What this helps you do.
- Nominated individuals, directors and provider-group leaders.
- Registered managers seeking stronger governance and clearer escalation.
Scope of the review
- Regulation 17 governance systems and relevant director requirements under Regulation 5.
- Responsibility, delegation, risk reporting and management oversight.
- Audit quality, incident and complaint learning, feedback and action closure.
How it works
- Map accountability
Identify who owns decisions, information and escalation at each level.
- Trace assurance
Follow selected concerns from identification through oversight and response.
- Challenge effectiveness
Review whether completed actions demonstrate a sustained change in practice.
- Strengthen reporting
Recommend proportionate changes to governance and management information.
What you receive
- Governance findings mapped to relevant requirements.
- An accountability and escalation improvement plan.
- Recommendations for management reporting and verification of actions.
Explore a fictional report and action plan, or create your own non-confidential working plan.
What to prepare
- Organisation chart, delegated responsibilities and meeting records.
- Risk registers, audit programme and management reports.
- Selected incident, complaint and improvement records with identifiers removed where practicable.
Use evidence references in an initial brief. Confidential records need an agreed secure handling route.
Scope and limits
- The review examines agreed governance evidence and does not replace the provider's management responsibilities.
- Director checks and specialist clinical matters require a clearly agreed scope and appropriate supporting expertise.
Common questions
Is a dashboard enough to demonstrate good governance?
A dashboard can help, but the review also examines the reliability of its information and the decisions and improvements it produces.
Can a group and its individual services be reviewed together?
Yes, the scope can examine central oversight and selected locations while distinguishing group-level arrangements from local implementation.
Sources and review
Content version: 1 November 2026. The proposed scope must be confirmed in engagement terms.
Start with a focused brief.
Describe the service and the questions you need this review to address.
Discuss your requirementsA worked example of the review
Illustrative example — not a client case. This shows a possible working method; it does not report an actual engagement or outcome.
Checking what an action marked complete actually achieved
Suppose a leadership team closes a recurring risk after approving a revised policy, but its reports contain no evidence that practice changed.
- Map responsibility for the risk, the decision to close it and the management information used for oversight.
- Compare the risk register, meeting records, audit findings and relevant feedback to establish the basis for closure.
- Agree what evidence would demonstrate improvement, who will obtain it and when the leadership team will review the result.
- Test the evidence at the review point and record whether the action can be closed, needs further work or requires escalation.
The review supports scrutiny of governance. The provider remains responsible for decisions, safe care and ongoing oversight.
Related guidance and next steps
Content version: . Named expert review remains pending for public launch.