F12

Fundamental standards of behaviour

Mid Staffs Inquiry · Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · Issued 6 February 2013 · Addressed to: Healthcare providers

Government responseDepartment of Health and Social Care: Accepted (Nov 2013)

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England state no delivery position (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care says in progress (Feb 2015)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

Reporting of incidents of concern relevant to patient safety, compliance with fundamental standards or some higher requirement of the employer needs to be not only encouraged but insisted upon. Staff are entitled to receive feedback in relation to any report they make, including information about any action taken or reasons for not acting.

Mid Staffs Inquiry, Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · 6 Feb 2013 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

The Inquiry asked healthcare providers to insist on incident reporting and give staff feedback. In commentary of September 2024, published in February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and NHS England stated that national guidance specifies mandatory and encouraged incident recording through the Learn from Patient Safety Events (LFPSE) service, but feedback to staff was not mentioned (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). In May 2024, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team reviewed the recommendation, noting past government updates on incident reporting metrics and system recommissioning (The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team, May 2024).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 1 Oct 2026.

About this summary
This recommendation asks for cultural or behavioural change, which is difficult to verify from published sources alone. The record above reflects policy commitments rather than measured outcomes.

Report-level response context

Government responded via "Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First" (2014), a single document covering all 290 recommendations with a blanket acceptance. Individual recommendation responses were not broken out.

Government response

●Department of Health and Social Care · Accepted · 19 Nov 2013

Speaker not recorded. Source: Department of Health, Hard Truths: the Journey to Putting Patients First, volume 2 (Cm 8777-II), November 2013

Accepted.
The Government agreed in its response to the Inquiry, Patients First and Foremost, that clear accountability for Trust Boards is essential so that they understand their responsibilities to patients. This includes a regard to patient safety and fundamental standards.
The Care Quality Commission will develop and inspect against the fundamental standards, of which patient safety will be an essential component. NHS England is committed to working with the Care Quality Commission on developing a shared and agreed approach to measuring safety in the NHS (both for regulatory and improvement purposes) and is actively in discussion with the Care Quality Commission on the patient safety measures, including incident reporting, best suited for use in their surveillance model and how NHS England can contribute to this.
‘Patient safety incidents reported’ is also one of the overarching indicators in Domain 5 of the NHS Outcomes Framework and describes the readiness of the NHS to report harm and learn from it. Therefore, it is important that staff receive feedback on any concerns they raise about patient safety including via local incident reporting systems. At a national level, NHS England will re-commission the National Reporting and Learning System to improve its functionality, uses and benefits. This will also aim to strengthen reporting and learning from the most serious incidents, with quicker notification and feedback of the relevant lessons learnt, and with more efficient mechanisms for distributing incident reports to relevant organisations, such as clinical commissioning groups, the Care Quality Commission, Monitor, the National Trust Development Authority and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.

Response document: Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First. Volume Two of the Government Response to the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry: Response to the Inquiry's Recommendations

Site note: This is volume two of "Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First" (Cm 8777-II), the government's response to the Inquiry's 290 recommendations, published by the Department of Health on GOV.UK on 19 November 2013 and dated to that day here. The PDF the row links to is the accessible edition, whose title page reads "January 2014". The Department of Health has been the Department of Health and Social Care since January 2018. The volume says it includes accounts from each of the national organisations the recommendations name, but it does not mark which passage each organisation wrote, so every row is filed under the Department that published it.

Delivery

●DHSC and NHS England state no delivery position · 27 Feb 2026

NHS England’s policy guidance on recording patient safety events and levels of harm sets out where recording of events is mandatory and where staff are strongly encouraged to record events which they believe may impact upon the safety of their patients. This includes areas of good practice which can be learned from. NHS England also supports staff to record anonymously, to provide psychological safety where individuals may fear the repercussions of speaking up. The recently introduced Learn from Patient Safety Events (LFPSE) service is a national database of records of patient safety incidents from across England. LFPSE supports the policy on recording patient safety events, and allows frontline staff and safety/governance teams to collaboratively develop the record of what happened, recognising that opinions and recollections may differ, and that there is usually a subjective element.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025)

Site note: DHSC and NHS England's own account of progress, supplied to the Thirlwall Inquiry in September 2024 and printed in the Inquiry legal team's Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). It is not a finding of the Inquiry. Their reviewed extent of implementation reads “Superseded.”. Table row: section 18.2 No. 12, PDF page 428-429.

●Department of Health and Social Care says in progress · 11 Feb 2015

Patient safety incident reporting is a key part of patient safety improvement. Patient safety incident reporting to the National Reporting and Learning System continues to increase year on year. Data published in April 2014 showed that in the six months from April 2013 to September 2013, 725,314 incidents in England were reported to the National Reporting and Learning System, 8.9% more than in the same period in the previous year.

On 24 June, NHS England published the results of a new indicator on the NHS Choices website, rating NHS hospitals for their incident reporting. A good reporting culture in an organisation means that the organisation reports patient safety incidents frequently, reports the more serious incidents that occur but also reports many incidents involving low and no harm to patients, because its staff understand that by reporting even these less serious incidents, the organisation can learn and improve. A good reporting culture is also indicated by the staff of a hospital saying they think the organisation has fair and effective procedures when incidents are reported. These aspects of incident reporting have been combined from existing data sources, including the Care Quality Commission Intelligent Monitoring data, to give a composite rating for each acute hospital’s reporting culture. The rating does not describe whether a hospital is safe, but does provide patients with authoritative and easy to access information on how well developed the organisation’s patient safety incident reporting culture is and will encourage organisations to improve their reporting culture.

Work to re-commission the National Reporting and Learning System has been progressed by NHS England with the development of a long list of options for the new system based on input from a wide range of stakeholders and experts. The options are now being appraised in terms of technical feasibility, deliverability and operational impact and will be utilised to support the strategic business case. The procurement of the new system will then progress in the 2015/16 financial year, subject to approvals.

The Care Quality Commission is giving greater prominence to safety alerts in its revised surveillance model. The Care Quality Commission’s NHS acute Intelligent Monitoring system includes a composite indicator around completion of safety alerts which contributes to providers’ risk scores. Discussions are taking place as to whether this can be implemented for the other sectors the Care Quality Commission regulates.

Providers are expected to retain accountability for implementing patient safety alerts while demonstrating safety improvement and learning in order to give safety alerts more prominence in the inspection model.

From: Culture Change in the NHS supporting Annex (annex to Culture change in the NHS: applying the lessons of the Francis Inquiries)

Site note: This is the supporting annex published on 11 February 2015 with "Culture change in the NHS: applying the lessons of the Francis Inquiries" (Cm 9009), attached to the GOV.UK page as "Culture change in the NHS supporting annex". The annex has no title page; that title is GOV.UK's and the PDF's own. Its table has four columns (No., Recommendation, Hard Truths Government response, Progress update), and the row carries the Progress update cell. No column says which organisation wrote an update, so the row is filed under the Department of Health (now the Department of Health and Social Care), which published it.

Site note: The Inquiry addressed this recommendation to healthcare providers, not to the Department of Health. The annex gives this update in the Department's publication and does not say who wrote it, so the row is the Department's report of the progress made on it.

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024

This recommendation was accepted by the Government. In the January 2014 Hard Truths report, the Government agreed that it was important staff receive feedback on any concerns they raise about patient safety.

In the February 2015 Culture Change report, the Government said that rates of patient safety incident reporting had increased from 2012 to 2013.

The Government referred to the publication by NHS England of a new indicator on the NHS Choices website, rating NHS hospitals of their incident reporting. The Government said this provided patients with authoritative and easy to access information on how well developed an organisation’s patient safety incident reporting culture was. The Government said that the Care Quality Commission was giving greater prominence to safety alerts in its revised surveillance model, with its acute intelligent monitoring system including a composite indicator around completion of safety alerts which contributed to providers’ risk scores.

The Government also referred to then ongoing work to recommission the National Reporting and Learning System, with procurement to progress in 2015/16.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024)

Site note: The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team's own notes on implementation, from its Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024). The review does not colour its Extent of Implementation cell for this recommendation green; it leaves the cell uncoloured where a recommendation was rejected, where evidence of implementation was insufficient, or where steps had been taken but implementation was not yet complete. Table row: section 16.2 No. 12, PDF page 389-390.

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.