Recurring concern

Inadequate mental health risk assessment

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 3 Dec 2013•Latest report 1 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes deficiencies in the mental health risk-assessment process, including incomplete assessment, inadequate documentation or formulation, failure to gather relevant information, and reliance on insufficient indicators when assessing patients with mental health concerns.

Not included

  • Excludes failures in communication, handover, escalation, review, or safety planning unless the report explicitly presents them as a component failure of the mental health risk-assessment process.
  • Excludes risk assessments concerning unrelated hazards, settings, or beneficiary groups, such as antenatal growth risk, roadside trees, or general safeguarding.
  • Excludes generic workforce training or staffing deficiencies that are not specifically tied to inadequate mental health risk assessment.
Reports
118

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
135

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
234

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.

NHS England20
Department of Health and Social Care19
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust8
North East London NHS Foundation Trust7
North London NHS Foundation Trust7
Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust6
Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust6
East London NHS Foundation Trust5
Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust5
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust4
Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust4
NHS Birmingham and Solihull Integrated Care Board4
Care Quality Commission3
Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership3
Greater Manchester Mental Health 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. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Paul David TEMPLETON · 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

    Paul David Templeton died at Ipswich Hospital on 20 April 2023 following termination of life support after asphyxiation. The Jury found that prolonged refusal to eat or drink while detained under the Mental Health Act should have been recognised as action to end his life and as elevating his suicide risk, including by other means. The report raises concern that the response from Norfolk & Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust did not adequately address these failures in suicide risk 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

    Failure to recognise elevated suicide risk from prolonged refusal to eat or drink

    Wider context from the report

    “In the words of the Jury: “Initial and all subsequent assessments seriously fail to recognise that Paul’s prolonged choice not to eat or drink were in fact indications of ‘action’ to end his own life and therefore he should have been considered as a suicide risk.” Action is needed to prevent future failure to recognise (a) when the prolonged choice of a patient detained under the Mental Health Act not to eat or drink should be regarded as an action to end their own life; and (b) when such a patient’s prolonged choice not to eat or drink should be recognised as elevating that patient’s suicide risk (including of suicide by means other than malnourishment). ”

    Source location

    Paul David TEMPLETON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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 recognise prolonged refusal to eat or drink as action to end life

    Wider context from the report

    “In the words of the Jury: “Initial and all subsequent assessments seriously fail to recognise that Paul’s prolonged choice not to eat or drink were in fact indications of ‘action’ to end his own life and therefore he should have been considered as a suicide risk.” Action is needed to prevent future failure to recognise (a) when the prolonged choice of a patient detained under the Mental Health Act not to eat or drink should be regarded as an action to end their own life; and (b) when such a patient’s prolonged choice not to eat or drink should be recognised as elevating that patient’s suicide risk (including of suicide by means other than malnourishment). ”

    Source location

    Paul David TEMPLETON · 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

    Hold a reflective multidisciplinary away day using food-and-drink case studies to strengthen holistic clinical risk assessment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns (a) & (b) we have acted to secure assurance that assessors working within Willows ward have the skills and awareness required to undertake comprehensive holistic risk assessments, including an understanding and awareness of the significance of food and drink in mental health risk assessment. A reflective Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) Away Day was held on 15th and 17th May 2024. During this, the team explored the application of clinical risk assessment skills to a range of different cases. This was undertaken to support the transition of knowledge into clinical practice and provide assurance of consistency between staff members. The case studies included scenarios related to food and drink to raise staff awareness. To maintain a good standard of clinical practice this will be discussed in clinical supervision and reviewed within future team meetings.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    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

    Discuss food-and-drink risk assessment in clinical supervision and review it in future team meetings.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns (a) & (b) we have acted to secure assurance that assessors working within Willows ward have the skills and awareness required to undertake comprehensive holistic risk assessments, including an understanding and awareness of the significance of food and drink in mental health risk assessment. A reflective Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) Away Day was held on 15th and 17th May 2024. During this, the team explored the application of clinical risk assessment skills to a range of different cases. This was undertaken to support the transition of knowledge into clinical practice and provide assurance of consistency between staff members. The case studies included scenarios related to food and drink to raise staff awareness. To maintain a good standard of clinical practice this will be discussed in clinical supervision and reviewed within future team meetings.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    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

    Use daily team huddles to prompt consideration of eating and drinking in holistic clinical risk assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure focus on appropriate clinical risk assessment, the Team are using Daily Team huddles to prompt assessors to consider holistic care / including eating and drinking within their clinical risk assessments. To support this, we have also made changes to the SBAR (Situation Background Assessment Recommendation) record that the team use to communicate and share patient information at handover. The revised SBAR provides more information about eating and drinking (identifying quantity not just appetite) to inform clinical risk assessment.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    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

    Revise SBAR handover records to capture eating-and-drinking quantity, not only appetite, for clinical risk assessment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure focus on appropriate clinical risk assessment, the Team are using Daily Team huddles to prompt assessors to consider holistic care / including eating and drinking within their clinical risk assessments. To support this, we have also made changes to the SBAR (Situation Background Assessment Recommendation) record that the team use to communicate and share patient information at handover. The revised SBAR provides more information about eating and drinking (identifying quantity not just appetite) to inform clinical risk assessment.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    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 deliver bespoke training linking suicide prevention with malnourishment, with subject-matter expert support.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The challenge for the Trust is to secure a training package which sufficiently addresses both clinical risk assessment and food and nutrition. The national approved training, required as mandatory by the Trust, does not reference suicide through malnourishment. The Trust’s 3PS (Presenting, predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating & protective factor training) programme highlights the importance of good nourishment but does not link this to suicide. We recognise that to deliver content linking suicide prevention training with content referencing malnourishment we will need to develop and deliver a bespoke package of training supported by subject matter experts. We are in the process of discussing this with our Physical Health team and raising this with NHS England and the Royal College of Psychiatrists for their broader consideration.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    Open published response
  2. Swansea and Neath Port Talbot

    AI-generated summary

    Nicholas Kim Harrison · 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

    Nicholas Kim Harrison died on 9 April 2022 from injuries sustained when he was seriously assaulted by his son at the family home on 12 March 2022. The report identifies concerns about failures in mental health assessment, information-sharing, community engagement, patient risk assessment, Ward F security and staff training, and the scope and timeliness of investigations and complaints handling.

    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

    Unavailability of relevant medical records to s.12 doctors before MHA 83 assessments

    Wider context from the report

    “It is a mandatory requirement of the MHACOP Wales that a medical examination by a doctor of a patient in a formal assessment under the MHA 83 where they are considering admission to hospital must involve consideration by that doctor of all available relevant clinical information. I heard evidence in the inquest that doctors approved under s.12 MHA 83, and used by SBUHB to conduct assessments under the MHA 83, only have access to a patient’s medical records if they are employed by SBUHB. I heard that SBUHB rely heavily on s.12 doctors who are not directly employed by them and / or are locum doctors. I also heard that there is no system within SBUHB to ensure s.12 doctors are required to record the outcome of their assessment when there is a decision not to admit a patient to hospital. I heard evidence that there is no single digital record system / platform for Mental Health Services and associated access for practitioners across Wales. I am concerned that there is a system in place (or a lack of a system) in SBUHB and more widely across the NHS in Wales which is placing s.12 doctors at risk of acting contrary to the MHACOP Wales where they are unable to view a patient’s medical records prior to an assessment under the MHA 83. I am concerned that this creates a risk that assessments may be flawed and / or may not detect that a person requires admission to hospital in circumstances where that patient may pose a risk to their own life and / or to the lives of others and that this creates a risk that other deaths will occur. In addition, if a s.12 doctor is unable to record their assessment in a patient’s medical records there is a risk that important information may not be documented which may be relevant to an understanding of the risk a patient may pose to themselves or others thus creating a risk that other deaths will occur. ”

    Source location

    Nicholas Kim Harrison · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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

    Continue working with the Health Board through joint forums to secure appropriate WCCIS access for mental-health professionals requiring it.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Council will continue to work with SBUHB via the various forums referred to above in order to ensure, as far as is reasonably possible, that the appropriate mental health professionals, deemed by SBUHB as requiring WCCIS access, is granted such access. Discussions have already taken place between SBUHB and the Council with the view to arranging for all patient clinical notes to be available across the relevant systems accessed by both organisations.”

    Source location

    Response from City and County of Swansea
    Page 6 · response
    Published 9 May 2024

    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 all SBUHB-employed Section 12 doctors with read access to WCCIS for Mental Health Act assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Regarding access to WCCIS for MHA Assessments, all S12 Drs employed by SBUHB will be given read access to WCCIS to enable them to access information pertaining to the patient being assessed under the MHA 83. AMHPs also have full access to WCCIS. Both organisations (SBUHB/CCOS) committed to reminding both the AMHP and the S12 Drs to discuss patient history and any collateral information prior to the assessment taking place who recognise the importance of an all Wales digital solution. The Health Board, in the letter sent on 3rd April 2024, (referenced on page of this letter) covered this important area.”

    Source location

    Response from Swansea Bay University Health Board 2
    Page 4 · response
    Published 9 May 2024

    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

    Some matters raised in the report fall outside the Council’s remit, so it will not respond to them.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within the Council's remit to respond to all of the matters of concern set out by His Majesty's Coroner in the Report, and it is appropriate that the Council responds to the first and second matters of concern. I shall address each in turn:”

    Source location

    Response from City and County of Swansea
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 May 2024

    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

    SBUHB and NHS Wales must primarily address concerns about Section 12 doctors’ records access and assessment recording.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This is a matter of concern for SBUHB and NHS Wales to primarily address, but the Council wishes to comment specifically in relation to access to its systems by Section 12 doctors.”

    Source location

    Response from City and County of Swansea
    Page 5 · response
    Published 9 May 2024

    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 responses to the concerns are assigned to the health board and local authority, while Welsh Ministers set the policy and strategic framework.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note the report has been sent to the UHB and the City and County of Swansea for a response and action and I expect them to provide responses within your timescale that address the concerns raised. I am issuing a separate Welsh Government response to ensure lines of accountability are clear. I take the concerns raised in the report very seriously and I would like to set out the actions being taken.”

    Source location

    Response from Welsh Government
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 May 2024

    Open published response
  3. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Emanuel Kolade LADAPO · 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

    Emanuel Kolade Ladapo had paranoid schizophrenia and depression and was receiving treatment from Camden & Islington services. He died by suicide, with the medical cause recorded as asphyxiation via a plastic bag and inhalation of nitrogen gas. Concerns included a lack of engagement with his sister, and failures to ask about suicidal feelings when he had deteriorated and remained depressed, including a failure of the initial management review to identify the omission.

    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

    Insufficient staff awareness of the importance of exploring suicide risk

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Mr Ladapo was noted to have deteriorated by the time of his consultation on 19 January 2023, and he was still depressed on 16 February 2023, but the psychiatrist who saw him on each occasion omitted to ask him whether he felt suicidal. This was the error of an individual, but it too is an omission that I have observed and written to C&I about before. Furthermore, the initial management review did not identify the omission. I am concerned that the importance of exploring the suicide question does not feature highly enough in the consciousness of C&I staff. ”

    Source location

    Emanuel Kolade LADAPO · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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 ask patients whether they feel suicidal during psychiatric consultations

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Mr Ladapo was noted to have deteriorated by the time of his consultation on 19 January 2023, and he was still depressed on 16 February 2023, but the psychiatrist who saw him on each occasion omitted to ask him whether he felt suicidal. This was the error of an individual, but it too is an omission that I have observed and written to C&I about before. Furthermore, the initial management review did not identify the omission. I am concerned that the importance of exploring the suicide question does not feature highly enough in the consciousness of C&I staff. ”

    Source location

    Emanuel Kolade LADAPO · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  4. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Ellen Ocean WOOLNOUGH · 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

    Ellen Ocean WOOLNOUGH was found suspended by a ligature at her home on 20 July 2022 after concerns had arisen about her physical and mental health. Resuscitation restored circulation, but she suffered an irreversible hypoxic brain injury and died in hospital on 28 July 2022. The principal concerns relate to mental health service discharge decisions after failed engagement, the response to urgent referrals including risk assessment and safety planning, the implementation of the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework, and the preservation of call recordings and other evidence.

    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

    Inadequate risk assessment in response to urgent referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “2. The adequacy of NSFT’s Crisis Rehabilitation Home Treatment Team (CRHTT) response to an urgent referral, in particular; risk assessment, safety planning and decision making concerning the downgrading of referrals. ”

    Source location

    Ellen Ocean WOOLNOUGH · 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

    Update the Clinical Risk Assessment and Management Policy through governance, publish it, and progress its implementation plan.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust has recently been reviewing and updating their Clinical Risk Assessment and Management Policy. This Policy is currently progressing through Trust internal governance processes and is due to be published end of June 2024, with a Policy implementation plan to be progressed during July/August 2024. This will provide additional support to staff clinical risk assessment practice.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 April 2024

    Open published response
  5. Norfolk

    AI-generated summary

    Christopher Edward SIDLE · 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

    Christopher Sidle had schizophrenia and experienced a deterioration in his mental health during June 2023. After several assessments by mental health services, he was not admitted to hospital; on 1 July 2023 he jumped from a moving taxi, suffered life-threatening head injuries and died on 4 July 2023 after life-sustaining therapies ceased. The report identified inadequate assessments and missed opportunities to provide appropriate and timely care, alongside concerns about crisis-team training, communication, risk assessment, community support, and the shortage of inpatient mental health beds.

    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 conduct full and proper assessments and independently verify service users’ responses

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Despite additional face to face training being made available to the CRHTT, witness evidence was heard which does not reflect the findings of the investigation and does not recognise the need for a full and proper assessment and the need not to accept a service user’s response to questions raised. ”

    Source location

    Christopher Edward SIDLE · 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 establish a core competency framework for CRHTT assessors.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Nevertheless, in response to this incident and as presented at inquest, the Trust has developed a core competency framework for CRHTT assessors which reflects fidelities outlined within the Core CRISIS Fidelity Scale. This was developed by 31.08.23 in response to an action arising from the Safety Incident Review (SIR) that was undertaken by the NSFT Patient Safety Team. Our action was to ensure that new assessing staff complete an induction and all assessors within the team complete core competency.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    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

    Complete induction, competency assessment and supervised competency development for CRHTT assessing staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Nevertheless, in response to this incident and as presented at inquest, the Trust has developed a core competency framework for CRHTT assessors which reflects fidelities outlined within the Core CRISIS Fidelity Scale. This was developed by 31.08.23 in response to an action arising from the Safety Incident Review (SIR) that was undertaken by the NSFT Patient Safety Team. Our action was to ensure that new assessing staff complete an induction and all assessors within the team complete core competency.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    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

    Recruit qualified, experienced CRHTT clinicians and provide a structured 12-week preceptorship, supervision and development portfolio.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is acknowledged that clinicians within CRHTT require a wide breadth of knowledge and understanding and as such in April 2024 a recruitment and retention project was launched for CRHTT. This project will attempt to recruit qualified and experienced clinicians, these will be qualified band 5 with post registration experience. They will undertake a 12-week preceptorship within CRHTT. New staff will be allocated to a named preceptor. Their preceptor will be an experienced member of staff who will act as their professional support during their induction to the CRHT Team. New team members will be expected to complete 80% of clinical time with their preceptor within their first 12 weeks. They will attend weekly supervision and monthly reflective practise, as well as complete a portfolio that will record evidence of their training and professional development.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    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

    Monitor the impact of CRHTT measures through monthly audits and report findings through Trust quality and safety governance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We will monitor the impact of these measures on patient care and assessment by undertaking a monthly audit. This will inform an evaluation report that will be presented to the Care Group Quality Assurance Group for monitoring purposes and to support improvement. For assurance purposes the report findings will be presented to the Trust Safety group and onward to the Trust Board Quality Committee.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    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

    The witness evidence does not reflect the investigation findings or recognise the need for full assessment of service users’ responses.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. Despite additional face to face training being made available to the CRHTT, witness evidence was heard which does not reflect the findings of the investigation and does not recognise the need for a full and proper assessment of the need to accept a service user’s response to questions raised.”

    Source location

    Response from Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    Open published response
  6. Inner West London

    AI-generated summary

    Adrian Michael James · 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

    Adrian Michael James died after falling from the fourth-floor balcony of his block of flats while experiencing severe and enduring mental illness, including paranoia and a high background risk of suicide. The principal concerns were that he was not assessed by a consultant, proactive care was not considered during his mental health crisis, insufficient attention was given to impulsive suicide risk, no follow-up assessment occurred after a police-interrupted treatment session, and communications between services were inadequate.

    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 adequately assess the risk of impulsive suicide

    Wider context from the report

    “3.    That insufficient consideration appeared to have been given to the risk of impulsive suicide with instead assessment focussing on his denial of increased active suicidal intent. ”

    Source location

    Adrian Michael James · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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 guidance reminding staff to consider consultant psychiatrist assessment for people with complex emotional needs and suicide risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are issuing additional guidance around managing risk of suicide in those with a diagnosis of Personality Disorder (or more commonly now known as Complex Emotional Needs) reminding staff to consider the need for assessment by a Consultant Psychiatrist.”

    Source location

    Response from Central and North West London
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 March 2024

    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

    Responding to the Coroner’s specific concerns falls outside NHS England’s remit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within NHS England’s remit to respond to the specific concerns set out by the Coroner in your Report and it is appropriate that Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) respond to these. We understand you have also directed your Report to the Trust to respond to your concerns. NHS England has been asked to be sighted on the Trust’s response to you and will carefully consider this.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 March 2024

    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

    The Trust is responsible for responding to the Coroner’s specific concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within NHS England’s remit to respond to the specific concerns set out by the Coroner in your Report and it is appropriate that Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) respond to these. We understand you have also directed your Report to the Trust to respond to your concerns. NHS England has been asked to be sighted on the Trust’s response to you and will carefully consider this.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 March 2024

    Open published response
  7. Nottinghamshire

    AI-generated summary

    Kenneth Stanley Baylis · 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

    Kenneth Stanley Baylis took his own life on 23 January 2023 while on unescorted leave as an informal inpatient on Kingsley Ward. The report identified concerns including inadequate suicide risk assessment and mitigation, insufficient family involvement, failure to follow planned-leave procedures, and inadequate review and investigation after serious suicide attempts or a 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

    Inadequate suicidal risk assessment

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Inadequate suicidal risk assessment and suicide mitigation ”

    Source location

    Kenneth Stanley Baylis · 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

    Roll out the SAFETool across all MHSOP wards with staff training on its use.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “One of the risk assessment frameworks utilised across the MHSOP care unit, and currently being introduced to the wider Mental Health Care Group, is the Suicide Assessment Framework E-Tool (SAFETool) – this is a suite of peer reviewed clinical tools to improve quality, consistency and documentation of assessment and response to suicidal patients.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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

    Embed SAFETool paperwork in the RIO electronic patient record and require staff to complete forms there.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The use of the tool within MHSOP wards and learning from this has been identified and as a result the following changes are taking place:”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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

    Strengthen SAFETool training with family and carer involvement content and reflective case studies.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The training will be facilitated by one of the Trusts Clinical Educators for Suicide Prevention who also has an extensive clinical background within MHSOP. The training already incorporates family/carer involvement within risk assessment and care planning, but this has been further strengthened and includes case studies to enable staff to undertake reflection and learning during the training session.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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

    Incorporate SAFETool learning and reflection into staff supervision and monitor training and supervision compliance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Use of the SAFETool is not indicated for all patients admitted to the ward and where it is utilised the learning and reflection on the use of the tool will be incorporated into supervision for the member of staff to ensure the training is embedding into practice. Clinical and managerial supervision takes place monthly for staff members and provides support to staff from a named senior/experienced clinician to promote reflection, learning and development within clinical practice. Kingsley Ward supervision compliance is consistently within Trust targets and all staff have yearly mandated training from the Trust in clinical supervision to ensure this is being carried out effectively. Staff on Kingsley Ward are all currently up to date on their mandated clinical supervision training.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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 clinical risk guidance, safety-planning documentation, audits and healthcare-record forms in line with current evidence and guidelines.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Trust guidance relating to risk assessment, formulation and safety planning has been reviewed in line with NICE guidelines and the latest updates from NHSE and suicide prevention evidence and literature. The Trust Lead for Self-harm and Suicide Prevention is leading this work and has met with NHSE and other leaders in suicide prevention to scope how other Trust’s have implemented this to inform Nottinghamshire Healthcare’s continued work. Updated guidance is reflected in the Trust’s new Clinical Risk and Safety Policy (due to be ratified in May 2024) and guidance documents relating to psychosocial assessment, formulation, and safety planning in relation to suicidality, including self-harm have been developed. Audits, and risk and safety forms within healthcare records are being reviewed and updated to ensure that these support improvement.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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

    Ratify the updated Clinical Risk and Safety Policy.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Trust guidance relating to risk assessment, formulation and safety planning has been reviewed in line with NICE guidelines and the latest updates from NHSE and suicide prevention evidence and literature. The Trust Lead for Self-harm and Suicide Prevention is leading this work and has met with NHSE and other leaders in suicide prevention to scope how other Trust’s have implemented this to inform Nottinghamshire Healthcare’s continued work. Updated guidance is reflected in the Trust’s new Clinical Risk and Safety Policy (due to be ratified in May 2024) and guidance documents relating to psychosocial assessment, formulation, and safety planning in relation to suicidality, including self-harm have been developed. Audits, and risk and safety forms within healthcare records are being reviewed and updated to ensure that these support improvement.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    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

    SAFETool use is not clinically indicated for every patient admitted to the ward.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Use of the SAFETool is not indicated for all patients admitted to the ward and where it is utilised the learning and reflection on the use of the tool will be incorporated into supervision for the member of staff to ensure the training is embedding into practice. Clinical and managerial supervision takes place monthly for staff members and provides support to staff from a named senior/experienced clinician to promote reflection, learning and development within clinical practice. Kingsley Ward supervision compliance is consistently within Trust targets and all staff have yearly mandated training from the Trust in clinical supervision to ensure this is being carried out effectively. Staff on Kingsley Ward are all currently up to date on their mandated clinical supervision training.”

    Source location

    Response from Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response
  8. Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent

    AI-generated summary

    Jamie Peter Norman PILKINGTON · 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

    Jamie Peter Norman PILKINGTON died after his vehicle left the road, struck a tree and caught fire in the early hours of 12 March 2023. At the time, he was under the care of Mental Health Services and had been expressing suicidal thoughts. Concerns included failures to complete suicide risk assessments and insufficient exploration and management of issues relevant to his suicide risk during mental health assessments.

    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

    Inadequate exploration of matters affecting suicide risk

    Wider context from the report

    “During a Mental Health triage with the Mental Health and Social Inclusion Hub on 8th February 2023 there was a failure to complete the Risk Assessment in relation to his risk of suicide. When referred to and assessed by the Integrated Mental health Team on 3rd March 2023 again there was a failure to complete a Risk Assessment as to his risk of suicide. Furthermore, in an appointment on 3rd March 2023 1. Suicidal/self-harm thoughts not explored in detail. 2. There was no exploration of his statement to the effect he was actively researching methods of taking his own life. 3. There was no exploration regarding efficacy/concordance with medication. 4. There was no discussion around distraction techniques, coping mechanisms or information about contact details for other services. 5. There was no discussion regarding his support network, next of kin etc. 6. There was no indication of next steps, timescales or when he could expect to be informed of the onward plan and no definite date when his case would be discussed with the Multi Disciplinary Team. On hearing evidence of the investigation into the Mental Health care which he received, beyond offering further training and support to nursing staff and mental health professionals, no assurance could be given of a system change to ensure that such Risk Assessments were completed or that appropriate and adequate exploration is made of matters which may affect how the risk of suicide is managed. ”

    Source location

    Jamie Peter Norman PILKINGTON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · 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

    Train staff in suicide awareness, risk formulation and collaborative safety planning across the organisation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “MPFT has explored the guidance and what this means for clinicians working with those who may be at risk of suicide. It is recognised that the existing FACE risk assessment is no longer indicated for use in suicide as it is not possible to predict suicide due to the dynamic nature of this. There is building evidence of the effectiveness of safety planning in suicide mitigation, which requires the training and roll out of safety planning skills and tools across the whole organisation. By December 2023 we had trained 1281 staff across the trust in suicide awareness training (e-learning), the safety planning training is face to face and is resource intensive to deliver due to ensuring fidelity against the model therefore numbers for this are lower.”

    Source location

    Response from Midlands Partnership NHS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 February 2024

    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 families and carers in collaborative safety planning.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Family and carer engagement; ensuring that families and carers are included in safety planning,”

    Source location

    Response from Midlands Partnership NHS
    Page 3 · response
    Published 26 February 2024

    Open published response
  9. Manchester North

    AI-generated summary

    Teresa Chmielek · 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

    Teresa Chmielek took her own life at home on 17 June 2023, after a referral to mental health services concerning her suicide risk was rejected without contact or a face-to-face review. The concerns included failure to identify or recognise the reported recent suicide attempt, lack of meaningful multidisciplinary discussion and direct contact, inadequate referral arrangements and documentation, and the absence of procedures and auditing for referral decisions.

    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 identify or recognise suicide risk during referral screening

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The notes made by the SPoE Nurse for use during discussion at the screening MDT meeting did not include any reference to the report of a recent suicide attempt and the Court was not satisfied that the risk of suicide had been identified or recognised by the SPoE Nurse ”

    Source location

    Teresa Chmielek · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton

    AI-generated summary

    Jack FARRINGTON · 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

    Jack Farrington, who had a long history of mental health difficulties and was detained under section 2 of the Mental Health Act, died on 2 January 2020 after running from an emergency department and falling from a road bridge. The report raised concerns about fragmented access to medical records, inadequate handovers and record keeping, insufficient flagging and assessment of absconding and self-harm risks, and the implementation of measures intended to keep him safe.

    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 structured arrival handover and risk-history enquiry for detained patients

    Wider context from the report

    “I heard that there is no specific structure in place at Queen Alexandra Hospital Emergency Department for ensuring the full and accurate handover of information about a patient who arrives whilst subject to detention under the Mental Health Act. I heard evidence that the receiving staff are not required to ask about a patients history of absconding or self harm. This gives rise to the possibility of a patient’s risk not being properly assessed. ”

    Source location

    Jack FARRINGTON · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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

    Work with Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust and continue supporting developments addressing emergency-department handover and shared patient care arrangements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I hope that my letter has addressed the concerns raised from Mr Farrington’s inquest. I have noted that there were concerns addressed to both NHS England and Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust in addition to Solent NHS Trust. I am pleased to report that our service has been working with Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust to address the concern raised regarding handover on arrival at the Emergency Department and will continue to support Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust in future developments and care arrangements for our shared patient groups.”

    Source location

    Response from Solent NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 November 2023

    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 the standardised handover, triage and risk-assessment approach to ensure self-harm and absconding risks are considered at handover.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust uses a Mental Health Primary Risk Assessment Survey Tool to assess patients on arrival to ED, this has been updated following this incident (see response to Q3). In addition, the use of a standardised handover triage and risk assessment tool are in review to ensure that patients’ risk of self-harm or absconding are considered at the point of handover.”

    Source location

    Response from Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 November 2023

    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

    Meet with Solent NHS Trust to review transfer-of-care priorities, including clinician-to-clinician discussion before Emergency Department transfer.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A meeting has been arranged with Solent NHS Trust on 9 January 2024 to review transfer of care priorities which will include clinician to clinician discussion prior to a patient’s transfer to the Emergency Department.”

    Source location

    Response from Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 November 2023

    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

    Agree an implementation timeline with Solent NHS Trust for its electronic handover system.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to a proposed clinician-to-clinician discussion, our colleagues at Solent NHS Trust are working on developing an electronic handover system. This system will provide the ED team with more information about the patient’s needs and risks before they arrive. We will agree the timeline for implementing this system at the scheduled meeting on January 9, 2024.”

    Source location

    Response from Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 November 2023

    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

    Solent NHS Trust is developing the electronic handover system, with implementation timing to be agreed jointly.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to a proposed clinician-to-clinician discussion, our colleagues at Solent NHS Trust are working on developing an electronic handover system. This system will provide the ED team with more information about the patient’s needs and risks before they arrive. We will agree the timeline for implementing this system at the scheduled meeting on January 9, 2024.”

    Source location

    Response from Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 November 2023

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026