-recommended candidate
• Appropriate level of support
• Independent counsellors/listeners
• Guidelines
• No decision
• Setting aside the Bishops' Advisers' recommendation
• Panel reports and the College/Course
• Return to a further Bishops' Advisory Panel
• Sponsorship of withdrawn candidates
• Candidates not proceeding to ordination
• Continuing responsibilities of Ministry Division Staff
• Resources

The booklet Financial Information for Recommended candidates

In the case of a candidate who is recommended or conditionally recommended for training by the Bishops’ Advisers, the booklet Financial Information for Recommended Candidates is sent to the Bishop who, if he endorses the recommendation, instructs the candidate to take careful note of its contents.  The booklet includes information about grants.

Conditions

Bishops’ Advisers may offer advice to the Bishop about appropriate next steps for a candidate.  This advice must be distinguished from a condition. Advice may cover a wide variety of subjects (e.g. use of a spiritual director, spouse’s readiness for the candidate to begin training, whether College or Course training may be more appropriate for a particular candidate).  Such advice does not have the force of a condition and is offered for the consideration of the Bishop and DDO.

A condition applies to a candidate whose recommendation has been made conditional on the fulfilment of a particular requirement.  A specific condition is attached to the recommendation by the Bishops’ Advisers.  Once a Bishop endorses any condition, training grants administered by the Ministry Division may only be paid when the condition is fulfilled. The following conditions are those most commonly encountered.  Their requirements and means of fulfilment are clearly laid out and described below.  Any other condition will be fully explained in the Panel report.  

Conditions will normally fall in the following categories:

i)     Medical Condition

It will be clearly indicated in the report to the Bishop whether or not a candidate needs a medical.  No grant for training can be paid unless the medical conditions are fulfilled.

ii)     Financial Condition

The Sponsoring Papers should include an assurance that the Statement of the Financial Position Form has been completed by the candidate, that the needs of the candidate and his or her family and dependants (if any) have been reviewed and that no financial bar exists to the candidate proceeding to training.  Ministry Division will apply the financial condition to any candidate (married or single) when no assurance of the diocese’s satisfaction about the candidate’s financial circumstances is given in the Sponsoring Papers.

iii)    Criminal Records Condition

The Sponsoring Papers should include an assurance that an Enhanced Disclosure from the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) has been obtained.  Ministry Division will apply the CRB Condition when no assurance is given in the Sponsoring Papers.

iv)    Faculty Condition

The Sponsoring Papers should indicate whether a Faculty under Canon C4 is required.  If a Faculty is required then the Sponsoring Papers should indicate that one has been granted.  If a Faculty is required and for some exceptional reason has not been obtained, for example because of a Vacancy in See, then Ministry Division will apply a Faculty Condition which should be fulfilled as soon as possible and must be fulfilled before the candidate may be ordained.

v)     Reference to the Candidates Panel

The report may require that a check on a candidate’s progress should be made before or during the time of training.  The report will indicate clearly why this condition is applied.  The check will be made in the form of interviews with members of the Candidates Panel, after which that Panel will recommend to the Bishop what next step should be taken.  The condition is not a formality.  There is a real possibility that the Candidates Panel may advise either further delay or the withdrawal of the recommendation.  A candidate must be firmly informed of the force of this condition from the outset. 

vi)    A Report Condition

The condition asking for a report from a College or Course principal may take one of two forms.  In some cases it will be a report to the Bishop.  Copies of such a report should also be sent to Ministry Division.  If the report raises any major queries, then the Bishop is free, as always, to consult the Candidates Panel.  In other cases the report is specifically requested for the Candidates Panel review; in this case the paragraph immediately above applies.

vii)   Pre-Theological Education Condition

The purpose of Pre-Theological Education (PTE) is to enable as wide a range of candidates as possible to make good use of theological education.  In the first instance, the work makes it possible for conditionally recommended candidates to fulfil their conditions. The National Adviser for Pre-Theological Education is one of the staff of the Ministry Division. The primary role of the National Adviser is one of oversight. The DDO is the co-ordinator of programmes of PTE.  Local and regional resources, both church and secular, should be used as needed.  It should be noted that candidates who are asked to undertake a placement in order to meet their condition fall under the provisions of PTE. 

Overview of PTE

The Panel report will have specified some areas which need attention if the candidate is to proceed to a Theological College or Course. These will have been brought together in a condition paragraph which will relate quite explicitly to the  Criteria for Selection. The necessary work will have been described and a time-scale for the completion of the work will have been set (usually one year).  The Sponsoring Bishop must decide whether to accept the advice.  If the condition is upheld, the DDO and the candidate, with the support and scrutiny of the National Adviser, devise a programme of PTE using diocesan and regional resources.  The candidate then undertakes the work with local oversight and central funding.  At the end of PTE, a moderation process takes place which results in a report offering further advice to the Sponsoring Bishop who must decide whether the candidate should proceed to training.  (For PTE procedures, see Welcome to Pre-Theological Education).

Mentors

The reports which led up to the devolution of Pre-Theological Education to the dioceses envisaged the DDO as the primary focus of the programme.  However, experience has shown that there is a heavy workload associated with a candidate who is undertaking PTE.  DDOs may wish to consider making use of mentors as part of a programme.  The person chosen would need to be readily available to the candidate, have sufficient time at their disposal to give to the candidate, be able to assist the candidate in managing and recognising their own learning and able to help the candidate reflect on the programme.  There is no particular need for the mentor to be ordained, but some theological expertise would be welcome.  The primary work of the mentor would be focused in three areas: offering support for the candidate on the journey through Pre-Theological Education, providing robust comment as an aid to the reflective processes and assisting the candidate in the process of developing the portfolio.  We strongly encourage DDOs to consider the use of mentors if they find themselves unable to offer the backup they might like to give to their candidates. 

Funding

Pre-Theological Education is jointly funded by central church funds and diocesan monies.  There is a ceiling of £1200 per candidate available from the Ministry Division towards the costs of a programme.  Funding for the costs of the programme (e.g. tuition fees and honoraria) are reimbursed through the National Adviser’s office and payment is usually made to a Diocesan Board of Finance on receipt of either a bill or a paid invoice.  Additional funding is provided in the form of travel and book grants. These are available in the same way as those for Course students.  The candidate should make application for this money through the Grants Office.  There is further funding for the expenses of Moderation. 

Conveying conditions to the candidate

When the Bishops’ Advisers recommend or conditionally recommend a candidate, their report will be likely to include points of reservation, indicate areas of uncertainty, and suggest where some further help might be needed.  Such comments will be included in the report to give a rounded picture, and because the Bishops’ Advisers wish them to be considered.  It is important for these matters to be shared with the candidate as part of the debriefing session.  They should not be ignored, for they often emerge as problems at a later stage. The process of sharing such matters, even with a recommended candidate, will often be far from complete at the first post-conference interview, when the candidate may not be very good at hearing what appears to be criticism. 

Work with non-recommended candidates

The non-recommended candidate

The disappointment of a candidate who has not been recommended for training is often severe and candidates differ in their reactions to that disappointment.  There are complex emotional reactions involved in such an experience.  The pastoral care of such candidates is therefore a sensitive matter and one in which the DDO should be willing to have a crucial part to play.

This pastoral care is not however the responsibility of the DDO alone.  The candidate’s incumbent or chaplain will have much more frequent contact with them and therefore take responsibility for much of the continuing care.  But the incumbent may also be adversely affected by the decision and may experience some of the same anger, frustration, or bereavement felt by the candidate.  This may be especially acute in the case of self-supporting candidates with strong local support for their candidacy.  The DDO and incumbent will need to establish an effective partnership and recognise that it is not always right to expect incumbents to bear the burden of pastoral care entirely on their own.

Appropriate level of support

A significant factor in the effective care of non-recommended candidates is the quality of the support they receive before they attend a Panel.  In other words this is a matter which affects the support and care of all candidates. Incumbents will also need to be informed about the stages of the discernment and selection process and the possible outcomes so that they can offer appropriate support at the right time.

The individual candidate’s needs should be met by the appropriate people.  For example, it is natural for the DDO to act as the provider of information about the discernment and selection process and, possibly, as a vocational adviser.  It is not possible for the DDO to act as an independent sounding board, standing outside the process.  Similarly, a  candidate’s incumbent might well act as a provider of pastoral care but find it very difficult to combine that with the role of spiritual director or mentor. This is not an argument that every candidate should have at least half a dozen people designated to look after him or her during the process.  Individual needs and circumstances will vary, and the more obtrusive and contrived such support becomes the less effective it will be.  It is worth considering, however, whether some diocesan procedures put too much weight on particular people, such as DDOs and incumbents, and provide them with too many roles and, therefore, expectations.

Independent counsellors/listeners

These concerns have led a number of dioceses to investigate the possibility of setting up panels of experienced people, lay and ordained, who are not involved in the diocesan discernment process, and who can be available to non-recommended candidates to help them explore the implications of that decision. This practice of using independent counsellors/listeners is to be commended for serious consideration.

Guidelines

With these general points in mind the following stages are suggested to help DDOs in their care of non-recommended candidates:

• the manner in which the decision is communicated should be considered carefully;
• the recognition that the candidate will find it difficult to absorb information at this initial stage;
• therefore, a fortnight after the Panel, careful debriefing with the candidate, after which they should be given a copy of the report;
• the importance of reminding the candidate of the help available from a counsellor/listener;
• after three months another meeting to talk about how the candidate is coping with the decision, what has happened in the time since the decision, and what the process will be from now on.  This might involve initial contact with other agencies (e.g. those involved in vocations advice, lay training, adult education,  Reader training, etc.);
• after six months the opportunity of another meeting with the candidate.  The agenda for this meeting may cover issues of redirection, the possibility of coming back for sponsorship to another Bishops’ Advisory Panel, or letting go.  In some cases the DDO will maintain contact with the candidate, in other cases they need to leave the discernment and selection process and allow others to work with the candidate.

There is a fuller discussion of these issues in The Care of Candidates before and after a Selection Conference.

No decision

Very rarely the Bishops’ Advisers are unable to agree about the recommendation to make to a Sponsoring Bishop.  In such cases, their findings and guidance are summarised in the report as fully as possible to enable the Bishop to reach a decision.

Setting aside the Bishops’ Advisers’ recommendation

The Bishop receives the Bishops’ Advisers’ report as advice and is free to set aside a non-recommendation or recommendation if he so decides, though these occasions are likely to be exceptional. The DDO will be closely involved in consultation with the Bishop and the Panel Secretary concerned.  The DDO will be able to explain the grounds for the diocesan concern and the Panel Secretary can offer further information which led to the recommendation.

The House of Bishops agreed that if a Bishop decides to set aside a non-recommendation in favour of sending a candidate into training, he has a particular responsibility for finding a title post for the candidate on completion of training.

Panel reports and the College/Course

Copies of reports on recommended and conditionally recommended candidates are sent to the principals of training institutions on request, provided the Bishop has endorsed the recommendation.  If a Bishop has set aside a non-recommendation of a candidate and permitted a candidate to enter training, the Panel Secretary will obtain the Bishop’s permission before releasing a report to a training institution.

Return to a further Bishops’ Advisory Panel

A non-recommended candidate may normally return to a further Bishops’ Advisory Panel after two years if a Bishop is prepared to sponsor him or her.  Exceptional circumstances may require flexibility. In any event, the Bishop and the DDO should be convinced that all the points raised in the previous report have been heard, accepted and dealt with, before sponsoring for a further Panel.  Premature return to a Panel should be resisted, whatever the pressure from candidate, incumbent, or anyone else.  However, in some cases a Bishop may choose to send a candidate to another Panel before the two years are up as a way of appealing against the non-recommendation.  A Bishop may sponsor candidates up to a maximum of three times.

Sponsorship of withdrawn candidates

The Candidates Panel deals with a number of candidates’ cases and will review and advise the Sponsoring Bishop accordingly on a range of issues (See Section 8).  However, where a candidate’s sponsorship has been withdrawn, the candidate needs time to adjust to, live with, and reflect on, the withdrawal of sponsorship.  The candidate’s vocation will need to be further tested by continued faithful service in the Church as a lay person before re-presenting him/herself for ordained ministry.  In these circumstances the candidate will need to be sponsored again by a Bishop.  The candidate will then return to a Bishops’ Advisory Panel.  This second sponsorship should normally be after a period of three years from the withdrawal of sponsorship. 

Candidates not proceeding to ordination

In the case of a candidate deciding not to proceed to ordination during their final year in training the College/ Course should inform the Sponsoring Bishop as soon as possible and the DDO should alert the Ministry Division.  This information would enable the Deployment, Remuneration and Conditions of Service unit to amend its records of students seeking title posts.  It would also enable conversations to proceed so that considerations can be given to appropriate funding arrangements.

Continuing responsibilities of Ministry Division staff

The Selection Secretaries look after candidates’ files at Church House on behalf of the Bishops. A record is thus kept of a candidate’s progress from first application for a Panel.  The DDO should inform Ministry Division staff of any significant change in a candidate’s circumstances which might occur during this period.  Similarly, Ministry Division staff will inform the diocese should they become aware of any changes. When a candidate withdraws from training for any reason it is important that the Ministry Division is informed.  It should not be assumed by the DDO that the College/Course will necessarily have informed Ministry Division.

Resources

Financial Information for Recommended Candidates, a booklet published by the Ministry Division.

The Care of Candidates before and after a Selection Conference.  ABM Ministry Paper, No.16, 1997.