F98

National Patient Safety Agency functions

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

Government responseDepartment of Health and Social Care: Accepted in part (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 to the National Reporting and Learning System of all significant adverse incidents not amounting to serious untoward incidents but involving harm to patients should be mandatory on the part of trusts.

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from September 2024, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England stated that the recommendation had been superseded, explaining that the Learn from Patient Safety Events service replaced the National Reporting and Learning System alongside the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework and the statutory duty of candour (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). In a review published in February 2026, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team noted that the government had originally accepted the proposal only in principle, opting not to introduce a mandatory reporting system but rather to rely on the duty of candour and measures promoting voluntary incident reporting (The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team, Feb 2026).

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

About this summary
This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record above reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.

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 in part · 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 in principle.
Reporting of patient safety incidents involving severe harm and death is already mandatory nationally under the Care Quality Commission regulations and these incidents are actively reviewed by NHS England as well as being shared with the Care Quality Commission.
The Government’s current policy is not to introduce a mandatory reporting system at this stage however the Government does agree there should be a new duty on providers to be candid to patients (as set out in recommendation 174) and more should be done to promote the reporting of all patient safety incidents among healthcare professionals (as set out in recommendation 181).
The National Reporting and Learning System already receives over 1.2 million incident reports a year and NHS England continues to encourage increased reporting from across the healthcare system. Indicator 5.1 of the NHS Outcomes Framework requires that the NHS continues to increase the numbers of incidents that are reported to the National Reporting and Learning System as this is a good indication of the development of a mature patient safety culture where organisations are open about incidents. NHS England will continue to drive the development of the safety culture within the NHS, not least by implementing relevant recommendations from the Berwick report. Organisations should routinely collect, analyse and respond to local measures that serve as indicators of the level of quality and safety of healthcare, including the voices of patients and staff, staffing levels, the reliability of critical processes and other quality metrics.
As stated in recommendation 97, the Chief Inspector of Hospitals’ assessment will include an inspection for patient safety which will inform the ratings of all NHS providers and the Care Quality Commission and NHS England will work closely together to share information, including reported incidents from the National Reporting and Learning System, to support Care Quality Commission’s surveillance and inspection.

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 state no delivery position · 27 Feb 2026

This recommendation precedes the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (the NHS approach to developing and maintaining effective systems and processes for responding to patient safety incidents) and the Learn from Patient Safety Events (LFPSE) service (a national NHS system for the recording and analysis of patient safety events). LFPSE replaces the previous National Reporting and Learning System.

In addition, the statutory Duty of Candour ensures that providers are open and transparent with people who use services (please see response to recommendation 21 for more information about this duty).

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. 98, PDF page 471-472.

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

As set out in the updated response to Recommendation 12, 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. Following close liaison between the Care Quality Commission and NHS England, the Care Quality Commission’s new Intelligent Monitoring system now assesses the patterns of incident reporting to the National Reporting and Learning System by flagging as at risk or at elevated risk all organisations demonstrating any of the following:
• potential under-reporting of patient safety incidents as suggested by organisations who are reporting significantly fewer patient safety incidents than other organisations
• potential under-reporting of patient safety incidents causing death and severe harm as suggested by organisations who are reporting significantly fewer of these kinds of incidents than other organisations
• potential under-reporting of patient safety incidents involving no harm as suggested by organisations who report a significantly higher proportion of incidents involving harm than other organisations
• poor organisational commitment to monthly reporting of incidents to the National Reporting and Learning System, as demonstrated by reporting 3 months or less out of six; or
• where a hospital has significantly lower scores than other organisations in relation to the percentage of staff who report their organisations’ procedures and responses to incident reports are fair and effective via the NHS Staff Survey. On 24 June 2014, 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 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 is underway in NHS England with ongoing stakeholder and expert engagement being used to inform the design phase. The options development and appraisal will be progressed in Q3 and Q4 of 2014/15 with the revised design confirmed by the end of March 2015, subject to approvals. The procurement of the new system will then progress over the 2015/16 financial year.

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 NHS England, 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 · 27 Feb 2026

This recommendation was accepted in principle by the Government.

The Government stated that its policy was not to introduce a mandatory reporting system but instead introduce a duty of candour, with more done to promote the reporting of all patient safety incidents among healthcare professionals.

The Government also said that the Care Quality Commissions new Intelligent Monitoring System assessed the pattern of incident reporting to the National Reporting and Learning System by flagging organisations which demonstrated potential under-reporting of safety incidents or poor organisational commitment to monthly reporting of incidents.

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

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 dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). 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 18.2 No. 98, PDF page 471-472.

Earlier findings (1)

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024

This recommendation was accepted in principle by the Government.

The Government stated that its policy was not to introduce a mandatory reporting system but instead introduce a duty of candour, with more done to promote the reporting of all patient safety incidents among healthcare professionals.

The Government also said that the Care Quality Commission’s new Intelligent Monitoring System assessed the pattern of incident reporting to the National Reporting and Learning System by flagging organisations which demonstrated potential under-reporting of safety incidents or poor organisational commitment to monthly reporting of incidents.

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. 98, PDF page 437.

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.