MPs to assess government progress using CQC-style ratings

The committee said it would launch the process – similar in style to that operated by the Care Quality Commission for frontline service providers – to offer objective evaluations of ministerial pledges and to help the committee hold the government to account.

They will look at four key questions – has the commitment been met or on track to be met; has it been effectively funded; did it achieve a positive impact for patients; and was the commitment appropriate? Further questions under each of the four areas will be agreed with the committee

The evaluation of progress will include a financial analysis, particularly of financial flows in support of commitments, the committee said in a report, Independent evaluation of progress on government commitments. The National Audit Office value for money methodologies could also be used, and both the NAO and Care Quality Commission will be asked for their opinions.

An initial pilot will examine progress on maternity service targets, due to be published in the autumn.

As a first step in the process, the health and social care secretary, NHS England and NHS Improvement and other relevant government body will be invited to outline the commitments they have made, together with evidence of progress, in the committee’s chosen policy area.

The committee will agree a list of commitments, which will then be evaluated by a panel of experts comprised of three core members and between three and six further members with expertise in the policy area being examined. Both core and non-core membership will include clinicians and service users.

If the panel judges that the government’s performance is ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’, the committee expects this to galvanise the Department of Health and Social Care and its arm’s length bodies to make improvements. The committee expects to return to the topic later to assess whether improvements have been made.

Committee chair Jeremy Hunt (pictured) said the move was about government accountability. ‘We are piloting a new CQC-style ratings system to provide an expert independent assessment of the government’s record on key pledges. This will mean the government is held to account by an evaluation process similar to that used across the NHS and social care system, which gives not just an absolute score but key pointers as to how to improve that score next time round. 

‘We hope it will focus attention on areas such as cancer, mental health and patient safety where a number of vital commitments have been made.’