Medical training
Mid Staffs Inquiry · Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · Issued 6 February 2013 · Addressed to: Department of Health and Social Care
Government responseDepartment of Health and Social Care: Accepted in part (Nov 2013)
DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care states no delivery position (Feb 2015)
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The Secretary of State should by statutory instrument specify all medical education and training regulators as relevant bodies for the purpose of their statutory duty to cooperate. Information sharing between the deanery, commissioners, the General Medical Council, the Care Quality Commission and Monitor with regard to patient safety issues must be reviewed to ensure that each organisation is made aware of matters of concern relevant to their responsibilities.
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 noted action taken following the inquiry, referring to recommendation 35 for detail on the regulatory landscape and how organisations work together (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). In May 2024, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team found that while Health Education England was added in April 2015 to the statutory list of bodies subject to a duty to cooperate, no other medical education and training regulators had been added (The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team, May 2024). The legal team also noted that operational protocols and memoranda of understanding covering information sharing had been established between the Care Quality Commission, the General Medical Council, and other oversight bodies (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 response
●Department of Health and Social Care · Accepted in part · 19 Nov 2013
Accepted in principle.
As stated in recommendation 152, in the new health and care system architecture, Memoranda of Understanding exist between key partners such as Health Education England and the Care Quality Commission, to share information and concerns about the quality and safety delivered of providers. The Health and Social Care Act 2012 further strengthened this by placing a statutory duty on Monitor and the Care Quality Commission to cooperate in the interests of patients. Monitor and Care Quality Commission have a Memorandum of Understanding in place to facilitate the necessary collaboration and information sharing. There are similar duties on organisations across the system, including Health Education England.
The Care Quality Commission and the General Medical Council have published an operational protocol which sets out in detail how coordination and information sharing will work between the two regulators. A similar arrangement will be in place between the Care Quality Commission and the Nursing and Midwifery Council by December 2013, and updated information sharing arrangements thereafter between the Care Quality Commission, the General Dental Council and Health and Care Professions Council. Information from third parties such as the General Medical Council and the Royal Colleges is a potential trigger for regulatory intervention in Monitor’s Risk Assessment Framework. Recently established Quality Surveillance Groups bring together the different parts of the system to share information, including shared views of risks to quality and any early warning signs of risk about poor quality. If any part of the local, regional or national system has concerns that there may be a serious quality failure within a provider organisation, which cannot be addressed through established and routine operational systems, a Risk Summit can be called.
Delivery
●DHSC and NHS England say in progress · 27 Feb 2026
The Thirlwall Inquiry has noted action taken following the conclusion of the Inquiry.
Please also see response to recommendation 35 for detail on the regulatory landscape and how organisations work together.
●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
What other bodies have found
●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024
This recommendation was accepted in principle by the Government and accepted by the General Medical Council in its spring 2013 initial response.
Duties to cooperate are found in sections 288 to 290 Health and Social Care Act 2012. Health Education England was added to the list of relevant bodies on 1 April 2015. No other medical education and training regulators were added to the list.
In its January 2014 Hard Truths report, the Government referred to the various operational protocol and memoranda of understanding between relevant organisations. The Government also said that information from The General Medical Council and Royal Colleges was potential trigger for regulatory intervention in Monitor’s Risk Assessment Framework.
A Memorandum of Understanding between Health Education England and the Care Quality Commission memorandum of understanding (publicly available version dated May 2016) included information sharing provisions between the two organisations.
The joint operational protocol between General Medical Council and the Care Quality Commission (publicly available version dated June 2020) contained information sharing provisions, including any concerns the General Medical Council has about training.
The joint working protocol between the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the Care Quality Commission (publicly available version dated November 2017) contained information sharing provisions, including any concerns the Nursing and Midwifery Council had about training at an organisation.
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.