Recurring concern

Unreliable mental health referral pathways

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 4 Sep 2013•Latest report 25 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of mental health referral pathways, including identifying when referral is indicated, selecting the correct route, accepting direct referrals, making or re-making referrals, receiving and actioning referrals, and providing clear urgency or follow-up arrangements.

Not included

  • Excludes failures limited to assessment or treatment after a mental health referral has been successfully received and actioned.
  • Excludes generic social-care, occupational-health or other specialist referrals unless the report explicitly concerns the mental health referral pathway.
  • Excludes generic communication, training or documentation deficiencies that are not directly tied to making, receiving, processing or following up a mental health referral.
  • Excludes urgent mental-health referral and assessment delays where the existing dedicated urgent mental-health pathway concern is the more specific supported boundary.
Reports
110

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
136

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
173

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department of Health and Social Care19
NHS England15
HM Prison and Probation Service6
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board6
North East London NHS Foundation Trust5
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust4
Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust4
Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust4
College of Policing3
Department for Education3
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust3
Ministry of Justice3
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust3
North London NHS Foundation Trust3
Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust3

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Devon, Plymouth and Torbay

    AI-generated summary

    David Joyce · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    David Joyce, who had a history of mental health difficulties, died by suicide at his home on 31 August 2023 after being found having suspended himself. The concerns included a lack of follow-up and consideration of mental health referral after he first sought help, prescribing Quetiapine without specialist input despite his reported symptoms and overdose, and a delay of 15 weeks before a medication review led to a change in treatment.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to consider referral to secondary or tertiary mental health services

    Wider context from the report

    “1. David first presented to the GP surgery on 16th May 2023, reporting a deterioration in his mental health. No follow up was initiated by the surgery despite David’s recorded past medical history of dissociated disorder, self-harm and suicide. There was no evidence that, on that occasion, there had been any consideration of referral to secondary or tertiary mental health services which may have been available to assist David and inform his care; ”

    Source location

    David Joyce · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review records, clinical actions, and processes for supporting, referring, and liaising about high-risk patients with mental health teams.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Having closely reviewed the medical records for David I sat down with the medical team at the practice to review his medical records and actions by the individual doctors and the practice. The consensus was the practice should have been more proactive on the 26th June when David represented making a formal referral to the Community Mental Health Team and possibly the CRISIS Team for urgent support given how David’s mental health had deteriorated in the 5 weeks prior to review. ████████ attempt to call and speak to ████████ following her review of David whilst in Police custody clearly caused a breakdown in the formal referral process for David at that time.”

    Source location

    Response from Foxhayes Surgery GP Practice
    Page 4 · response
    Published 21 August 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Initial presentations involving difficult life events are not typically referred to specialist services because consultation support and safety-netting are considered sufficient.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We would not typically refer an individual onto secondary or tertiary services presenting initially who is experiencing difficult life events. We speak to a very large number of patients who are struggling with life events including separation from partners that typically need time to resolve. Patients need to feel heard, understood and supported and I think we have a duty to offer appropriate pragmatic advice to patients on managing difficult life events. We always safety net at the end of our consultations and discuss appropriate follow up and additional support should the individuals not be able to keep on top of their symptoms and problems.”

    Source location

    Response from Foxhayes Surgery GP Practice
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 August 2026

    Open published response
  2. Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin

    AI-generated summary

    Alex Alfred ROBINSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Alex Alfred Robinson was admitted to Royal Shrewsbury Hospital on 8 September 2025 and was later found unresponsive at Church Lane, Little Wenlock, Telford, on 10 September 2025 after ligaturing himself; he was declared deceased at the scene. The principal concern was conflicting information about whether the Mental Health Liaison Team was available and whether a formal referral had been made, representing a possible lost opportunity for him to receive appropriate care, although this could not be known to have prevented his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure a formal referral to MHLT

    Wider context from the report

    “That consultant has made a statement and in paragraph 12 sets out his plan including “arrange review by mental health liaison team (MHLT). Following discussion, MHLT provided advice and a leaflet to be given to the patient as they are available on site out of hours to review the patient physically”. In a later statement (in paragraph 3) the consultant further states “I was not present at that moment when the resident doctor discussed with MHLT service, but she informed me that MHLT informed her they will not be available to see Mr Robinson at that time”. Subsequent inquiry with MHLT stated clearly that Midlands Partnership Foundation Trust (MPFT) Mental Health Liaison Team at RSH is a 24/7 service, they had the usual night cover of cover of two staff on the 8/9 September 2025 and that no formal referral was ever received. This conflicting information represents a lost opportunity for Alex to have received appropriate care from MPFT which may have prevented Alex from killing himself on the 10 September 2025, but this cannot be known. ”

    Source location

    Alex Alfred ROBINSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Require staff to document all contact with mental health professionals on the online referral form and retain a copy in the patient notes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Our conclusion and learning from this is that all contact with MPFT needs to be documented on the online referral form and a copy kept in the notes. We believe this should resolve any ambiguity about advice received and therefore potentially reduce the risk that level of concern for a patient’s mental health has not been fully understood. We will also reiterate to staff the importance of recording the name of any healthcare professional who has given advice in the medical notes.”

    Source location

    Response from Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 July 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide Trust-wide communications highlighting the need to use the online referral form.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will provide Trust-wide communications to highlight the need to use the online referral form.”

    Source location

    Response from Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 July 2026

    Open published response
  3. West Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Richard Mark WHELAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Richard Mark Whelan died on 15 December 2024 from exsanguination caused by incised wounds to both wrists after a deliberate act intended to end his life. In the preceding weeks, his mental health had deteriorated, and a referral to the Mental Health Trust Single Point of Access made on 11 December had not been acted on by the time of his death. The principal concern was that non-urgent referrals could take up to 14 days to be triaged, with a further plan only devised after triage.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to require referrals to SPA from people with mental health experience

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence at the inquest indicated that any referral to SPA classed as non-urgent may take up to 14 days to triage reflecting the SPA Standard Operating Procedure. The referrals to SPA could come from anyone, not necessarily someone with experience of mental health conditions. It was only following a triage of a referral and the outcome of the triage would a plan be devised to take forward a referral. ”

    Source location

    Richard Mark WHELAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop referral guidance to help referrers recognise risk factors and identify when immediate telephone contact with SPA is required.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust accepts referrals from a wide range of agencies and professionals and also from individuals, their families and carers. In respect of referrals received from referrers with limited understanding of mental health conditions, the Trust is developing referral guidance to support referrers in recognising risk factors and understanding when immediate telephone contact with SPA is required. In addition, the referral form is being amended to include guidance that, where there are positive responses to risk”

    Source location

    Response from South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 April 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Amend the referral form to direct referrers with positive risk-question responses to contact SPA immediately about the referral.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust accepts referrals from a wide range of agencies and professionals and also from individuals, their families and carers. In respect of referrals received from referrers with limited understanding of mental health conditions, the Trust is developing referral guidance to support referrers in recognising risk factors and understanding when immediate telephone contact with SPA is required. In addition, the referral form is being amended to include guidance that, where there are positive responses to risk”

    Source location

    Response from South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 April 2026

    Open published response
  4. Cheshire

    AI-generated summary

    Tania Louise JARMAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Tania Louise JARMAN died aged 54 on 27 February 2024 at Park House, a non-clinical crisis placement, after tying a ligature with the probable intention of ending her life. Her mental health had worsened before her death, and her admission removed her from protective factors including her mother and home. The principal concerns were the longstanding shortage of mental health beds and the risk that this could lead to an artificially elevated threshold for referrals, potentially denying beds to patients with a clinical need.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Use of artificially elevated thresholds for mental health bed referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “2. In addition, the fact that this situation is longstanding now raises the risk that clinical decisions as to bed referrals may use an artificially elevated threshold for referral because decision makers are “hardened”. This potentially denies beds to patients who do in fact have a clinical need for them. ”

    Source location

    Tania Louise JARMAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Alan Hughes · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mark Alan Hughes, who had a history of anxiety and was assessed as at high risk of self-harm and suicide, died after taking codeine and morphine and stabbing himself during the night of 22–23 June 2025. The report raised concerns that urgent referrals from general practice could not be made directly to the Home Based Treatment Team in South Trafford, resulting in a delay over the weekend before assessment or onward referral could occur.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to allow direct referral from general practice to the HBTT for urgent high-risk referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “7. In evidence, it was accepted on behalf of the CMHT that there are occasions when a nurse associated with a general practice, or a general practitioner, may need to refer directly to the HBTT; but that the formal procedure does not allow for this. 8. Therefore, at the time of Mr Hughes’s death, such a referral could not be made. It still cannot be made, notwithstanding the availability of this course in other boroughs and the findings of the After Action Review. 9. Had it been possible for the nurse who assessed Mr Hughes on behalf of the general practice to refer him direct to the HBTT, the delay occasioned by the system of referral to the HBTT operated by South Trafford CMHT would have been avoided. 10. It was explained in evidence on behalf of the CMHT, that had the HBTT been able to assess Mr Hughes, it was unclear whether they would have accepted the referral. However, what the HBTT would or would not have decided is unknown: nor does this obviate the concern raised. 11. The concern is that in South Trafford, a service user cannot be referred directly to the HBTT from a general practice where: i. there is an urgent referral arising from a high risk of self-harm and / or suicide; ii. where this referral is considered necessary by the general practice professionals; and, iii. where such a referral could be made were it to take place in other boroughs within the area covered by Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust. ”

    Source location

    Mark Alan Hughes · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Issue a Practice Note clarifying that primary care mental health practitioners can directly refer patients to HBTT across all Trust boroughs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To confirm mental health practitioners based in general practice, such as PCN’s, can refer directly into HBTT in all boroughs of the Trust, following an assessment of the persons mental health.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Include direct HBTT referral guidance in the Trust Patient Safety Newsletter distributed electronically to all staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This information has been shared with urgent care staff and our PCN colleagues via a Practice Note issued on 28th April 2026 and will be included in the May edition of the Trust Patient Safety Newsletter that is shared with all staff across the Trust electronically by 28th May 2026.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Hold an urgent-care away day to review and confirm the HBTT SOP and reinforce referral pathways and operational expectations, including direct referrals by primary care networks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, a planned away day is scheduled to take place on 6th May 2026 lead by the clinical service managers for urgent care, during which senior operational leads will meet to review and confirm the HBTT Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). The SOP that went live in February 2026 has a list of services that can refer into HBTT and states that this is not an exhaustive list and that GMMH operate an inclusive referral process to support all GMMH internal teams. This session will be used to clearly outline referral pathways and operational expectations across all GMMH HBTT services.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Finalise the Referral and Assessment hub SOP by the end of May 2026.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the transformation of community mental health services GMMH are implementing a Referral and Assessment hub who will triage all external referrals and direct to the most appropriate service. These hubs are already in place in some areas of the Trust; the SOP will be finalised by the end of May 2026 and there will be a Referral and Assessment hub functioning in all areas of the Trust by the end of August 2026 enabling GP’s and other professionals to have a single point of referral.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Establish a functioning Referral and Assessment hub in every Trust area by the end of August 2026 to provide a single external referral point.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the transformation of community mental health services GMMH are implementing a Referral and Assessment hub who will triage all external referrals and direct to the most appropriate service. These hubs are already in place in some areas of the Trust; the SOP will be finalised by the end of May 2026 and there will be a Referral and Assessment hub functioning in all areas of the Trust by the end of August 2026 enabling GP’s and other professionals to have a single point of referral.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Mental health practitioners in general practice can directly refer to HBTT across all Trust boroughs after assessing the person’s mental health.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To confirm mental health practitioners based in general practice, such as PCN’s, can refer directly into HBTT in all boroughs of the Trust, following an assessment of the persons mental health.”

    Source location

    Response from GMMH
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response
  6. Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Stephen Taylor · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Stephen Taylor experienced worsening mental distress linked to work and financial concerns, with escalating risk indicators and repeated contact with health services. He died on 26 May 2025 after deliberately jumping from Louisa Bay Cliffs. The principal concerns were the lack of coordinated escalation and ownership of risk across services, reliance on his denial of immediate intent despite other risk indicators, routine rather than urgent referrals, and the absence of a same-day urgent face-to-face assessment despite family concerns.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delays in actioning necessary referrals to secondary mental health services

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) Referrals to secondary mental health services were identified as necessary by more than one service but were treated as routine rather than urgent, and were not actioned immediately. ”

    Source location

    Stephen Taylor · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Facilitate a phased training and support package with NHS Talking Therapies Collaborative to improve referral matching and risk communication.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “KMMH and NHS Talking Therapies Collaborative are currently in discussion facilitating a phased training and support package to mutually ensure patients are placed with the best service provider to meet needs of patients at point of referral.”

    Source location

    Response from Kent and Medway mental Health NHS Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Introduce visual prompts at every call station and workstation directing staff to arrange Rapid Response assessment within four hours when risk is concerning.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As a result of this very sad death, the Urgent Mental Health Helpline, has generated visual prompts at each call station to support clear identification and pathways for call handlers/clinicians to direct, where risk is of concern, a referral for a rapid assessment within 4 hours by our Rapid Response service. It is expected that our staff will not rely on a risk prompt tool but will be equipped to identify risk accurately and utilise a curious approach to seeking further risk information, from the patient, their families and referrers.”

    Source location

    Response from Kent and Medway mental Health NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Reduce the target timeframe for triaging urgent referrals from 72 hours to 24 hours.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Urgent Mental Health Helpline Standard Operating Procedure has undergone thorough review which has resulted in an update to:”

    Source location

    Response from Kent and Medway mental Health NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Update the Duty Standard Operating Procedure to require same-day routine referral action and careful consideration of family members’ information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The Duty Standard Operating Procedure was reviewed and updated in November 2025 and now includes (1) an explicit reference to the management of routine referrals, and states these should be actioned on the day that the referral decision is made and consent received, and (2) reference to the importance of the careful consideration of family members’ information within the clinical decision-making process.”

    Source location

    Response from Vita Health Group
    Page 4 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Deliver a reflective Duty Team session sharing case learning and the resulting Standard Operating Procedure changes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• A reflective session with the Duty Team took place on 03/12/25 sharing the learning from this case and the changes that have made to the Duty Standard Operating Procedure as a result.”

    Source location

    Response from Vita Health Group
    Page 4 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Patients whose needs exceed Talking Therapies’ remit should be referred to Kent and Medway Mental Health NHS Trust or emergency and crisis services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In the event of a patient presenting with mental health needs beyond the remit of NHS Talking Therapies (typically if the presenting problems are out of scope, e.g. evidence of symptoms of serious mental illness, or if dynamic risk factors make treatment unsafe within primary care), the care pathway is for the person to be referred into the Adult, or Older Adult Mental Health Team. In Kent and Medway, these services are provided by Kent and Medway Mental Health NHS Trust. Urgent referrals are those responded to within 72 hours whilst routine non-urgent referrals take longer. Emergency support is provided by 999 and the Crisis Support Team can be contacted and aim to provide support within 4 hours.”

    Source location

    Response from Vita Health Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    An urgent referral was not indicated because reported deterioration lacked evidence of dynamic risk, risky behaviour, suicide planning or intent.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although Mr Taylor had not been reviewed directly by the clinical team, the Duty Team noted the concerns shared by his daughter, and agreed a plan with her, that a non-urgent referral was most appropriate and would be made to the Older Adult Mental Health Team. The rationale for this was that whilst Mr Taylor’s presentation had deteriorated and new risk factors had been reported, the absence of dynamic or immediate risk factors such as risky behaviour, or evidence of planning or intent towards a suicide attempt, meant that an urgent referral was not indicated and therefore unlikely to be accepted. However, due to an escalating presentation, additional support from the Older Adults Mental Health Team was still indicated.”

    Source location

    Response from Vita Health Group
    Page 3 · response
    Published 21 January 2026

    Open published response
  7. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    STUART CHRISTOPHER JAMES BERRY · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    STUART CHRISTOPHER JAMES BERRY, who had a history of mental health issues and significant cocaine misuse, was remanded to HMP Chelmsford on 27 January 2024 after expressing an intention to end his life. He was found suspended in his cell about seven hours after arrival and died at Broomfield Hospital on 1 February 2024; the medical cause of death was hanging and the jury concluded suicide. The principal concerns included failures in mental-health care, communication and risk documentation, failure to share information about his extreme suicide risk, inadequate assessment and supervision in prison, and the accessibility of cell-window ligature points.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to make urgent mental health referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “In addition to failing to share crucial and obviously relevant information regarding Mr Berry’s extreme risk of suicide provided by the CPN at Court with prison staff, the jury found that the reception nurse, in the context of the clear information known to her, failed to: (a) document his risk of self-harm and suicide in the Systm One records and (b) failed to refer Mr Berry, that day, for an urgent review by the Mental Health team. CONCERN: Such comprehensive shortcomings in performance in respect of information sharing, conduct of assessments, basic documentation and escalation/referral on to relevant colleagues indicates (a) a failure in training of a very concerning kind, alongside (b) a failure in HCRG monitoring of standards, supervision and quality assurance processes to identify and address such extensive failures in performance. ”

    Source location

    STUART CHRISTOPHER JAMES BERRY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 6 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Establish and staff a dedicated Early Days in Custody Nurse role to oversee reception screening, risk assessment, information sharing, escalation, supervision, and quality assurance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are focusing on strengthening the interfaces between healthcare and custodial services, retraining reception nurses, and introducing a dedicated Early Days in Custody (EDiC) Nurse role.”

    Source location

    Response from HCRG
    Page 1 · response
    Published 20 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Deliver targeted mental-health awareness training and support reception nurses to identify suicide, self-harm, acute distress, and appropriate ACCT observation levels.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Strengthening Mental Health Awareness and Screening at Reception Targeted 1-1 training was introduced on 27 January 2026 to enhance staff understanding of suicide and self-harm risk factors, acute mental distress, and the impact of early custody on mental wellbeing. The newly established EDiC Nurse role provides clinical leadership and quality assurance through supervision, coaching, and review of reception assessments, supporting nurses to move beyond checklist-based screening and to apply professional judgement when identifying and escalating mental health risk. This approach supports earlier identification of risk and timely referral for mental health assessment. The EDiC Nurse also supports and supervises staff in identifying the appropriate ACCT observation levels and carries out reviews of ongoing ACCT observation levels to check their appropriateness.”

    Source location

    Response from HCRG
    Page 3 · response
    Published 20 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review mental-health operational procedures and referral processes to clarify urgent-referral thresholds, escalation routes, and expected 24-hour response times.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Improving Identification and Escalation of Urgent Mental Health Referrals The Mental Health Operational Standard Operating Procedures and referral processes are being reviewed, clarifying thresholds for urgent mental health referrals, escalation routes, and agreeing expected response times as within 24 hours. This is audited by the EDIC Nurse. This review will be completed by 30 April 2026. Reception nurses are being supported to identify and escalate urgent presentations through targeted training on assessing the risk of suicide and self-harm alongside ongoing supervision.”

    Source location

    Response from HCRG
    Page 4 · response
    Published 20 January 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Reissue mandatory escalation guidance and introduce MDT agendas and case-presentation templates for changing risk or uncertainty.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since the incident, we have introduced measures to support staff in consistently meeting expectations around escalation and collaborative working. We recognise that embedding these behaviours is a gradual process and requires ongoing reinforcement, supervision and oversight, which we will continue to prioritise through:”

    Source location

    2026-0015 - Response from Essex Partnership University Foundation Trust
    Page 8 · response
    Published 20 January 2026

    Open published response
  8. Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Stuart VIDLER · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mark Vidler had severe depression and was receiving mental health care from Kent and Medway Mental Health NHS Trust. After serious suicide attempts on 30 April and 7 May 2025, he was discharged from the Home Treatment Team and was not reviewed by an out-of-hours clinician on the night of 7 May after a Rapid Response Team referral was declined. He was found dead at home on 8 May 2025, and the inquest concluded that his suicide was contributed to by a failure in care. Concerns included shortcomings in patient-centred care, clinical oversight and referral processes, risk recognition, discharge decision-making, continuity of care, care coordination, and the implementation and recording of suicidality management.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Limited out-of-hours availability of MHT+ support for Rapid Response Team referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “(8) I heard evidence that as a result of the referral to the Rapid Response Team being declined, Mark's mental health care technically rested with the MHT+ team, which only works until 17:00. As a result, the Approved Mental Health Practitioner service (responsible for arranging MHA assessments) would have been unable to speak to the referrer. While this was not an issue in the specific circumstances of this case, I consider that it raises risks for others in the future. ”

    Source location

    Mark Stuart VIDLER · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report
  9. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Andrew John Hughes · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Andrew John Hughes was found deceased at his home after concerns about his wellbeing and unsuccessful attempts to contact him. The inquest concluded that he died by suicide, with the medical cause recorded as hanging. The principal concern was a lack of clarity about how people raising urgent mental-health concerns could be directed to mental-health services and what emergency response those services could provide.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of clear arrangements for signposting and contacting emergency mental health services and clarifying their expected response

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest heard evidence that across Greater Manchester there is a system known as Right Care Right Person (RCRP). This is a system that has been adopted by Greater Manchester along with many other parts of England. The inquest was told that adoption of the system was overseen by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Greater Manchester. The aim according to the evidence heard was to identify which agency was most appropriate to respond to concerns raised such as in the case of Mr Hughes. In this case Greater Manchester Police declined to attend and indicated it was a health matter and therefore a matter for the Ambulance Service. The evidence was that this was an incident that involved concerns around his mental health and the risks that his mental health presented to his wellbeing. It would, the inquest was told have been more appropriate for mental health services to have become involved rather than the ambulance service. It was however unclear from the evidence how that would have been facilitated. There was no clarity as to what arrangements existed for a concerned family to be signposted by GMP to mental health services or how mental health services could be contacted in such an emergency situation as presented in this case or what response could have been expected. This was because it was unclear what provision there was in Greater Manchester for Mental Health Services to deal with these emergency situations. ”

    Source location

    Andrew John Hughes · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Improve identification of mental health needs, accuracy of signposting, and decision-making accountability during contact handling.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since the implementation of the Right Care, Right Person model in September 2024, Greater Manchester Police has undertaken targeted review and improvement activity. This work has identified that, in a small number of cases, including the circumstances relevant to Mr Hughes, mental health-related contact was not consistently identified, and callers were not always accurately signposted to the most appropriate support.”

    Source location

    2026-0099 - Response from Greater Manchester Police
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Operate an agreed process for GMP call handlers to transfer or signpost people with mental-health welfare concerns to NHS 111 option 2.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not known whether signposting to mental health services, on the day in question, would have been able to prevent Andrew’s death as this did not take place. However, I can confirm that we do have an agreed process, developed in partnership with Greater Manchester Police (GMP) for police call handlers to transfer and signpost people for whom there is a mental health concern for welfare. This is via NHS 111 option 2 which in GM is staffed by trained mental health professionals who provide triage and assessment over the phone for people experiencing mental health crisis. We have established a dedicated mental health team based in Northwest Ambulance Service (NWAS) Emergency Operations Centre that provides 24/7 support and tactical advice to ambulance and ambulance teams ‘at scene’. It is not clear from your report whether GMP contacted the team for tactical advice in this incident.”

    Source location

    Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Urgent mental health intervention is the responsibility of health-based resources and clinical partners, rather than policing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, the concern raised in the matter you describe did not identify a requirement for an emergency mental health response. It indicated the need for an urgent, rather than emergency, intervention. This distinction is significant. Urgent mental health support falls below the threshold for police attendance and, within Greater Manchester as it is nationally, this is the responsibility of health-based resources and clinical partners. Callers will be supported to access those services directly.”

    Source location

    2026-0099 - Response from Greater Manchester Police
    Page 1 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Operational implementation of RCRP, including protocols and emergency arrangements, is the Chief Constable’s responsibility; related Regulation 28 notices should be directed there.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Responsibility for the operational management of the policing role in the RCRP system in Greater Manchester rests with the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. This is in accordance with the principle of operational independence, as set out in the Policing Protocol Order 2023. Under this Order, the direction and control of police operations are vested solely in the Chief Constable, ensuring that I, as Deputy Mayor, am excluded from day-to-day decision-making or protocol implementation.”

    Source location

    Response from Deputy Mayor of Greater Manchester
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Mental health services provide crisis, not emergency, responses; the concern incorrectly treats them as responsible for 999 emergencies.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In your report you state that ‘it was unclear what provision there was in Greater Manchester for mental health services to deal with these emergency situations’. It should be stressed that mental health services are commissioned by NHS GM to deliver a crisis mental health response, and not an emergency response, which is provided by 999 services. Based on the circumstances of the death, this report of concern required an emergency response and as mental health services were not contacted immediately prior to Andrew’s death, they could not have known about the immediate risk to life.”

    Source location

    Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    999 services, rather than commissioned mental health services, are responsible for emergency responses requiring immediate intervention.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have reviewed the circumstances of the death included in your report and understand that immediately prior to Andrew’s death, mental health services were not contacted. It is our understanding from your report that 999 services were contacted as Andrew required an emergency response. Mental health services commissioning by NHS in Greater Manchester would not provide a 999-emergency response, nor would they have the means to contact someone who is not responding to phone calls or be able to force entry to a property when there is a concern for an individual’s safety.”

    Source location

    Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Commissioned mental health services cannot provide 999 emergency responses, contact nonresponsive individuals, or force entry to protect someone at risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have reviewed the circumstances of the death included in your report and understand that immediately prior to Andrew’s death, mental health services were not contacted. It is our understanding from your report that 999 services were contacted as Andrew required an emergency response. Mental health services commissioning by NHS in Greater Manchester would not provide a 999-emergency response, nor would they have the means to contact someone who is not responding to phone calls or be able to force entry to a property when there is a concern for an individual’s safety.”

    Source location

    Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2026

    Open published response
  10. Nottinghamshire

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Gunaratnam Kannan · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mr Gunaratnam Kannan took an overdose of Metformin and Indapamide tablets on 18 March 2025 and initially refused hospital treatment after being assessed as having mental capacity. He was later found confused, with limited consciousness and lacking mental capacity, was taken to hospital, suffered a cardiac arrest and was pronounced deceased on 19 March 2025. The concerns identified were a lack of joint-agency policy and training on Mental Capacity Act and Mental Health Act assessments, including uncertainty about which service should request or undertake a Mental Health Act assessment.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of training of service providers on the process for referrals for Mental Health Act assessments

    Wider context from the report

    “• Lack of joint agency working/policy work on the Mental Capacity Act Assessments and Mental Health Act Assessments setting out the roles and remit of service providers. • Lack of training of service providers on the Mental Capacity Act assessments and the process for referrals for Mental Health Act assessments. I heard evidence at the inquest from EMAS that it would be for the NHCT crisis team to attend for a MHA assessment if the patient was deemed to have capacity and that EMAS do not make referrals for mental health act assessments. I heard evidence from NHCT that it would be for either the family, GP or the attending medical practitioner , in this case EMAS, to request a MHA assessment. There is a clear lack of understanding between these service providers as to what actions should be taken and by who. In my opinion, action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the power to take such action. ”

    Source location

    Mr Gunaratnam Kannan · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop and disseminate two flow charts supporting capacity considerations and referral decisions, including display in team offices.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Two flow charts were also developed (Appendix A and B) to help support staff in what considerations need to be given regarding mental capacity upon receipt of a call such as that in the case of Mr. Kannan. This includes when liaising with EMAS to ensure that there is significant consideration on how a person’s mental health and consumption of substances may alter their thinking and capacity. These have been shared with all staff and are displayed in team offices for quick reference.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Participate in a multi-agency workstream to develop a joint mechanism or protocol clarifying roles and remits for capacity assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, prior to the commencement of the inquest, Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust contacted the Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) to make them aware of the concerns that the coroner had made organisations aware of when gathering the evidence of the case. The request was for SAB to facilitate a workstream forum involving all key agencies within the Nottingham area, with the aim to come together and agree a joint working mechanism / protocol setting out the roles and remits of service providers in the context of assessments via both the Mental Capacity and Mental Health Acts. The first meeting took place on 3 December 2025, with the plan to meet again on 7 January 2026. The initial meeting provided opportunity to discuss the case of Mr. Kannan and the current practices being followed by each agency in attendance.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Share the Trust’s local internal pathways and protocols at the next multi-agency workstream meeting.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “waiting for the outcome of the national discussion. The plan from this first meeting was then for all agencies to share their local internal pathway and protocol in terms of response and remit and EMAS to provide an update on the national forum at the next meeting in January 2026.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare
    Page 3 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop and implement formal referral pathways with mental health trusts for mental health assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ambulance crews are not mental health specialists and therefore cannot determine whether a statutory MHA assessment is required. At present, EMAS does not have formalised referral pathways with local crisis teams; however, we are actively working with mental health trusts to develop and implement these pathways.”

    Source location

    Response from East Midlands Ambulance Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Work through a multi-agency group to strengthen decision-making and inter-agency pathways for Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act matters.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Locally, EMAS participates in a quarterly Right Care Right Person Meeting led by Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board, alongside system partners, to review clinical and operational responsibilities and identify gaps in service provision. Following the inquest, a wider multi-agency group has been convened to specifically consider how to strengthen decision-making and pathways between agencies when considering the mental health act and the mental capacity act.”

    Source location

    Response from East Midlands Ambulance Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide biennial Mental Health Awareness training covering statutory detention processes, roles and current pathways.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Supporting tools such as non-conveyance checklists and MCA prompts are embedded within our patient record system to guide staff in practice. Furthermore, all front-line crews undertake Mental Health Awareness training every two years, covering statutory detention processes, roles, and current pathways. This training is under review for January 2026, and we will seek input from Mental Health Trust partners to ensure alignment with formalised pathways for MHA assessments.”

    Source location

    Response from East Midlands Ambulance Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review Mental Health Awareness training and seek Mental Health Trust input to align it with formalised referral pathways.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Supporting tools such as non-conveyance checklists and MCA prompts are embedded within our patient record system to guide staff in practice. Furthermore, all front-line crews undertake Mental Health Awareness training every two years, covering statutory detention processes, roles, and current pathways. This training is under review for January 2026, and we will seek input from Mental Health Trust partners to ensure alignment with formalised pathways for MHA assessments.”

    Source location

    Response from East Midlands Ambulance Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Mental Health Act assessment referrals are the responsibility of Approved Mental Health Practitioners within the Local Authority.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The process for referring for Mental Health Act assessments is held by the Approved Mental Health Practitioners (AMHP) who are part of the Local Authority. There is a clear process and pathway already in place (Appendix C).”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    An established process and pathway for requesting Mental Health Act assessments is already in place across Nottingham City and County.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The process for referring for Mental Health Act assessments is held by the Approved Mental Health Practitioners (AMHP) who are part of the Local Authority. There is a clear process and pathway already in place (Appendix C).”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Ambulance crews cannot determine whether a statutory Mental Health Act assessment is required because they are not mental health specialists.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ambulance crews are not mental health specialists and therefore cannot determine whether a statutory MHA assessment is required. At present, EMAS does not have formalised referral pathways with local crisis teams; however, we are actively working with mental health trusts to develop and implement these pathways.”

    Source location

    Response from East Midlands Ambulance Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust should reassert processes for acceptable practitioners to initiate urgent referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Re-examining specific issues of Mr Kannan’s case is beyond the remit of the College, but it highlights the need for Nottinghamshire HCT to reassert their processes of acceptable medical practitioners instigating urgent referrals to enable best outcomes and prevent future deaths in similar circumstances.”

    Source location

    Response from Royal College of General Practitioners
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 November 2025

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026