Recurring concern

Failure to ensure safe discharge planning for inpatient mental health admissions

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 31 Oct 2014•Latest report 27 May 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes deficiencies in the end-to-end discharge planning process for inpatient mental health admissions, including failures of social care involvement, practitioner preparedness, coordination and management of issues arising during discharge or out-of-area admissions.

Not included

  • Excludes generic mental health bed-capacity shortages or delays in obtaining admission.
  • Excludes general communication or information-sharing failures not specifically tied to inpatient mental health discharge planning.
  • Excludes failures in Mental Health Act assessment, admission notification or ongoing inpatient care unless they directly concern discharge planning.
  • Excludes isolated clinical treatment failures that do not concern the discharge process.
Reports
17

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
19

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
43

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 Care5
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust3
NHS England2
Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust1
Betsi Cadwaladr University LHB1
Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust1
Care Quality Commission1
Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust1
Cygnet Hospital Harrow1
Elysium Healthcare Limited1
Essex County Council1
Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust1
Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust1
London Borough of Lewisham1
Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust1

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. Inner West London

    AI-generated summary

    Georgia Sylvia Nelson · 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

    Georgia Sylvia Nelson, who had treatment-resistant schizophrenia and severe persistent symptoms, stepped in front of a train at Gloucester Road Underground Station on 11 May 2018 and was killed instantly. The report raised concerns about the lack of suitable long-term and rehabilitation housing for young people with severe mental illness, inadequate discharge planning, and missed opportunities to improve treatment and consider rehabilitation before discharge.

    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 proper discharge planning and referral for patients with mental illness

    Wider context from the report

    “4. That there should be a system to ensure that there is proper discharge planning and referral on for all patients discharged after admission with mental illness. ”

    Source location

    Georgia Sylvia Nelson · 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

    Maintain discharge-planning policies and ward processes, including admission discharge planning, daily discharge-tool use, and pre-discharge communication with care coordinators and families.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust has specific policies (CPA Policy 2015 and the Discharge and Transfer of Patients, 2015) in place that set out the expectations and requirements of discharge planning and referral for patients leaving hospital are completed. These policies underpin the important principle of the need for community teams work to closely with inpatient teams to ensure that planning is carried out to ensure as seamless a transition as possible from our inpatient services to the community in recognition of the well-known vulnerability of this period.”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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

    Have Crisis and Home Treatment Teams attend each ward’s daily handover to contribute to discharge planning.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To further support this critical point in the pathway we will: - The Crisis and Home Treatment Teams now attend the daily handover meeting on each ward to ensure they are aware of any planned discharges and contribute to discharge planning for all patients on the wards. - Ensure we deliver on the National CQUIN that people leaving hospital have face to face contact within 72 hours of discharge by an identified worker. - That all patients leave hospital with a clear plan of who to contact in crisis and where to get help if they need it as well as the details of the above appointment. This will help this critical period of adjustment and support longer term ongoing care and communication. - Ensure the learning from this case is shared across all in-patient, crisis and community teams”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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 face-to-face contact with an identified worker within 72 hours for people leaving hospital.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To further support this critical point in the pathway we will: - The Crisis and Home Treatment Teams now attend the daily handover meeting on each ward to ensure they are aware of any planned discharges and contribute to discharge planning for all patients on the wards. - Ensure we deliver on the National CQUIN that people leaving hospital have face to face contact within 72 hours of discharge by an identified worker. - That all patients leave hospital with a clear plan of who to contact in crisis and where to get help if they need it as well as the details of the above appointment. This will help this critical period of adjustment and support longer term ongoing care and communication. - Ensure the learning from this case is shared across all in-patient, crisis and community teams”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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

    Give every discharged patient a crisis contact and help information, together with details of their follow-up appointment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To further support this critical point in the pathway we will: - The Crisis and Home Treatment Teams now attend the daily handover meeting on each ward to ensure they are aware of any planned discharges and contribute to discharge planning for all patients on the wards. - Ensure we deliver on the National CQUIN that people leaving hospital have face to face contact within 72 hours of discharge by an identified worker. - That all patients leave hospital with a clear plan of who to contact in crisis and where to get help if they need it as well as the details of the above appointment. This will help this critical period of adjustment and support longer term ongoing care and communication. - Ensure the learning from this case is shared across all in-patient, crisis and community teams”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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

    Ensure community teams discuss all inpatients daily so they know patients’ progress and can contribute to admission goals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure that this is the case we will: - We have successfully piloted a new trauma-informed approach to in-patient care delivery in one of our units and this is being implemented across all sites. This will support the development of a more personalised approach to in-patient care - The Crisis and Home Treatment Teams attending the handover meeting on each ward daily will ensure they are aware of any planned discharges and contribute to discharge planning for all patients on the wards - Every community team has a daily ‘zoning’ meeting and we will ensure that all inpatients are discussed in the relevant team so community teams are aware of all current in-patients and their progress and can contribute meaningfully to the intended aim of the admission - Community team leads will attend the daily bed management meeting huddles where forthcoming discharges are discussed to ensure they are”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    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

    Have community team leads attend daily bed-management huddles to support communication about forthcoming discharges.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To ensure that this is the case we will: - We have successfully piloted a new trauma-informed approach to in-patient care delivery in one of our units and this is being implemented across all sites. This will support the development of a more personalised approach to in-patient care - The Crisis and Home Treatment Teams attending the handover meeting on each ward daily will ensure they are aware of any planned discharges and contribute to discharge planning for all patients on the wards - Every community team has a daily ‘zoning’ meeting and we will ensure that all inpatients are discussed in the relevant team so community teams are aware of all current in-patients and their progress and can contribute meaningfully to the intended aim of the admission - Community team leads will attend the daily bed management meeting huddles where forthcoming discharges are discussed to ensure they are”

    Source location

    2019-0140-Response-by-CNWL-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 June 2019

    Open published response
  2. Somerset

    AI-generated summary

    Robin Damien Richards · 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

    Robin Damien Richards, who had a history of mental health problems and diagnoses including Asperger's Syndrome, ADHD and a learning disability, was found suspended by his belt at supported accommodation on 29 June 2015 and died in hospital on 3 July 2015. Concerns included a shortage of suitable supported accommodation, the suitability and inspection of his placement, and shortcomings in communication, handover, discharge planning, care planning and 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

    Lack of clarity in discharge plans and placement expectations

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) That there exists a shortage of suitable supported accommodation for those diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, both in Somerset and nationally. In the case of Mr Richards this shortage resulted in him being obliged to remain on a psychiatric ward after his discharge under the Mental Health Act. This was not in Mr Richards best interests. (2) The suitability of Highbridge Court as a placement for Mr Richards which whilst CQC registered had not been CQC inspected. (3) A number of shortcomings on the part of Somerset Partnership NHS Foundation Trust ("the Trust") in Mr Richards mental health care were identified; a) Poor communication with family and between Trust staff. b) A lack of clarity in Mr Richards discharge plan and as to what Mr Richards could expect from his placement. c) An inadequate handover. d) Poor communication between Trust staff and Placement Staff and a failure to communicate with Mr Richards personally at a time of crisis for him. e) An inadequacy in the Trust's Risk Assessment process and subsequent management of risk to include only having telephone contact with staff and not speaking directly with Mr Richards ”

    Source location

    Robin Damien Richards · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  3. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Adrian Jennings · 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 Jennings had a history of mental health issues and self-harm attempts and died on 10 December 2016 after taking a fatal cocktail of drugs and alcohol. The principal concerns included poor communication and inadequate discharge support planning between mental health services, failures to record key information when he arrived at hospital, and a policy gap concerning the reporting of high-risk absconding before 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

    Lack of a clear system for joined-up discharge planning between primary and secondary mental health services

    Wider context from the report

    “2.there was no clear system for the primary and secondary mental health services of the mental health trust ,Pennine Care, to develop a joined up discharge plan following a stay on the mental health ward; ”

    Source location

    Adrian Jennings · 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

    Publish best-practice information on coordinated mental-health discharge planning and transition support.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note your second concern regarding the ability of primary and secondary mental health services to provide a joined up discharge plan. NHS England believes that strong communication, between health care professionals, with individuals receiving care, and with their families and carers is crucial to delivering safe, effective acute mental health care pathways. This communication is particularly important when individuals are transitioning between teams or services and for ensuring a robust discharge plan is in place.”

    Source location

    2018-0111-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 17 June 2018

    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 a framework for Community Mental Health Services setting out improved joint working between primary and secondary mental-health services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England is also developing a framework in 2018/19 for Community Mental Health Services which will articulate models of improved joint working between primary and secondary mental health services. This will support teams to work together to plan”

    Source location

    2018-0111-Response-by-NHS-England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 17 June 2018

    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 the Mental Health Act Code of Practice to set guiding principles for improving patient care, including involving carers and families in care decisions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Mental Health Act 1983 Code of Practice¹, whilst being statutory guidance for providers of services under the Act, should be observed as best practice by all commissioners and providers of services to people who may become subject to the Act. We revised the Code of Practice in 2015 and set out guiding principles to”

    Source location

    2018-0111-Response-by-Department-of-Health
    Page 1 · response
    Published 17 June 2018

    Open published response
  4. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    Anne Morris · 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

    Anne Morris died by suicide after hanging herself while alone in a friend’s house on 26 June 2017. The principal concerns were that the Priory Hospital did not contact consented friends or relatives, did not establish a written discharge and follow-up plan, and did not liaise adequately with the relevant Oxleas Home Treatment Team before discharge. Concerns were also raised that the Oxleas team did not obtain a discharge plan or know that Anne had agreed to contact with a friend regarding community support and suicide risk.

    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 of the HTT to obtain a written discharge plan from the hospital

    Wider context from the report

    “(4) The Oxleas HTT do not appear to have proactively contacted the Priory Hospital for a written discharge plan prior to, or at the time, of the home visit on the 25/6/17. Had the HTT made contact with the Priory Hospital it would still have been possible to formulate a plan (including the availability of collateral assistance from Messrs ████████). ”

    Source location

    Anne Morris · 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 identify a responsible HTT for the discharge address

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) The Priory Hospital did not identify a responsible HTT for the discharge address in Eltham and there was no liaison with an HTT prior to discharge. ”

    Source location

    Anne Morris · 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 the transfer-of-care protocol to address obtaining missing information from referring or receiving services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Our ‘Transfer of Care within Oxleas and externally’ protocol has been reviewed by the Medical Director, because it only described the information which should be provided to other units not what services should do in order to obtain information when a patient is referred / transferred. This will ensure standardisation in all Oxleas services in addition to the Home Treatment Team and this will then be disseminated through our clinical effectiveness governance process. This action is complete.”

    Source location

    2017-0383-Response-by-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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

    Disseminate the reviewed transfer-of-care protocol through the clinical effectiveness governance process.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Our ‘Transfer of Care within Oxleas and externally’ protocol has been reviewed by the Medical Director, because it only described the information which should be provided to other units not what services should do in order to obtain information when a patient is referred / transferred. This will ensure standardisation in all Oxleas services in addition to the Home Treatment Team and this will then be disseminated through our clinical effectiveness governance process. This action is complete.”

    Source location

    2017-0383-Response-by-Oxleas-NHS-Trust_Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 and relaunch the discharge policy, strengthening family involvement, care-plan circulation, service identification and written acceptance of follow-up responsibility.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Please note that we have reviewed and re-launched Priory Healthcare Policy H02: Admission, Transfer and Discharge and made reference to the involvement of family, friends and carers in the discharge planning process (paragraph 5.1e). A rolling programme of training webinars which detail policy and practice in relation to discharge planning will feature as part of these webinars. Please be assured that the point that you have made in respect of communicating with family and friends prior to discharge will be highlighted as part of these webinars.”

    Source location

    2017-0383-Response-by-Priory-Group
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 rolling webinar training programme highlighting discharge-planning policy, family communication, care-plan circulation and follow-up service responsibilities.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Please note that we have reviewed and re-launched Priory Healthcare Policy H02: Admission, Transfer and Discharge and made reference to the involvement of family, friends and carers in the discharge planning process (paragraph 5.1e). A rolling programme of training webinars which detail policy and practice in relation to discharge planning will feature as part of these webinars. Please be assured that the point that you have made in respect of communicating with family and friends prior to discharge will be highlighted as part of these webinars.”

    Source location

    2017-0383-Response-by-Priory-Group
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    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 fourth and fifth concerns relate to Oxleas Mental Health NHS Trust rather than Priory Group.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We note that the fourth and fifth matters of concern relate to Oxleas Mental Health NHS Trust rather than to Priory Group.”

    Source location

    2017-0383-Response-by-Priory-Group
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 February 2018

    Open published response
  5. Staffordshire South

    AI-generated summary

    Lester John STACEY · 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

    Lester John STACEY, who had hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and bipolar affective disorder, was found hanging in a barn at his home on 23 October 2016 and was certified dead at the scene. Concerns included discharge from mental health inpatient care without follow-up appointments, no attempted visit to re-engage him with services, and a change in medication that does not appear to have been monitored.

    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 arrange follow-up appointments before discharge

    Wider context from the report

    “The deceased was admitted as an In-patient under S2 Mental Health Act from 16 May 2016 to 19 May 2016. He was discharged without being given follow up appointments. He subsequently failed to respond to telephone calls and letters to attend appointments. He was therefore discharged from the service on the 21 June 2016. There was no attempt to visit him during this period to try and re-engage him with services. He may not have received the correspondence inviting him for appointments because he was away on holiday for some of that period. He might have benefitted from having pre-arranged appointments prior to his discharge. His medication was changed during his last admission and thereafter does not appear to have been monitored. The deceased was said to have lacked confidence in the new medication and may not have been totally compliant. Family perception was that he responded less well to the changed medication. ”

    Source location

    Lester John STACEY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  6. Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley

    AI-generated summary

    Tracey Lynch · 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

    Tracey Lynch, who had emotionally unstable personality disorder, died by suicide after hanging herself in her room at Oswald House on 9 October 2015. The report identified concerns about the lack of a final discharge meeting, familiarisation visits and appropriate escorted transport, and about the absence of adequate assessments and care planning after her presentation changed and she was transferred between services.

    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 hold a final discharge meeting for discharge to a rehabilitation unit

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Despite the fact that there had been a clear change in the presentation of Tracey Lynch following the CPA Meeting on the 22nd June and despite the fact that arrangements for discharge were not in place until the 28th September 2015 no final discharge meeting was held, that is despite the fact that the responsible clinician, ████████ the care co-ordinator ████████ and the deputy manager from Oswald House ████████ had all indicated that they wished there to be a final discharge meeting. There seemed to be no system in place to ensure that such a meeting would take place and in order to ensure that appropriate management would take place of the discharge to a rehabilitation unit. ”

    Source location

    Tracey Lynch · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  7. Inner South London

    AI-generated summary

    CHRISTOPHER TOKE AJAYI · 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 Toke Ajayi, who had schizo-affective disorder and insulin-dependent type II diabetes, was discharged into unsupported accommodation and was found decomposed there on 17 September 2012 after apparently receiving no professional or carer visits for about a month. The report identified concerns about discharge planning, lack of supported accommodation and GP care, failures to communicate his medical needs, and failure to follow up missed appointments, medication and insulin treatment. The inquest found the cause of death to be hyperosmolar non-ketotic coma associated with diabetes mellitus, with neglect contributing.

    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 comprehensively plan discharge arrangements

    Wider context from the report

    “Mr Ajayi was aged 45 when he died. He had a long history of mental illness and a forensic history. He suffered with severe mental illness with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia in 1989 which was amended to schizo-affective disorder in 2002. He was a wanderer and also not always compliant with medication. He was single and had little or no contact with his family in the time leading up to his death. In the last hospital admission before his death he was diagnosed with HONK – Hyperosmolar non-Ketotic coma. This means his blood sugar was high. He now required insulin to control his diabetes and he was, when discharged, to administer this to himself twice a day. On the 9th August 2012 there was a discharge planning meeting at the Maudsley (his last hospital admission). His Care Coordinator attended. It was known by then, because of his poor history of being non-compliant, that he would be being discharged with a Community Treatment Order in place. His named Care Coordinator does not seem to recall much about this meeting but has acknowledged that he would have been told that Mr Ajayi was now insulin dependent. From thereon, it appears that nothing of value was done in relation to Mr Ajayi's discharge planning. He was eventually discharged, wrongly, into unsupported accommodation with no care package, where no GP was caring for him and no Diabetic nurse aware of his discharge. Whilst his named Care Coordinator was on leave his colleague, another Care Coordinator, equally did not ensure everything was in place. Both argued that as Mr Ajayi was placed by Southwark Council, after discharge, into accommodation out of the borough, that militated, practically, in relation to them visiting post discharge. No one was to visit him. To use the words that Counsel for the family used, this group of staff (Care Coordinators) carry an enormous responsibility. The job must be carried out with great diligence and care. Staff must be of the right calibre, and have the right training, and support, to carry out their tasks well. The evidence revealed that these members of staff have a high degree of delegation imposed upon them. They are dealing with probably the most vulnerable people in society. It cannot be uncommon for a mentally unwell person to be discharged from hospital whilst suffering from a physical condition. One impinges on the other when that person is required to self-administer life-saving treatment to themselves. Therefore, they are particularly vulnerable. I acknowledge that patients such as Mr Ajayi, who frequently disengage with treatment, can only have their risk of harm/death reduced, not eliminated. However, this case highlighted so very many missed opportunities, mainly within the department of Care Coordinators. I have heard some evidence about resources impinging upon matters. Certainly, in this case, the accommodation which would be available for an individual such as Mr Ajayi (who was on the Sexual Offender's list as well as having the problems cited above), is, and was, limited. However, this report is not concerning that issue. It concerns the ability of this group of staff to carry out their jobs ensuring the lowest possible risk to their users as can be achieved. If necessary, Mr Ajayi should have (as would have been likely), stayed in hospital until the right discharge arrangement was in place (supported accommodation or unsupported with an intensive package of care). The caring element of the Care Coordinator role was missing. I am assured that the team that was responsible for Mr Ajayi's community care have developed a more structured multi-disciplinary approach including monitoring of 7 day follow up and I am told is robustly monitored in respect of compliance with the seven day follow up), and the identification of high risk patients such as Mr Ajayi. I am further assured that discharge planning is expected to be comprehensively and carefully planned before discharge. Sadly, I did not find this evidence reflected in the Care Coordinators' evidence. I have not been shown any audit figures to prove that changes have been checked as in action comprehensively, and the evidence was not impressive in relation to changes within this particular department. No re-training was evident. Both Care Coordinators were experienced and both also knew Mr Ajayi and his history, albeit not acting upon his new diagnosis. The evidence as a whole came across as still a service dealing with extremely vulnerable members of the public, where crucial decisions and follow up impinge directly on those individual's well-being, as well as others in the community. There appears to have been no root and branch overhaul of the department. Further, there was inconsistent evidence as to supervision, which in itself, would only account for supervisory control over some users of the service, at that particular time. I have concerns that the named Care Coordinator told me that his supervision was two weekly, where his manager told me it was monthly. Other than more supervision, I am struggling to find any other tangible changes that I am sure have been made, to prevent this group of staff from allowing the same circumstances to occur again. ”

    Source location

    CHRISTOPHER TOKE AJAYI · 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

    Debrief involved staff and remind Trust and local-authority staff about discharge planning, documentation and physical-health guidance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• All Trust and London Borough of Southwark (LBS) staff involved in this specific case gave evidence, learnt lessons and have been de-briefed on the Coroner’s conclusions.”

    Source location

    2014-0558-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 31 October 2014

    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

    Implement updated action plans producing more robust systems and structures between Southwark inpatient and community teams.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The breakdown in effective clinical communication and collaborative care planning was noted in the Trust’s SI investigation report (together with action plans) and further acknowledged and discussed in supporting evidence given at Inquest.”

    Source location

    2014-0558-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 31 October 2014

    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 discharge notification proformas routinely and send them to community teams or team managers on the discharge day, with ongoing audit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Discharge proforma (discharge notification): this is now routinely completed and copies sent to community team/team manager on the day of discharge (compliance is monitored through ongoing audit).”

    Source location

    2014-0558-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 31 October 2014

    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

    Audit seven-day follow-up and discharges involving patients with unstable diabetes to assess follow-up, communication and forward planning.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The community team involved have undertaken two specific audits: (a) Team 7 day follow-up performance (Oct-Dec 2014) showed no missed reviews; (b) Discharge of two patients with unstable diabetes (Dec 2014) demonstrated extensive communication and forward planning prior to discharge, appropriately involving all partners.”

    Source location

    2014-0558-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 31 October 2014

    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

    There are no systemic problems with discharge and community follow-up for patients with complex mental and physical health needs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust acknowledges that important lessons have been learnt from this specific case that are being taken forward in improving integrated working; the Trust is otherwise confident that there is no systemic problems with regard to discharge and community follow up of similar patients with complex mental and physical health problems.”

    Source location

    2014-0558-Response-by-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust
    Page 8 · response
    Published 31 October 2014

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026