Reviewing the indicators in the Public Health Outcome Framework
Download the full outcome
PDF, 364KB, 21 pages
PDF, 168KB, 1 page
MS Excel Spreadsheet, 16KB
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email firstname.lastname@example.org. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
Detail of outcome
The government response to the consultation on refreshing the 2013 to 2016 Public Health Outcomes Framework (PHOF).
From April 2016 there will be 67 public health indicators which will consist of 158 indicators/sub-indicators. The indicators help us measure the public’s health and wellbeing. The main proposed changes are:
- 1 indicator has been added
- 2 indicators have been removed
- 17 indicators/sub-indicators have been added
- 7 sub-indicators have been removed
A detailed breakdown of how the indicators have changed is included in Chapter 5 of the government response
See the published technical specifications for full details of all indicators in the revised Public Health Outcomes Framework 2016 to 2019.
This consultation ran from
Seeks views on whether government should remove, replace or revise the existing indicators in the framework.
When the Public Health Outcomes Framework (PHOF) was first published in 2012 there was a commitment not to make any changes for 3 years to allow it to become established during the transfer of public health responsibilities from the NHS to local authorities.
The PHOF indicators help us measure the public’s health and wellbeing.
The Department of Health now needs to make sure it is still as relevant and useful as possible, with a view to updating the indicators from April 2016.
This consultation is looking for suggestions on:
- removing ineffective indicators
- replacing or improving others where improvements in data have taken place since 2012
- adding new indicators, but only where there are important public health gaps