AFRM Fellowship Clinical Examination (Adult)

The Fellowship Clinical Examination (Adult) assesses your readiness for independent practice as a Rehabilitation Medicine Physician. You must demonstrate, apply and integrate medical and rehabilitation knowledge and clinical skills, while embodying professional practice behaviours.

Overview

Assessment changes 

The Fellowship Clinical Examination has been reviewed and updated in line with the implementation of the new curriculum and the Learning, Teaching and Assessment (LTA) Program. The changes are intended to clarify, not alter, the function and expectations of the exam and align the exam to the new curriculum standards and LTA Program. 

Key information 
  • The pass criteria and content scope remain the same. This exam assesses readiness for competent, independent practice as a Rehabilitation Medicine Physician; therefore, all learning goals are assessable.
  • PREP trainees aren't required to transition to the new curriculum. The exam content is relevant and linked to both the PREP and the new curricula.
  • Your professional competence in live stations is assessed via the Professional Competencies Rating Scale, which aligns with the domains of the Professional Practice Framework. This was previously named the Professional Behaviour Rating Scale. The weighting of professional competencies in live stations is unchanged (40%).
  • Candidates are now responsible for managing their time within stations. For full details, refer to the Time Management section.

Key dates

Applications open Monday 10 November 2025
Applications close 5pm AEDT, Monday 24 November 2025
Pre-exam special consideration requests close
(for provisions on exam day)
5pm AEDT, Monday 24 November 2025  
Exam 
Sunday 3 May 2026
Exam day special consideration requests close
(for technical and procedural issues)
Friday 8 May 2026 
Results released Thursday 4 June 2026
Information is correct as of Tuesday 20 January 2026.

Note: The RACP follows an alternating day rule for clinical exams, rotating each year between Saturday and Sunday.


Location

 

Gold Coast University Hospital
Adult Outpatient Department
Block D, Level 1
1 Hospital Blvd
Southport QLD 4215


Plan your journey: public transport | parking

Risk management and contingency planning

In addition to quality assurance, a comprehensive risk management framework safeguards exam integrity and minimises disruptions. Lessons from the COVID‑19 pandemic have strengthened this framework, enhancing the ability to respond to unforeseen challenges.

Risk management plans outline strategies for mitigating potential disruptions and ensuring coordinated responses to unexpected events. Crisis communications support timely updates, and contingency plans outline alternative exam delivery methods if required.

These plans are reviewed before each exam cycle and published on our website for transparency. Through proactive risk management and rigorous quality assurance, we remain committed to upholding the highest assessment standards, providing candidates and stakeholders with confidence in the exam process.

Plan A 

The exam proceeds face‑to‑face on a single day in Australia on 3 May 2026. Trainees from across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand attend 1 exam site at an allocated time during the scheduled exam day.

Plan B 

If the exam can't be delivered as planned on 3 May 2026 due to unforeseen circumstances, it'll be postponed and will proceed a minimum of 3 months later for all candidates.

Recommendations from the Review of the Paediatric Clinical Examination in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand are being implemented to enhance exam safety for candidates, examiners, patients and their families/whānau/carers. To find out more, read the Review of Paediatric Clinical Examination in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

Exam format overview

The exam follows the objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) format. You'll progress through a series of stations, each presenting a different clinical scenario.

The Prepare and Exam Day tabs provide detailed information on the content and processes of the exam day.


Exam development

The exam content is developed by the FCE Working Party, a dedicated group of AFRM Fellows who oversee the design, refinement and quality of all exam stations. The process is facilitated by the Lead and Deputy Lead Coordinators and supported by RACP staff. Planning begins well in advance, with the Working Party selecting and mapping station topics to both the PREP and new Adult Rehabilitation Medicine Curricula to ensure balanced coverage of learning objectives. This curriculum mapping supports blueprint fidelity, mitigates construct under-representation and promotes fairness across candidate cohorts.

Working Party members collaboratively develop questions and marking guides, engaging in structured peer review to refine clinical accuracy, clarity and scoring intent. These reviews reduce item-writing bias and strengthen the validity of each station. Toward the end of development, a face-to-face review is conducted, including role play and evaluation by Fellows who are independent of the Working Party. This external perspective provides an additional check on interpretation, relevance and applicability across practice contexts.

Once submitted to the RACP, questions undergo technical editing and staged review involving the Lead Coordinators, the RACP Technical Editor, the AFRM Faculty Assessment Committee and the assessment development staff. These steps help confirm internal consistency, alignment with assessment standards and readiness for inclusion in the exam. Final proofreading, approval and standard-setting processes ensure that all stations meet expected performance requirements before the materials are prepared for examination delivery.


Performance standard criteria

Standard-setting processes ensure that all candidates are assessed fairly and consistently. The exam uses criterion-referenced methods, meaning performance is assessed  against pre-determined criteria rather than a comparative curve. This approach ensures that all candidates who meet the required standard can pass.

Performance expectations are defined through detailed assessment criteria, marking guides, the Global Assessment Rating (GAR) scale and the Professional Competencies Rating Scales. Examiners apply these criteria to assess whether a candidate has demonstrated the required level of competence in each station. Pass marks are established using recognised standard-setting methods: the Modified Angoff method for static stations and the Borderline Regression method for live stations, with the GAR used as the criterion measure for Borderline Regression.

Examiners participate in structured calibration activities to develop a shared understanding of the required standard, the GAR categories and the observable behaviours that represent them. These processes strengthen scoring consistency across examiners and stations and support defensible, criterion-based pass or fail decisions.


Marking

Each station is marked by consensus between 2 examiners. All stations are equally weighted. Examiners follow structured procedures to ensure consistent scoring across circuits.

Static stations are assessed using a pre-determined marking guide. Examiners independently review the candidate’s responses and then agree on a final score for each sub-question. Pass marks for static stations are established using the Modified Angoff method, informed by subject matter experts’ expectations of minimally competent performance.

Live stations are assessed using a pre-determined marking guide, a Global Assessment Rating (GAR), and ratings from the Professional Competencies Rating Scale (PCRS), where relevant. Examiners independently mark the candidate’s performance, then agree on the GAR and a consensus score for each component of the station. Pass marks for live stations are set using the Borderline Regression method.

Your score for live stations is based on 2 components: the marking guide scores specific to that station (60%) and the professional competencies ratings (40%).

The overall pass mark is the sum of the station pass marks. You pass the exam if your aggregate score is greater than or equal to the overall pass mark and you pass at least 7 stations.

See previous exam pass rates.

Professional competencies

In live stations, professional competence is assessed via the Professional Competencies Rating Scale, which aligns with the domains of the Professional Practice Framework.

Professional competencies scores are determined using a pre-set rating scale for: 

  • quality and safety of physical exam
  • quality and safety of history taking 
  • communication 
  • judgement and decision making
  • medical expertise 

Not all domains are relevant to every station.  

Professional Competencies Rating Scales:


Quality assurance

A robust quality assurance framework governs the exams to ensure fairness, accuracy and consistency across all assessments. Each stage of the exam process follows detailed business rules tailored to the exam’s purpose, format and potential risks.

From planning and development with relevant committees through to topic selection, station design, role player and patient recruitment, examiner recruitment and calibration, stringent measures uphold rigorous assessment standards.

Data integrity is prioritised through comprehensive quality checks before results are finalised, while results meetings and ratification procedures provide additional oversight, particularly for candidate results close to the minimum expected standard and for any unforeseen circumstances that may impact outcomes.

Clear and timely communication ensures transparency for candidates and stakeholders, and structured feedback mechanisms support continuous improvement of future assessments.


Results

You'll receive your exam result by email. Ensure your contact details are up to date in MyRACP, including your current email address and phone number. If you don't receive your result email, contact us for assistance.

To ensure fairness, accuracy, and integrity, results undergo the following quality assurance process:

Post-exam stepsDescription
Exam Data CollectionScores are submitted by examiners.
Data VerificationChecking for anomalies and data comparison.
RACP Exam AnalysisData quality assurance review by Senior Lead, Assessment, and Data Analyst.
Compile Results Meeting Agenda and DocumentsCompile results meeting agenda, including results, item analysis, incident reports and post-exam special consideration applications.
Results MeetingDiscussion of results and decision on incidents and post-exam special consideration applications. All candidate details are de-identified.
Results ConfirmationConfirmation of results for release.
Results AdministrationFinal preparation of results for release.
Results ReleaseResults are typically released mid-week and before end of day to ensure that candidates can access support within business hours.

Candidate feedback

A personalised feedback report summarising the performance band you achieved for each station is included in your results email. For each station, there are 6 performance band ranges:

  • Excellent performance
  • Better than expected standard
  • Meets expected standard
  • Below expected performance
  • Poor performance
  • Very poor performance

All candidates receive a copy of the general feedback, which provides a cohort-based overview of key strengths and areas for improvement, summarised by examiners at the end of the exam.

See previous years' feedback reports:

We understand that you may be seeking more detailed individualised feedback; however, additional personalised feedback cannot be provided. You are encouraged to discuss your results with your Advanced Training Supervisor or mentor, who can help you reflect on your performance, recognise your strengths, and identify areas for continued development.

To support equitable access and consistency for all candidates, the AFRM Annual Trainees Meeting includes sessions on exams, preparation strategies and related processes, with opportunities for questions.


Next steps

To gain Fellowship of the Australasian Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, you must pass this exam and:

Refer to the eligibility criteria and exam attempts set out in the Progression Through Training Policy and the Adult Rehabilitation Medicine Training Program or the LTA Program.

Note: The Reconsideration Review and Appeals By-law (PDF) applies exclusively to decisions made by College bodies and doesn't apply to exam results, as these reflect outcomes of assessments against established criteria rather than discretionary decisions.
Close overlay