Accountability for safe, high-quality pathology starts with the board or owners. They are expected to sign off both the clinical governance framework and the risk framework, to weigh patient safety and sensible test use when they make commercial and continuity decisions, to be trained for their governance duties, to see that the organisation acts lawfully, ethically and openly, and to appoint whoever will be the designated person for the laboratories under their control. They also set direction and priorities for quality, deal with conflicts of interest, keep an eye on safety, quality and performance data and order improvement when it is needed, keep an up-to-date chart of who leads, manages and supervises the operation, and watch for money or market pressures that might erode the integrity of the service, acting when they see them.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.