Home / Inquiries / Mid Staffs Inquiry / F78
← F77 F79 →
F78

Enhancement of role of governors

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 partially delivered (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care states no delivery position (Feb 2015)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

The Care Quality Commission and Monitor should consider how best to enable governors to have access to a similar advisory facility in relation to compliance with healthcare standards as will be available for compliance issues in relation to breach of a licence (pursuant to section 39A of the National Health Service Act 2006 as amended), or other ready access to external assistance.

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 published in February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England reported that the recommendation was partially implemented, explaining that the Care Quality Commission produced guidance for foundation trust governors in 2019 and that GovernWell continues to provide a governor support programme (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). Prior to this, in May 2024, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team noted that the recommendation had been accepted by the government, recording earlier steps by Monitor to establish an advisory panel for governors in 2013 (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.
Monitor has set up the Panel for Advising Governors, which has a former Foundation Trust chair as its Chair, together with 16 other experienced members. The panel has been operational since May 2013 and is ready to take questions from governors on topics as per the Health and Social Care Act 2012.
Governors may therefore put a question to the existing panel on a breach or potential breach of the trust’s constitution, breach of licence or any other matter under chapter 5 of the National Health Service Act 2006.
The Care Quality Commission has recently written to all Councils of Governors to confirm the appointment of Professor Sir Mike Richards as the new Chief Inspector of Hospitals, and to highlight and inform governors of the ways in which they can share information and raise issues with the Care Quality Commission, and contribute to the new NHS inspections.
The Care Quality Commission will be piloting ways for governors to contribute directly to the new hospital inspections, as a further route to raising issues.

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 partially delivered · 27 Feb 2026

In 2019 CQC produced guidance for FT Governors about the CQC which provides information for governors to help carry out their duties.

Please see our response to Recommendation 47 for NHS England guidance and available support in relation to Foundation Trust governors.

GovernWell continues to provide a wide-ranging governor support programme. This includes providing a national training programme for governors, virtual workshops, newsletters and additional support and guidance.

In 2014-15 NHS Monitor and CQC Introduced the Well-led framework, a national set of comprehensive governance - including quality governance - guidelines which provider boards should follow, and which underpinned CQC Well-led reviews and Monitor/NHS Improvement approaches to governance. Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 requires that that Foundation Trusts assess their governance on a regular basis. It has been revised on several occasions since.

The CQC provide a range of resources and guidance for NHS Trusts and Foundation trusts as part of assessing the well-led question.

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 “Partially implemented – Closed”. Table row: section 18.2 No. 78, PDF page 463.

●Department of Health and Social Care states no delivery position · 11 Feb 2015

No further update is required. Please see response to the recommendation in Hard Truths

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 said that Monitor had set up a Panel for Advising Governors, operational from May 2013, to answer questions relating to (potential) breaches of a trust’s constitution, breach of licence or any other matter under chapter 5 of the National Health Service Act 2006.

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. 78, PDF page 428.

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.