Sample policy · Travel clinics

Pre-travel risk assessment and consultation policy (travel clinics)

Statutory anchor: Regulation 12 (safe care and treatment), Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 (SI 2014/2936). The primary clinical authorities for this policy are the UKHSA Green Book (Immunisation against infectious disease) and TravelHealthPro / NaTHNaC country and clinical guidance. · primary source

1. What the regulation says

Care and treatment must be provided in a safe way for service users. (Reg 12(1) (the headline duty))

assessing the risks to the health and safety of service users of receiving the care or treatment, (Reg 12(2)(a) (risk assessment))

doing all that is reasonably practicable to mitigate any such risks, (Reg 12(2)(b) (risk mitigation))

ensuring that persons providing care or treatment to service users have the qualifications, competence, skills and experience to do so safely, (Reg 12(2)(c) (staff competence))

the proper and safe management of medicines, (Reg 12(2)(g) (medicines management))

Regulation 12 lists the areas a provider must address, including risk assessment, risk mitigation, staff competence, safe premises, safe equipment, sufficient equipment and medicines, medicines safety, infection prevention and shared-care planning.

The full text of the regulation is at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/2936/regulation/12. Where this policy and the regulation diverge, the regulation wins.

2. Plain-English summary

Care and treatment must be provided in a safe way. The regulation lists the areas a provider must address, including risk assessment, risk mitigation, staff competence, safe premises, safe equipment, sufficient equipment and medicines, medicines safety, infection prevention and shared-care planning. Regulation 12 is central to CQC's safety expectations.

For a travel clinic, safe care starts with a proper, person-specific risk assessment using current national travel health guidance, advice that is tailored to the traveller and their trip, and a clear record of what was assessed, advised, given and declined.

3. Purpose

A safe travel health consultation is built on a proper risk assessment. The right advice depends on where the traveller is going, what they will do there, and their own health. This policy sets out how the Service assesses each traveller, gives advice based on current national guidance, and records it, so that the vaccines, antimalarials and health advice given are right for that person and that trip.

The Service must verify this policy against current national travel health guidance (TravelHealthPro / NaTHNaC and the Green Book) before adoption.

4. Scope

This policy applies to:

5. The risk assessment

For each traveller the Service assesses, using current country information:

The assessment is based on the country and clinical information current at the time of the consultation, because risk and recommendations change.

6. The advice given

From the risk assessment the Service advises on:

Advice is tailored to the person, not a generic destination handout.

7. Timing and incomplete courses

8. When the Service is not the right place

The Service is clear about the limits of what it offers. Where a traveller needs care beyond travel health (for example management of a complex condition before travel, or specialist advice for a particular risk), the Service says so and signposts the traveller to the right service rather than advising outside its competence.

9. Recording

The Service records, for each consultation: the risk assessment, the advice given, the vaccines and medicines provided (with batch numbers where given), the traveller's consent, and any advice declined. The record shows that a tailored assessment took place.

Operational controls to adapt

Roles and responsibilities

Pre-travel consultation procedure

  1. Collect the itinerary before advice is given. Record destinations, route, stopovers, travel dates, departure date, trip length, accommodation, activities and remote or rural exposure.
  2. Assess the traveller, not only the destination. Check age, pregnancy or breastfeeding, immune status, long-term conditions, allergies, medicines, previous vaccine reactions and vaccine history.
  3. Use current country and clinical guidance. Record the guidance source and access date for vaccine, malaria, outbreak, certificate and health-risk advice.
  4. Match advice to the risk assessment. Record recommended vaccines, required vaccines, malaria prevention, bite avoidance, food and water advice, accident risk, insurance advice and when to seek help abroad.
  5. Explain limits and timing. Tell late presenters what protection is realistic, what cannot be completed before travel, and any follow-up dose or course plan.
  6. Record consent and declined advice. A traveller may decline advice, vaccine or medicine, but the record must show what was explained and what risk remains.
  7. Escalate complex cases. Immunosuppression, pregnancy, significant allergy, serious comorbidity, uncertain yellow fever suitability or advice outside competence is referred to the clinical lead or specialist source.
  8. Close the loop. Follow-up appointments, remaining doses, prescriptions, certificate needs and written information are given before the consultation is closed.

Records and register links

The consultation record should include:

Missed risk assessments, advice outside competence, wrong destination advice, vaccine or medicine errors and repeated declined-advice documentation gaps are opened on the relevant register.

10. Training and competency

Clinicians carrying out travel consultations are trained and assessed as competent for travel health, keep up to date as guidance changes, and are refreshed on a stated cadence. The Service records who is competent and the next refresher date.

11. Audit cadence

The Service checks, on a stated cadence, that:

The Registered Manager and the clinical lead review the results and record the improvement actions that follow.

12. Sources and further reading

This template is based on CQC's guidance for providers and managers, the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, and other topic-specific legislation and guidance listed below. It is a starting point for adaptation, not a substitute for legal, clinical, HR, safeguarding or specialist professional advice.

Related reading

13. When to seek further advice

Seek specialist advice where the issue involves serious harm, safeguarding, deprivation of liberty, restraint, children, professional misconduct, controlled drugs, radiation, termination of pregnancy, infection outbreak, water safety, employment dismissal, DBS barring referral, or regulatory enforcement.

14. Document control

Version Date Author Changes
v1.1 2026-07-14 Verivius (sample) Added role ownership, consultation procedure, risk-assessment records, register links and related reading.
v1 2026-06-10 Verivius (sample) Initial sample template, conformed to the Verivius policy standard.

This sample policy template was issued by Verivius. It is a template, not a substitute for legal advice or the tenant's own policy-development process. Where this template and live law or regulator guidance diverge, the live source wins.

What good looks like here

Written from an ex-CQC inspector's chair, but the point is safe, well-led care your team can stand behind. Each row shows what strong evidence looks like, what thin evidence looks like, and where the expectation comes from.

A pre-travel consultation is usually a single encounter with no follow-up loop, and the consequences land weeks later and thousands of miles away, where the traveller cannot come back and have it put right. The failure mode is advice built on the destination rather than on the person. One country carries very different risk for a two-night city stopover than for a month of rural work, and a live vaccine such as yellow fever, routine for most travellers, can be the wrong call for someone immunosuppressed or pregnant. Because destination risk and national recommendations shift between one traveller and the next, advice that was sound last season can be wrong today, and nothing visible in the consultation itself will reveal it. The record of what was assessed, which guidance was used and when, and what was advised, given and declined is the only way anyone can reconstruct the reasoning if the traveller comes home unwell or a course was never finished. That trail is what lets the clinic learn from its own consultations. The Regulation 12 lens is simply the point at which someone else reads it.

  1. A documented, person-specific risk assessment sits behind the advice, gathered before advice was given, not a destination handout. The record captures the traveller's own health as well as the itinerary, so that two people bound for the same country get the advice each of them needs.

    Strong evidence: The itinerary, route, stopovers, dates and activities plus the health history, medicines, allergies, immune status, pregnancy or breastfeeding and vaccine history in the consultation record, and the audit check that consultations rest on a documented, person-specific risk assessment.

    Weak evidence: The record opens with the country and the trip length, a destination sheet is attached, and the traveller's own health is blank, ticked "nil" for everyone, or copied forward from a visit two years ago. Stopovers, rural legs and activities are missing, so nothing in the notes explains why two people going to the same country were advised differently, and the itinerary is often recorded after the vaccines were already selected.

    A legal duty. This comes from legislation that applies to your service, so meeting it is not optional. The exact provision is cited beneath the badge.

    Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, reg 9(3)(a) and reg 12(2)(a), read with reg 17(2)(c)

  2. Advice rests on current country and clinical guidance, with the source and the date it was accessed recorded, because destination risk and recommendations change between consultations.

    Strong evidence: The guidance source used, the country page or clinical guidance date, and any specialist advice sought, recorded in the consultation.

    Weak evidence: The advice matches what the clinic was doing last season rather than the country information as it stood on the day. An outbreak update or a changed recommendation has moved, and nothing in the consultation shows anyone looked: the note reads "advised as per current guidance" with no country page named, the clinic works from a printed destination sheet or a laminated wall chart carrying no version or date, or every record in the day's clinic shares one access date because it is a template default nobody changes.

    The recognised standard from a professional or clinical body, such as NICE or a royal college. Not a legal duty, but the accepted mark of safe practice, and a departure needs a documented reason.

  3. The vaccines, antimalarials and health advice given match the assessed risk (required versus recommended vaccines, malaria advice for that route), rather than a standard bundle for the destination.

    Strong evidence: The recorded risk assessment set against the vaccines recommended or required, vaccines given or declined (with batch numbers where given), medicines supplied, malaria advice and non-vaccine advice, and the audit check that advice, vaccines and medicines match the assessment.

    Weak evidence: Everyone bound for the same country leaves with the same bundle of vaccines whatever their route or activities, and the record lists what was given without ever recording what was recommended or required and why. Malaria appears as "malaria tablets discussed" with no named regimen for that route, no bite avoidance and no note of what chemoprophylaxis does not cover, and batch numbers are missing or captured for only some of the vaccines given.

    The recognised standard from a professional or clinical body, such as NICE or a royal college. Not a legal duty, but the accepted mark of safe practice, and a departure needs a documented reason.

  4. A traveller who declined a vaccine or medicine has a record showing what was explained and what risk remains, rather than a blank, and a late presenter was told honestly what protection is realistic.

    Strong evidence: Consent, contraindications, precautions, declined advice and late-presenter limitations in the record, and the audit check that timing, incomplete courses and declined advice are recorded.

    Weak evidence: The declined field is empty, or reads "declined rabies" with nothing about what was explained or what risk the traveller is now carrying, and consent is a single tick with no trace of the discussion behind it. For a late presenter the notes show a course started with no record that it cannot be completed before departure, no honest statement of what protection is realistic, and no plan for the remaining doses.

    The recognised standard from a professional or clinical body, such as NICE or a royal college. Not a legal duty, but the accepted mark of safe practice, and a departure needs a documented reason.

  5. Complex or high-risk cases are escalated rather than advised outside competence: immunosuppression, pregnancy, significant allergy, uncertain yellow fever suitability, or needs beyond travel health referred on to the right service, with the referral recorded.

    Strong evidence: The specialist-advice-sought field and the escalation to the clinical lead or specialist source, with the linked referral where the case fell outside competence.

    Weak evidence: A traveller who is immunosuppressed, pregnant or has a significant allergy has been worked through the same template as everyone else, with the contraindications and precautions section untouched and specialist advice sought left blank. Where escalation did happen it reads "discussed with clinical lead" with no name, no date and no outcome, and doubt about yellow fever suitability is resolved silently, either by giving the vaccine or by writing an exemption, with no reasoning and no referral recorded.

    The recognised standard from a professional or clinical body, such as NICE or a royal college. Not a legal duty, but the accepted mark of safe practice, and a departure needs a documented reason.

  6. Only clinicians assessed as competent for travel health give the advice, not any available clinician, and they keep up to date as guidance changes.

    Strong evidence: The record of who is competent and the next refresher date, and the audit check that clinicians' travel health competence is current.

    Weak evidence: Clinicians ran travel consultations without anyone having assessed whether they can do it: the file holds an attendance certificate from a study day some years ago and no assessment of actual practice. The list of clinicians approved for travel consultations still carries leavers, or omits the bank and locum staff who ran clinics through the busy season, so nobody can say who was competent to advise the travellers seen that month. Keeping up to date is evidenced only by a subscription to an update bulletin, with nothing showing anyone read it or changed what they do.

    A legal duty. This comes from legislation that applies to your service, so meeting it is not optional. The exact provision is cited beneath the badge.

    Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, reg 12(2)(c), read with reg 18(2)(a)

Related

Last verified 20 July 2026

Spotted something to improve?

These are sample templates, not the last word. If you would change a wording, or want to help us confirm a detail, tell us and we will look at it.

Related Verivius content

Want help adapting this to your service?

A Verivius consultant can read your adapted policy against the live regulation and your service shape. The work fits inside a Mock Inspection engagement or a shorter consulting brief. A 20-minute conversation is the fastest way to find out whether the fit is right.

Get started free

Free to start, no card. A 14-day trial when you subscribe.

Last reviewed 10 June 2026