F25 Accepted

Responsibility for regulating and monitoring compliance

Mid Staffs Inquiry · Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · Issued 6 February 2013

Source — verbatim from the inquiry

Inquiry recommendation

It should be considered the duty of all specialty professional bodies, ideally together with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, to develop measures of outcome in relation to their work and to assist in the development of measures of standards compliance.

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

Published evidence summary

Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:

- NICE works with specialist professional bodies and royal colleges in developing clinical guidelines and quality standards (NICE guidelines process, www.nice.org.uk).
- Individual royal colleges and specialty associations have developed outcome measures and clinical audit programmes in their areas. The National Clinical Audit and Patient Outcomes Programme (NCAPOP) funds over 30 national clinical audits across specialties (NCAPOP, Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership).
- The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) programme, established by NHS England in 2015, works with clinical specialties to develop and apply outcome measures to reduce unwarranted variation (GIRFT programme, NHS England).
- No published evidence of a formal duty placed on all specialty professional bodies to develop outcome measures in coordination with NICE has been identified. Participation remains voluntary rather than mandated.

Sources

Response — verbatim from government

Department of Health and Social Care

The government published "Hard Truths: the Journey to Putting Patients First" (Cm 8777) on 19 November 2013, responding to all 290 recommendations of the Francis Report. This followed an initial response "Patients First and Foremost" in March 2013. Key reforms included a new Chief Inspector of Hospitals, strengthened Care Quality Commission inspection regime, a statutory duty of candour, and the fit and proper person test for NHS directors. Volume 2 (Cm 8754) contains the government's detailed responses to each of the 290 recommendations. See: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7cd486ed915d63cc65d167/34658_Cm_8777_Vol_1_accessible.pdf

Department of Health and Social Care · 19 Nov 2013 Written response →

Evidence trail — what's actually happened since

  • 6 Feb 2023 · Academic Review - Ten Years After Francis Research published 2023 marking ten years since the Francis Report found mixed results. Structural and legislative changes largely delivered (duty of candour, FPPR, CQC overhaul, revalidation, Freedom to Speak Up Guardians). However, cultural change not fully embedded; understaffing, fear of speaking up, and poor complaint handling persist in parts of the NHS. View source → Reasonable Progress
  • 11 Feb 2015 · UK Government - Culture Change in the NHS Government published "Culture Change in the NHS" (Cm 9009) reporting progress on all 290 recommendations. Key achievements: 19 hospitals placed in special measures; those trusts recruited 109 additional doctors and 1,805 additional nurses; 129 board-level changes made; excess avoidable deaths fell by 450 in less than a year. View source → Good Progress
  • 19 Nov 2013 · UK Government - Hard Truths Vol 1 & 2 Government published "Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First" (Cm 8777) in two volumes. Vol 1 set out new actions; Vol 2 provided detailed response to each of the 290 recommendations. Approximately 204 of 290 recommendations were fully accepted. View source → Good Progress

Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.

How this page is built

Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.

This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.