Recommendation F233: For joint action Profile
From Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry, published 6 February 2013.
Recommendation
While both the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council have highly informative internet sites, both need to ensure that patients and other service users are made aware at the point of service provision of their existence, their role and their contact details.
In brief (written by this site)
In commentary from September 2024 published in February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England recorded the recommendation as in progress, stating that action taken by both regulators had been noted (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team reported in May 2024 that the General Medical Council had rolled out its Patient Information Service across the UK to improve communication with complainants, while the Nursing and Midwifery Council had produced two public information leaflets on raising concerns (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. The record below is the sources' own words.
About this summary
This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.
Government response
Accepted.
Both the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council have made clear their commitment to ensure that patients and the public have a clear understanding of the role of both organisations.
The General Medical Council is piloting meetings with patients and relatives who have made a complaint about a doctor. During the pilot, they are offering to meet individual complainants at the beginning and end of the case. The aim is to make sure that the complainant fully understands the nature and purpose of the General Medical Council’s procedures and that the General Medical Council fully understands the nature of the complainant’s concerns. The meeting when the case has concluded gives the General Medical Council an opportunity to explain the outcome.
How this response relates to the recommendation
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.
Blanket government agreement does not establish acceptance or delivery by each addressee. Some response passages cover groups of recommendations.
Scope of the government response
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.
Delivery
DHSC and NHS England say in progress (27 February 2026)
The Thirlwall Inquiry has noted action taken by the GMC and NMC following the conclusion of the Mid-Staffordshire Inquiry 2013.
See response to recommendation 230, above.
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. 233, PDF page 546-547.
Department of Health and Social Care says in progress (11 February 2015)
The Nursing and Midwifery Council is making progress with its website redevelopment project and has recently completed a phase of user testing to inform the architecture of the site. The revised website is due to be launched by mid-2015. Its Patient and Public Engagement Forum continues to meet quarterly and advises the Nursing and Midwifery Council on raising public awareness of its role and how to ensure its services are accessible to all potential users. The Nursing and Midwifery Council has produced two information leaflets for the public on raising concerns about nurses and midwives and understanding your rights when being cared for by students. These leaflets have been distributed widely through over 1,000 patient representative groups, patient advocacy services, patient advice and liaison
The General Medical Council is committed to ensuring patients and the public have a clear understanding of the role of the organisation. It has commissioned a report into the confidence and awareness of the General Medical Council functions and the effect of current communication channels, including its website, which will be published by early 2015. In 2012 the General Medical Council piloted a Patient Information Service with the aim of improving communications with members of the public who raise concerns about a doctor. The General Medical Council held a total of 298 meetings with patients, both at the beginning and end of our Fitness to Practise processes. An independent evaluation of the pilot found that meetings had mostly provided patients with a better understanding of the General Medical Council’s processes. They felt listened to and felt their complaint was being taken seriously. Meetings were also helpful in reducing their feelings of isolation. The evaluation report was published on our website in September 2014 and in January 2015 the pilot was rolled out to the General Medical Council’s offices across the UK, in Manchester and London, as well as Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast.
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 the General Medical Council, 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.
In 2012, the General Medical Council piloted a Patient Information Service with the aim of improving communications with members of the public who raise concerns about a doctor, with plans for the pilot to be rolled out across the UK. Reference to its Regional Liaison Service developing engagement with patients and the public, discussing its guide ‘What to Expect from Your Doctor’ as well as the General Medical Council’s general role. The pilot was rolled out to offices across the UK in January 2015.
In its July 2013 response, the Nursing and Midwifery Council said it also supported this recommendation. In the February 2015 Culture Change report, the Government referred to the re-launch of the Nursing and Midwifery Council’ website in mid-2015, its Patient and Public Engagement Forum, and the production of 2 information leaflets for the public on raising concerns about nurses and midwives.
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. 233, PDF page 505-506.
Source
Responsible bodies
Themes and tags
Who has spoken
- Department of Health and Social Care
Response, delivery statement - DHSC and NHS England
Delivery statement - Thirlwall Inquiry legal team
Finding