Approved Practice Settings
Mid Staffs Inquiry · Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · Issued 6 February 2013 · Addressed to: GMC
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The Department of Health and the General Medical Council should review whether the resources available for regulating Approved Practice Setting are adequate and, if not, make arrangements for the provision of the same. Consideration should be given to empowering the General Medical Council to charge organisations a fee for approval.
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:
- The government's response in "Hard Truths" (Cm 8777, November 2013) stated that the Department of Health and the GMC would review whether the resources available for regulating approved practice settings were adequate and would consider empowering the GMC to charge organisations a fee for approval (Hard Truths, DHSC, November 2013).
- The Medical Profession (Responsible Officers) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/2841, as amended by SI 2013/391) require designated bodies to appoint a responsible officer to evaluate and make recommendations about the fitness to practise of doctors connected to that body. This extends the revalidation framework to non-NHS settings, but resource adequacy for monitoring approved practice settings has not been the subject of published review since Francis (SI 2010/2841).
- No published evidence has been identified of a completed review of the adequacy of resources for regulating approved practice settings or of legislation empowering the GMC to charge fees specifically for approved practice setting approval.
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
- 3 Dec 2012 · GMC - Medical Revalidation GMC medical revalidation launched December 2012. All licensed doctors must demonstrate fitness to practise every five years through appraisal and evidence. Francis Report endorsed and recommended strengthening revalidation. View source → Confirmed Completed
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.