Regulatory standards ยท Research
The PSA's new standards: what changes, and what remains to be tested?
A new oversight framework took effect in July 2026. Regulatory promises and independently established outcomes are not the same thing.
What changed in 2026
The Professional Standards Authority (PSA) published new combined standards in March 2026. They took effect on 1 July 2026 and cover professional regulators and accredited registers. According to the PSA, evidence about regulators' performance under the new framework will be collected from the 2026/27 reporting cycle. The first reports using these standards are not expected until September 2027. A new framework is not evidence that an individual regulator has already achieved every new standard.
What the last completed HCPC review actually found
The PSA's review of the HCPC for 2025/26 found 16 of 18 standards met under the previous framework. It acknowledged constructive work across general standards, guidance, education and registration, including progress on equality, diversity and inclusion. It also found that fitness-to-practise timeliness and communication or support standards were not met. Risk management met the applicable standard while specific consistency improvements remained necessary.
What these figures cannot prove
Meeting most standards does not mean there are no serious problems; unmet standards can matter greatly to public protection, complainants and professionals. Conversely, two missed standards do not establish that every decision or every part of the organisation is unsound. Annual audit findings must be distinguished from evidence about a specific case.
A transparent measurement plan
For future reviews, the HCPC and independent observers should publish comparable indicators for case delay by stage, risk decisions, contact frequency and responsiveness, accessibility adjustments, representation and review outcomes. Different populations and case complexity must be accounted for before inferring causes. Unpublished or unverified statistics must remain clearly labelled as research questions.
Our editorial position
Public safety and proportionate regulation require both high standards and accountability. HCPC&Me welcomes published data from the regulator, the PSA, professional associations and researchers, including evidence that challenges our interpretation. We will distinguish the date of a reporting period from the date a review was released.
Sources
Corrections and responses
We welcome corrective evidence, including sources from the HCPC and PSA. Conclusions are tied to identified reporting periods.
Submit a correction ↗