Recurring concern
Unsafe emergency call handling
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 6 Dec 2013•Latest report 16 Jun 2026
What this concern includes
Includes failures of the emergency call-handling process that impair location identification, information transfer, triage, escalation, reassessment, caller advice or appropriate resource deployment, including the anchor's failure to obtain riverfront coastguard location references and the delayed provision of a prison gate location.
Not included
- Excludes deficiencies in coastguard staffing or service coverage that are not failures of emergency call handling.
- Excludes clinical assessment, treatment or other downstream response failures after the call-handling process has ended.
- Excludes generic staffing, training, policy or information-system deficiencies unless they are specifically tied to unsafe emergency call handling.
- Excludes failures in non-emergency communication processes that do not concern handling an emergency call.
- Reports
- 79
- Individual concerns
- 109
- Date range
- 2013–2026
- Stated actions
- 150
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
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.
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.
-
Concerns raised2
Failure to provide the police with the correct identity of the person involved in a welfare call
Failure to share the informant's contact details and ambulance service CAD information with the police
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to escalate calls when a urinary tract infection is suspected
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The information provided did not warrant escalation, so the call was appropriately categorised without a higher-priority response.
Stated by East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to pass updated information to third-party call-handling contractors
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to escalate repeated requests for an ambulance in the control room
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to re-categorise incidents when welfare-call information indicates increased risk
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Remind clinical contact centre leads to handle Protocol 23 overdose cases promptly.
Stated by Cardiff & Vale University LHB and Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust
-
Concerns raised2
Uncontrolled discretion by call handlers when time-critical factors are disclosed without an explicit time-critical transfer request
Vagueness of the Use of Standby Points policy for probing emergency requests
This report raised 10 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
-
Action
Update the Standard Operating Procedure and Clinical Directive to require clinicians to identify time-critical transfers and prioritise qualifying inter-facility calls as Category 1.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust -
Action
Disseminate the updated Standard Operating Procedure and Clinical Directive to all Emergency Operations Centre staff.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust -
Action
Provide Emergency Operations Centre staff with guidance on diagnoses and circumstances indicating a time-critical transfer, including escalation to the Clinical Support Desk when needed.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
-
Action
Audit inter-hospital time-critical transfer requests and provide feedback to acute trusts and commissioners when request information conflicts with the patient’s clinical condition.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust -
Action
Amend and finalise the Use of Standby Points policy to clarify that crews dispatched to Time Critical or Category 1 calls cannot reasonably request facilities use.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
An exhaustive list of time-critical transfer diagnoses and circumstances cannot be provided because medical care is complex.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
-
Position
Changes to the standby-points policy require review by staff union representatives and senior operational staff before finalisation.
Stated by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to accurately triage emergency calls
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Deliver further education and refresher training on head injuries through the NHS Pathways update.
Stated by West Midlands Ambulance Service University NHS Foundation Trust
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
It is unclear whether the call was incorrectly categorised because the caller’s answers may not have supported a Category 2 response.
Stated by West Midlands Ambulance Service University NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of police call handlers to assess whether an individual is objectively at immediate risk
This report raised 10 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Supplement Force Control Room call-handler training with guidance on assessing immediacy, welfare risks, and when to seek advice.
Stated by Essex Police
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to grade calls correctly where there is a clear danger to life
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Review and update policy D051 to align grading and deployment decisions with national incident-recording and call-handling standards, incorporating the THRIVE risk-assessment tool.
Stated by Devon & Cornwall Police
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing grading and deployment policies, audits and working practices are considered sufficient to ensure compliance with national incident-recording and call-handling standards.
Stated by Devon & Cornwall Police
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of an effective system for managing multiple calls regarding the same incident
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026