F263

Enhancing the use analysis and dissemination of healthcare information

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

Government responseDepartment of Health and Social Care: Accepted (Nov 2013)

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care says in progress (Feb 2015)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

It must be recognised to be the professional duty of all healthcare professionals to collaborate in the provision of information required for such statistics on the efficacy of treatment in specialties.

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 February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England reported that professional bodies require accurate records, 99 percent of trusts in England were enrolled in NCIP, and portal access across 14 surgical specialties was on track for April 2025 before expanding into non-surgical specialties (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). In May 2024, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team noted that although the government accepted the recommendation, it had not set out its position on how such a professional duty was to be "envisaged or implanted" (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.

About this summary
This recommendation asks for cultural or behavioural change, which is difficult to verify from published sources alone. The record above reflects policy commitments rather than measured outcomes.

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.
The Government stated in Patients First and Foremost (Department of Health, 2013) that, ‘From 2015, [NHS England] will ensure that data on services at specialty level is increasingly available. To do this they will work with providers, patient groups and specialty level organisations and those bodies such as the Health and Social Care Information Centre and the Care Quality Commission...’
It is important for healthcare professionals to provide information of this kind which will act as a catalyst for improvements in audit quality, participation and analysis that will enable fuller transparency. As the recent publication of outcome data for a number of surgical specialties has shown, we are at the start of an age of much greater openness about the quality of care, and all in the NHS, including health professionals, need to play their part in opening up information for patients and the public. The publication of this data has already stimulated specialist societies to take ownership of the setting and monitoring of clinical standards.

Response document: 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 in progress · 27 Feb 2026

Patient records must be clear, accurate and legible. This is a requirement set out by professional bodies including the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. In accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018, organisations must ensure the information they hold is accurate and where necessary, kept up to date.

Nearly all Trusts in England have been enrolled in NCIP (99%) and over 9,000 consultants now have access to the portal following universal access given across 7 surgical specialties.

NCIP is on track to give access to every consultant in 14 surgical specialties by 1 April 2025 with the intention of expanding into non-surgical specialties subsequently. Access to the portal has also been given to Medical Directors, Responsible Officers (who have governance responsibilities) and Trust Specialty Clinical Leads.

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 “Implemented – Ongoing”. Table row: section 18.2 No. 263, PDF page 566.

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

Medical Royal Colleges have actively supported the publication of individual consultant outcome data in the relevant specialties. The Consultant Outcomes Publication began with ten national clinical audits in June 2013; the information published is available on the NHS Choices Website and 2014 data will be published on My NHS. So far, over 99 percent of consultants have agreed or not objected to information regarding their practice being published and compliance with plans to report consultant-level data became mandatory, through the NHS standard contract, in 2014/15. Consultant data for neurosurgery and upper gastro-intestinal has also now been published. NHS England is looking into which outcomes data could be most usefully and feasibly collected to extend the programme. In addition, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges’ 2013 publication “i-care: Information, Communication and Technology in the NHS” reiterated the commitment to transparent collection and provision of information and the involvement of clinicians in the provision and use of clinical data.

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 healthcare providers, 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. However, the Government did not set out its position on how such a professional duty was to be envisaged or implanted.

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. 263, PDF page 520.

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.