Vivienne Maskrey (UEA), Annie Blyth (UEA), Prof. David Wright (UEA) Development of competency panels to enable pharmacist registration in the UK Amandeep Kaur Doll (Health Education England & UEA), Dr Sue Ambler (Health Education England), Rosalyne Cheeseman (Health Education England), Vivienne Maskrey (UEA), Annie Blyth (UEA), Prof. David Wright (UEA) Gill Shelton (Cambridge University Hospitals), Jawad Dungersi (Peterborough City Hospital), Meb Walji (Peterborough City Hospital), Maria Christou (University of East Anglia), Hannah Kinsey (UEA), Rina Matala (UEA) & Hattie Whiteside (UEA) Background Within the UK pre-registration pharmacist trainees are currently signed off as competent by their tutor at the end of their 52 weeks of training. Due to differences in expectations between tutors and the relationships built between tutors and their trainees, other healthcare professions in the UK require independent sign-off of competency for registration purposes Conclusion Wide variation in the quality and quantity of evidence collated by trainees was seen. The number of competencies to which one piece of evidence was related ranged from one to twenty-six. Greater guidance for trainees and tutors on evidence completion and mapping was identified as being required. The availability of reports from 13 week reviews and from both trainees and tutors at the point of panel review was seen as necessary to effectively assess progress. Aim To develop an objective and independent approach to signing-off pharmacist trainees as competent to practice at the end of their pre-registration training period. Methods 100 hospital and community pharmacist pre-registration trainees across one English region were recruited into a pilot project. Ethical approval to undertake focus groups with stakeholders was obtained. Six test competency panels consisting of a : 1 trained chair 2 pharmacist pre-registration trainers 1 patient and public representative, Test panels conducted at 26 week point. These panels reviewed the electronic portfolios of 8 or 9 trainees each awarded outcomes. Focus groups undertaken to learn from the experience with : 6 panel chairs Panel members Trainee. Results The test panels at week 26 44 trainee portfolios were reviewed 31 of these were deemed likely to pass 7 were identified as requiring additional training time 6 were asked to provide additional information within 2 weeks to enable the panel to make a final decision. The process identified a need to create: Frequently asked questions for trainees Guidance on preparing portfolios for submission by trainees and tutors.