Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

NMC warns nursing directors to ensure safe staffing levels


Directors of nursing who fail to ensure their hospitals have adequate numbers of nurses could find themselves facing fitness to practise panels, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has warned.

Jackie Smith, NMC chief executive and registrar, highlighted the decision last week to issue a five year caution to Jan Harry, the former chief nurse of Mid Staffordshire Foundation Trust.

Ms Harry was found guilty by a fitness to practise panel of putting patients in danger by failing to ensure there were enough nurses on wards at the scandal hit hospital between 1998 and 2006.

The panel concluded Ms Harry’s catalogue of failings amounted to misconduct and that her fitness to practise was impaired. They imposed a maximum five year caution “in order to mark your conduct as unacceptable and signal that this must not be repeated”.

Jackie Smith

Jackie Smith

Ms Smith told Nursing Times it was a “distinct possibility” that other nursing directors could face fitness to practise panels if they failed to ensure there were adequate numbers of nurses “to protect patients”.

She said: “There is a marker here. What the panel said was that it was her responsibility to ensure adequate nursing provision. The panel decided her practice fell well short of what was expected.”

Ms Smith said the NMC expected directors of nursing and those in leadership roles to already be doing what was needed, adding: “This is about protecting patient safety.”

Ms Harry had argued in her evidence to the panel that her role was purely strategic and not operational.

But the panel said nursing directors could not separate the two roles and the public had the right to expect a director of nursing to prioritise the provision of quality “frontline” nursing services.

It ruled against striking her off the register because no patients had been directly harmed by her personally and noted her “long, distinguished and otherwise unblemished” career.

Earlier this year an investigating committee for the NMC ruled Ms Harry’s successor Helen Moss had “no case to answer” and did not refer her to a fitness to practise panel. Ms Moss taking over as chief nurse in 2006.

In his report on the care failings at the trust, Robert Francis QC said there was no sense of urgency and an “unacceptable delay” in addressing the issues when Ms Moss arrived.

From next year the NMC will have new legal powers to re-consider the decisions made by the investigating committees.


Are you able to Speak Out Safely? Sign our petition to put pressure on your trust to support an open and transparent NHS.


Related files

Readers' comments (24)

  • michael stone

    Has the NMC explained how Directors of Nursing ENSURE there are definitely enough nurses, if how the money gets spent isn't always under their control ?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anything that challenges senior managers 'right' to ignorance or absence of due diligence is to be welcomed, especially when it has teeth.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Too little, too late I'm afraid. The NMC had the opportunity last week to prove that it takes patient safety seriously, that it would strike from its register anyone who puts patients at risk yet they reneged on this. What is the NMC for if it's not to protect patients from nurses who are not fit to nurse?

    What is the point of the NMC if it sees fit only to suspend someone who was fundamental, in allowing the suffering at Mid-Staffs to continue?

    I just wish she'd posted something about it on Facebook then maybe the NMC would've taken a stronger line!

    Is it just me, or do others struggle with the NMC decision?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This is an interesting dilemma. Directors of nursing and chief nurses are responsible to their employers' Boards to make sure services are cost-effective, and to be "involved" in strategic planning (does such a thing exist?); yet, on the other hand they have to look at patient safety and provide frontline services. The NMC have stated their view, so the senior nurses know where they stand. Interesting to see how this will pan out in reality.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In my trust, it's panned out by the DNS getting control of the nursing workforce budget directly for the first time ever and no longer having to work through "strategic plans" with the finance director to get extra staff where needed. Am more hopeful now nurses are getting more power.....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 11-Nov-2013 1:31 pm

    The message is out there for all to see: Directors of Nursing have absolutely nothing to fear from the NMC. A hand slap is about the very worst we can expect them to receive.

    I wonder how the families of those who suffered so appallingly in the Stafford Hospital are feeling about this latest disgrace.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • mags | 11-Nov-2013 5:49 pm

    Absolutely right: what a savage indictment of this failed, out of touch, cronyistic organisation. I just hope the NMC have dug their own grave and that this is the beginning of the end, but I doubt it!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 11-Nov-2013 1:31 pm

    If the case papers relating to the Harry case are read and understood it will be realised that the quality of evidence given was so poor one is surprised that the NMC managed to sustain a finding of "unfitness to practice".

    I have campaigned for a long time for these "leaders" of nursing to be made professionally accountable for their actions.

    Until nurses and the professional/trade union take a determined stance these "directors of nursing" will continue to advice that cuts in nurse staffing will not result in harm to patients.


    "Nurse managers" must be held fully accountable for their persistence in and insistence on, patients being put at very considerable risk.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Apologies !

    I failed to adequately proof read my previous comment and this site has no "edit" function.

    I hope the "sense" of what I wrote is intelligible .


    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • michael stone

    The Nobody | 11-Nov-2013 5:23 pm


    But when push comes to shove, if a Director of Nursing honestly believes that within the budget restraints it isn't possible to employ enough nurses 'to adequately ensure patient safety', are Directors of Nursing going to at that point resign, or will people start to play fast-and-loose with 'adequate patient safety' ?

    It seems to me that only the rich (and most nurses probably are not rich) or the incredibly principled, will resign from their job and ALSO give the "I had to resign because ..." valedictory speech.

    It is remarkable how once people have retired from the job, they THEN [sometimes] talk about 'everything that wasn't up to scratch'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page20 per page50 per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.