PSA publishes its review of the General Medical Council performance for 2024/25

We have published our annual performance review of the General Medical Council (GMC). During 2024/25, we monitored the GMC’s performance against the Standards of Good Regulation (“the Standards”). The performance review is our check on how well the regulators have been protecting the public and promoting confidence in the health and care professions.

For this period, the GMC has met 18 out of the 18 Standards. Our report explains how we made our decision. 

The GMC’s regulatory role has expanded in this review period, and it now regulates Anaesthesia Associates (AAs) and Physician Associates (PAs). AAs and PAs have been invited to register with the GMC since December 2024, and registration will be mandatory from December 2026. As a result, the GMC has introduced new standards, guidance, and assessments for registration for AAs and PAs, alongside quality assurance for course providers. It has also published good practice advice for doctors supervising AAs and PAs and has completed in-person visits to all AA and PA course providers.

Our  feedback to the GMC as part of its consultation on its new processes highlighted that the GMC was proposing to use single case examiners to make decisions, without the option of using them in pairs. The GMC’s final guidance addresses this point. 

The legislation brought in to regulate AAs and PAs is intended to form the template for the GMC Order, which we expect the UK Government to consult on early next year. In July 2025, we published new guidance to support regulators in implementing and using new powers which will allow them to use accepted outcomes in fitness to practise. We will expect the GMC, and other regulators once reformed, to have regard to this guidance. 

In October 2025, The Times reported that some doctors with overseas restrictions on their practice were working without limitations in the UK. We asked the GMC, and the other regulators we oversee, to provide additional assurance about what they are doing to manage this risk. Further to this, we have recommended additional steps the GMC could take in this area. This includes considering whether to extend the period it asks registrants to provide certificates of good standing for. You can read more about our exploration of this risk as it applies to broader regulators in our website update here.

In 2024, we introduced a new approach to assessing regulators against our Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Standard. In order to meet the Standard, regulators must assure us they are delivering the four high-level outcomes supported by our evidence matrix. The GMC continues to perform well against this Standard. This year, it has collaborated with partners to develop EDI guidance for registrants and has provided us with more detail about how it collects data from those raising fitness to practise concerns. A planned diversity data review will further enhance the quality of data it collects.

Overall, fitness to practise timeliness improved slightly despite an increase in older open cases. We noted the GMC has reviewed its new approach to how it handles cases with third-party investigations and has identified areas for improvement. New guidance was issued by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) in September 2025 to help tribunals assess risk and handle complex cases, including sexual misconduct.

We will continue to monitor the increase in the number of older open cases and how the GMC is handling these. We will also continue to monitor closely the way the GMC records risk. As with last year, we identified that the GMC could improve the controls it has in place, by being clearer about how and when staff are identifying, considering and responding to evidence of risk in cases, in line with the approach taken by other regulators. The GMC has indicated it will explore this and we will check back on progress in our next assessment. 

The judgements we make against each Standard incorporate a range of evidence to form an overall picture of performance. Meeting a Standard means that we are satisfied that a regulator is performing well in that area. It does not mean there is no room for improvement. Similarly, finding that a regulator has met all of the Standards does not mean perfection. Rather, it signifies good performance in the 18 areas we assess.

Our reviews do not stop when we publish our report. They are an ongoing, continuous process and, where we’ve identified areas for improvement, we pay particular attention to these as we continue to monitor the regulator’s performance.

You can find out more about the GMC’s review in the full report. You can find out more about how we review the regulators here.

ENDS

Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care

Contact: media@professionalstandards.org.uk