BRIS-121

Assign executive and non-executive board members responsibility for clinical safety strategy.

Bristol Heart Inquiry · Bristol Heart Inquiry — Final Report · Issued 18 July 2001

Government responseNot tracked (historical inquiry)

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

At the level of individual trusts, an executive member of the board should have the responsibility for putting into operation the trust’s strategy and policy on safety in clinical care. Further, a non-executive director should be given specific responsibility for providing leadership to the strategy and policy aimed at securing safety in clinical care.

Bristol Heart Inquiry, Bristol Heart Inquiry — Final Report · 18 Jul 2001 Source PDF →

Government response

●No formal government response recorded

The Index has not yet recorded a verbatim government response to this recommendation.

Delivery

●DHSC and NHS England say in progress · 27 Feb 2026

The Code of Governance for NHS Provider Trusts (2023) aims to help NHS providers deliver effective corporate governance, contribute to better organisational and system performance and improvement. This includes fulfilling their duties in the best interest of patients, service users and the public.

Clinicians are at the frontline of ensuring patients receive quality care. However, the board of directors takes final and definitive responsibility for improvements, successful delivery and, equally, failures in the quality of care. Effective governance therefore requires boards to pay as much attention to quality of care and quality governance as they do to the financial health of their organisation.

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 6.2 No. 121, PDF page 125.

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024

The Government agreed in part with this recommendation.

In its January 2002 response, the Department of Health said it believed safety should be the responsibility of the whole board. The Department said it would issue guidance requiring each trust board to designate a non-executive director to provide leadership.

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 6.2 No. 121, PDF page 111.

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.