Safety concerns in
Prevention of Future Deaths reports

Explore recurring concerns, the reports behind them
and published responses.

Explore recurring concerns

The same underlying safety problem raised in different reports.

  1. Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records 474 reports
  2. Unreliable hospital discharge processes 273 reports
  3. Inadequate safety incident investigations 244 reports
  4. Unreliable inter-agency information sharing for coordinated care 212 reports
  5. Inadequate control of falls risks 165 reports
  6. Failure to communicate clinically important information reliably between care services 144 reports
  7. Unreliable patient observation arrangements 139 reports
  8. Unreliable multi-agency communication procedures 134 reports

Who receives PFD reports?

People and organisations addressed in published reports.

Explore all recipients

Bespoke analysis

Research and analysis with PFD evidence

We turn published PFD evidence into focused, human-verified analysis.

Explore services

Designed for

  • Campaign organisations
  • Researchers
  • Policy-makers

Understanding the evidence

Methodology

PFD Monitor uses AI to make published Prevention of Future Deaths reports and official responses searchable. Automated checks, targeted human review and dated data releases help keep summaries tied to the original documents, although a person does not routinely review every AI decision.

Read the methodology

About the evidence

What are Prevention of Future Deaths reports?

A Prevention of Future Deaths report is a formal report issued by a coroner in England and Wales when an investigation reveals circumstances that create a risk of future deaths and the coroner believes action should be taken.

How the process works

The report is sent to a person, organisation, local authority or government department that may be able to act. The recipient normally has 56 days to respond, explaining the action taken or proposed. Most reports and responses are published by the Chief Coroner to support open justice and learning.

Coroners identify risks and matters of concern; they do not prescribe the solution or decide whether a recipient’s response is sufficient.

Why PFD Monitor matters

The Ministry of Justice has acknowledged that more needs to be done to improve access to information from PFD reports and to ensure that learning is shared, monitored and evaluated. It has also considered further improvements to how reports are published, searched and analysed.

PFD Monitor makes separate reports and responses easier to search and compare. It connects recurring concerns with individual reports, topics, recipients and the actions recipients said they had taken or planned at the time of their response.

What you can do here

  • Search concerns, source report text and report recipients.
  • Explore recurring patterns, topics and recipients.
  • See actions described in published responses and their stated status.
  • Follow every finding back to the official source wording.

PFD Monitor helps people navigate published evidence. It does not independently establish responsibility, verify that promised action happened or assess whether it was effective. Check important findings against the linked source.

Use with care

Evidence limitations

PFD Monitor describes what published reports and responses say. It does not independently establish causation or responsibility, verify that actions happened, or evaluate whether those actions were sufficient or effective. AI can miss or misinterpret text, so important findings should be checked against the linked source.

Read about limitations and responsible use

Keeping records accurate

Corrections

Corrections amend an affected extraction, description, classification or link while preserving the original source evidence and a traceable version history. Readers can flag a possible misrepresentation by providing the page address, relevant source passage and an explanation.

Read how corrections are handled