Accountability for quality accounts
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
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
It should be a criminal offence for a director to sign a declaration of belief that the contents of a quality account are true if it contains a misstatement of fact concerning an item of prescribed information which he/she does not have reason to believe is true at the time of making the declaration.
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 Care Act 2014, Part 2, Sections 92-94 implemented this recommendation. Section 92 provides that a care provider commits an offence if it supplies, publishes, or otherwise makes available information of a specified description that is required under an enactment or other legal obligation and that information is false or misleading in a material respect. A defence exists if the provider took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence (Care Act 2014, s.92).
- Section 93 sets penalties on conviction: on summary conviction, a fine; on indictment, up to two years' imprisonment or a fine or both. Courts may also impose remedial orders and publicity orders.
- Section 94 provides personal liability for directors, managers, secretaries, or similar officers where the offence was committed with their consent or connivance, or was attributable to their neglect. The same penalties apply to individuals as to the corporate body.
- The False or Misleading Information (Specified Care Providers and Specified Information) Regulations 2015 brought these provisions into force, specifying that the covered information includes Quality Accounts, cancer waiting times, maternity data sets, and core commissioning data sets. Guidance on the offence was published by DHSC in February 2015 (The False or Misleading Information Offence: Guidance, DHSC, February 2015).
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
- 1 Jan 2025 · NHS England - Quality Accounts NHS providers required to publish annual quality accounts under Health Act 2009 and NHS (Quality Accounts) Regulations 2010. Strengthened by Health and Social Care Act 2012. Published annually by 30 June. Includes mandatory quality indicators. View source → Confirmed Completed
- 30 Sep 2023 · UK Government - Kark Review of FPPT Tom Kark QC reviewed the Fit and Proper Person Test in 2019 and found it essentially "does not ensure directors are fit for the post they hold, and does not stop the unfit from moving around the system." NHS England published updated FPPT Framework effective 30 September 2023 requiring standardised board-level assessments. View source → Reasonable Progress
- 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
- 12 Feb 2015 · Legislation - Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 received Royal Assent 12 February 2015. Section 20 creates offence of ill-treatment or wilful neglect by care workers (up to 5 years imprisonment). Section 21 creates offence for care provider organisations where systemic failures led to neglect. View source → Confirmed Completed
- 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
- 27 Nov 2014 · Legislation - Fit and Proper Person Requirement Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, Regulation 5: Fit and Proper Person Requirement came into force November 2014. Requires providers to ensure directors meet fitness requirements including good character, qualifications, competence. CQC can require removal of directors. View source → Confirmed Completed
- 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
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.