Home / Inquiries / Mid Staffs Inquiry / F47
← F46 F48 →
F47

Use of information about compliance by regulator from: Foundation trust governors and scrutiny committees

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

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

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care says in progress (Feb 2015)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

The Care Quality Commission should expand its work with overview and scrutiny committees and foundation trust governors as a valuable information resource. For example, it should further develop its current 'sounding board events'.

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

In commentary from September 2024 published in February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England stated that the Care Quality Commission works with foundation trust governors on appointment, highlighting an updated provider code of governance and dedicated governor support programmes (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). In May 2024, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team noted that the recommendation had been accepted, recording earlier government reports on developing guidance and sharing information with overview and scrutiny committees (The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team, May 2024).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 26 Sep 2026.

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 Care Quality Commission has taken steps to engage Overview and Scrutiny Committees and Foundation Trust Governors, to increase their input to its new approach to inspection and monitoring.
All Overview and Scrutiny Committees now receive a two-monthly bulletin from the Care Quality Commission to update them on work and encourage feedback from their scrutiny reviews and activity. Each Overview and Scrutiny Committees has received a welcome letter from Professor Sir Mike Richards, the Chief Inspector of Hospitals. Local Trusts being inspected under the Care Quality Commission’s first wave of new in depth inspections have received a second letter inviting them to the public listening events and encouraging specific feedback about the Trusts.
The Care Quality Commission has put in place a contract with the Centre for Public Scrutiny to further develop information sharing and relationships with Overview and Scrutiny Committees across the regions. A sounding board of Overview and Scrutiny Committees was held in August 2013, which included encouraging Overview and Scrutiny Committees to access the Care Quality Commission’s local data to inform their scrutiny work programmes.
The Care Quality Commission and Monitor have worked together so that Monitor’s new statutory guidance for Governors46 provides briefing on the Care Quality Commission’s role and new approach to inspection. It sets out ways in which Governors can have an effective role in the Care Quality Commission’s monitoring and inspection, and how information should be shared.

Extract from: 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 say in progress · 27 Feb 2026

CQC work with Foundation Trust governors on appointment.

NHS England published an updated Code of governance for NHS provider trusts in April 2023, which replaced the Code produced by Monitor. The current Code of Governance requires governors to receive appropriate induction and to regularly update and refresh their skills and knowledge.

In 2014, Monitor published guidance for Foundation Trust governors. In 2022 NHS England published an addendum governors’ to statutory duties to reflect the different landscape of the NHS.

NHS Providers offers a governor support programme called GovernWell. This offers a range of resources, including guides on topics, newsletters and an induction toolkit.

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 “Implemented – Ongoing”. Table row: section 18.2 No. 47, PDF page 449-450.

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

The Care Quality Commission works with overview and scrutiny committees by allowing them to access and use the information the Care Quality Commission holds about services to help them drive local improvements in care services. They also work with the Care Quality Commission to coordinate compliance monitoring with scrutiny committee activity where appropriate. In turn, the committees share information with the Care Quality Commission gathered from local communities about the quality and safety of health and social care services.

The contract in place with The Centre for Public Scrutiny to deliver work across the country with overview and scrutiny committees will run until March 2015.

The Care Quality Commission is developing a separate guide for local councillors and overview and scrutiny committees to working with the Care Quality Commission, due to be published in November 2014. The Care Quality Commission is developing similar guidance for Foundation Trust Governors. This is due to be published in early 2015.

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 the Care Quality Commission, 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 referred to the Care Quality Commission taking steps to engage Overview and Scrutiny Committees and foundation trust Governors to increase their input to inspection and monitoring. All Overview and Scrutiny Committees were said to be receiving a two-monthly bulleting from the Care Quality Commission to update them on work and encourage feedback. The Government said that overview and scrutiny committees were to share information with Care Quality Commission gathered from local communities about the quality and safety of health and social care services.

The Government said that Monitor’s statutory guidance for Governors had been updated to set out ways in which Governors could share information.

In the February 2015 Culture Change report, the Government said that the Care Quality Commission was developing a guide for local councillors and overview and scrutiny committees to working with the Care Quality Commission.

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. 47, PDF page 412-413.

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.