Recurring concern

Failure to recognise and respond to deteriorating mental health in service users

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 12 Sep 2013•Latest report 25 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures by mental health or care services to identify deterioration or serious acute mental health risk and take an appropriate response, including assessment, escalation, communication, safeguarding action or urgent intervention when these controls are dedicated to the deteriorating mental-health response.

Not included

  • Excludes generic staffing, leadership, training, documentation or communication deficiencies that are not explicitly tied to recognising or responding to deteriorating mental health.
  • Excludes failures concerning physical deterioration or medical emergencies unless the report explicitly links them to deterioration of the service user’s mental health.
  • Excludes failures in a separate safeguarding, emergency alarm, welfare-check or treatment-refusal process where the report does not identify deteriorating mental health as the shared concern.
Reports
28

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
31

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
57

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 England5
Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust3
Department of Health and Social Care3
HM Prison and Probation Service3
Ministry of Justice3
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust2
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust2
All Care In One Limited1
All Care In One Ltd1
Bolton Borough Council1
Cambridge Nursing Home Ltd1
Care Quality Commission1
Coldingley Prison1
Cumbria Constabulary1
Department of Community Mental Health, Woolwich Station Medical Centre1

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. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Haydar Jefferies · 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

    Haydar Jefferies was detained at HMP Coldingley and developed severe depression and psychosis before self-ligaturing in his cell on 1 March 2023; he was resuscitated but died at hospital on 5 March 2023 from hypoxic brain injury and pneumonia. The principal concerns included failures to record and share risk-relevant information, refer him promptly to mental health services, provide an adequate mental health assessment and obtain appropriate clinical care and supervision during his acute deterioration.

    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 custody staff training to recognise red flags of declining mental health

    Wider context from the report

    “5. Custody staff are not trained in mental health presentations and are unable to recognise red flag indicators of declining mental health. ”

    Source location

    Haydar Jefferies · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 5 · 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

    Pilot mandatory online Introduction to Mental Health training for Care and Separation Unit staff, including all new staff applying to work there.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The prison is piloting an online e-learning course called ‘Introduction to Mental Health’ for all staff working in the CSU to support staff in identifying indicators of declining mental health and to upskill staff to complete the mental health referral forms with relevant risk information. All new staff applying to work in the CSU must complete this course.”

    Source location

    Response from HMPPS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 27 December 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 Introduction to Mental Health Awareness training to all new prison officers through initial prison officer training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to the action taken locally at HMP Coldingley, I can confirm that all new prison officers complete a training module called ‘Introduction to Mental Health Awareness’ as part of their initial prison officer training.”

    Source location

    Response from HMPPS
    Page 2 · response
    Published 27 December 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

    Roll out mental health training for Custodial Managers and CSU staff, requiring completion before new CSU staff take up post.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As outlined on page 12 of the December 2024 Safety Strategy, the prison is rolling out mental health training for Custodial Managers and CSU Staff to assist with populating the referral form with all relevant information in respect of risk and to support custodial prison staff in identifying mental health concerns more readily. Custodial Managers can check that mental health training has been completed by accessing officer training records through the online management system. Any new staff that have successfully passed a board to work in the CSU, must have also completed the online training prior to being invited for interview.”

    Source location

    Response from Government Legal Department
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 December 2024

    Open published response
  2. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Helen Jane Kerr · 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

    Helen Jane Kerr had a history of drug and alcohol abuse, developed psychosis, and died by hanging after being found dead at a refuge on 3 April 2023. The report identified concerns about failures to respond appropriately and promptly to information about her deteriorating mental health, inadequate assessment and treatment, limited out-of-hours information sharing, and failure to inform the refuge about risks associated with her presentation.

    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 appropriately assess declining mental health information and provide timely mental health referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Cogent information about Ms Kerr’s declining mental health was provided repeatedly to Surrey and Borders Partnership secondary mental health teams from the refuge support workers. It was not explored with them, and insufficient weight was given to it during the triage process. Ms Kerr was not provided with appropriate and timely referrals for mental health treatment. Despite the evident significant changes are being put in place the efficacy of these changes has not yet been evidenced. ”

    Source location

    Helen Jane Kerr · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Require senior oversight of Single Point of Access triage and recording of referrer collateral information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In the PFD report, you highlighted that a considerable amount of evidence has been provided by the Trust of the changes around prescribing referrals into our services. In particular, the PFD report notes that referrals into the Single Point of Access (“SPA”) can now be made by voluntary agencies and new protocols require more senior oversight of triaging decisions and recording of collateral information from referrers.”

    Source location

    Response from Surrey and Borders Partnership
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 September 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 revised SBAR documentation to include carer and family views in decision-making.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to the above improvements, the Trust website was updated to provide detail to external professionals on the different routes for emergency, urgent and routine referrals. There is now greater collaboration with family and referrers, supported by changes to the SBAR (a structured tool for communicating and sharing information which requires recording of the Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation) to now include carer/family views which are factored into decision making.”

    Source location

    Response from Surrey and Borders Partnership
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 September 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

    Test new Single Point of Access procedures and apply quality-control review to assess consistent implementation and identify service improvements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The implementation of the new SPA procedures is currently subject to testing in line with our quality improvement approach. The aim of this is to provide assurance that the new processes are applied consistently and are embedded. We have introduced a quality control process within SPA and the ongoing testing and review will allow us to identify other ways in which the service can be optimised. As part of this work, we are taking additional steps to enhance the out of hours offer.”

    Source location

    Response from Surrey and Borders Partnership
    Page 1 · response
    Published 18 September 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

    Deliver training across i-access services on recognising psychosis and making timely mental-health referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Further learning is reflected in the production of training which has been developed and rolled out across our i-access services. This focuses on recognising signs and symptoms of psychosis and the importance of a timely referral to mental health services for assessment. To date, 86% of relevant staff have viewed this training and it is planned that the remaining staff (who have been unable to do so due to absence from work) will have viewed this by 15 November 2024.”

    Source location

    Response from Surrey and Borders Partnership
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 September 2024

    Open published response
  3. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Wolfe Kinzley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Mark Wolfe Kinzley, a 61-year-old man with a neurological disorder, mental health problems and a history of self-harm, was found unresponsive at his nursing home on 30 October 2023 after suspending himself by a coat hanger. He died in hospital on 1 November 2023 from complications of the injuries sustained at the nursing home. The concerns included whether the care setting was appropriate, the absence of a formal capacity assessment, and the lack of a mental health assessment despite his history and deteriorating mental state.

    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 refer residents for mental health assessment when indicated by mental illness, self-harm history or deteriorating mental state

    Wider context from the report

    “3. During the same period, Mr Kinzley was not referred for a mental health assessment despite. a. His history of mental illness. b. His history of deliberate self-harm. c. His history of accidental self-harm when agitated. d. His deteriorating mental state during the month prior to his death. ”

    Source location

    Mark Wolfe Kinzley · 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

    Deliver targeted provider training on safeguarding, escalation processes and risk identification, including notifying the Local Authority and making safeguarding referrals for identified self-harm or other health risks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Local Authority will deliver targeted training to care providers regarding safeguarding, escalation processes/and risk identification.”

    Source location

    Response from NELFT and Redbridge Council
    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

    Inform care staff that local mental health teams accept referrals from patients, carers and other medical professionals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following the inquest, our named clinician, Dr Barker, for the care home has made the care staff aware that the local mental health teams, also accept referrals from patients, carers, and other medical professionals, in addition to referrals from a GP. This may be appropriate for any future cases as it would allow the care home to make a referral without waiting for a GP assessment, such as patients with fluctuating capacity or emergency situations.”

    Source location

    Response from Evergreen Surgery
    Page 3 · 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

    A mental-health referral required the consent of a patient assessed as having capacity, and depended on his willingness to consent.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Whilst we recognise the importance of mental health assessments and referrals for individuals with a history of mental health issues, we emphasise that any referral to mental health services in this situation would have required Mr. Kinzley's consent. He was deemed to have capacity at the times he was assessed, and therefore any referral would have been contingent upon his willingness to consent to such services.”

    Source location

    Response from Evergreen Surgery
    Page 3 · response
    Published 3 April 2024

    Open published response
  4. 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

    Lack of proactive care consideration during obvious mental health crisis

    Wider context from the report

    “2.    That no pro-active care was considered for Adrian whilst he was in obvious mental health crisis in the last 17 days of his life. ”

    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

    Share learning about proactive care during mental health crisis with the team.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have shared learning on this with the team and are updating our policies accordingly.”

    Source location

    Response from Central and North West London
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 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 policies to incorporate learning about proactive care during mental health crisis.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have shared learning on this with the team and are updating our policies accordingly.”

    Source location

    Response from Central and North West London
    Page 2 · 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
  5. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Shahzadi Khan · 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

    Shahzadi Khan was detained under the Mental Health Act after a manic episode with psychotic symptoms and was discharged from an out-of-area private hospital to her family home. Following inadequate discharge planning, communication problems and a failure to arrange the appropriate community care pathway, she deteriorated and took a fatal overdose of prescribed zopiclone at home. The concerns included the effects of out-of-area placements, poor coordination of local care pathways, and insufficient awareness of menopause as a possible factor in mental health deterioration.

    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 awareness of menopause as a factor in mental health deterioration

    Wider context from the report

    “2. There was evidence from her family that her deterioration was in part due to her going through the menopause and that had there been better awareness of this as a factor in mental health deterioration for some women and better support in place, interventions could have taken place at an earlier stage and been more effective. ”

    Source location

    Shahzadi Khan · 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

    Provide funding to Mind in Greater Manchester to raise awareness of menopause and its effects on mental health.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To raise awareness of menopause for healthcare staff including the effect of menopause on mental health, funding has been given to Mind in Greater Manchester (this is a partnership of five local Minds working together to ensure people experience better mental health and to support people with their mental health to live well and feel valued in their communities and at work). The funding will:”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 February 2024

    Open published response
  6. West Sussex, Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Rachel Kathleen Garrett · 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

    Rachel Kathleen Garrett had been experiencing deteriorating mental health and was found near the cliffs on several occasions. On 29 July 2020, after leaving the Royal Sussex County Hospital for a second time, she returned to the cliffs and ended her life by falling from the cliff top. The report’s principal concern was that mental health liaison staff employed by a separate mental health trust could not themselves use holding powers to prevent a patient leaving an acute hospital, creating a risk when patients with deteriorating mental health attended A&E.

    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 Mental Health Liaison teams to detain or hold absconding patients in acute hospitals

    Wider context from the report

    “Patients who attend a Hospital Accident and Emergency Department with mental health difficulties are in most hospitals seen by a Mental Health Liaison team (made up of Consultant Psychiatrists and Mental Health nurses) These staff are not employed by the Acute Hospital Trust but are employed by a local Mental Health Trust (in this particular case it was the Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust). As a result of their employment status the Mental Health Liaison team (who have the best knowledge of the patient having been caring for them) cannot invoke the Doctors or Nurses holding powers under Section 5(2) Mental Health Act (Section 5(4) for nurses). If a patient decides to abscond from the Acute Trust Hospital the Mental Health staff cannot detain/hold the patient. They would have to ask a Doctor within the Acute Hospital to do so. This Doctor may not have any knowledge of the patient and would be unlikely to act immediately in a busy A&E. By that time the patient would have been long gone. Due to this technical issue around the employment status of the Mental Health Team, those suffering with a deteriorating mental health in an acute setting are at risk in these circumstances. ”

    Source location

    Rachel Kathleen Garrett · 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

    Raise the case with the Department for Health and Social Care for consideration of the Mental Health Act issues identified.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England will also be raising this case with the Department for Health and Social Education and who have responsibility for Mental Health Act legislation, for their consideration of the issues raised.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 July 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

    Contact other integrated care boards to explore approaches to employing Mental Health Liaison Teams within acute hospitals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Two of the actions that we will take forwards as a matter of some urgency are to make contact with other ICBs to explore how they are addressing the employment of Mental Health Liaison Teams within the Acute Care hospitals and also to look at workforce and practices within our Providers to try to resolve these issues on a local level. Whilst we are still trying to resolve the concerns that have been raised, this is a recognised National issue and as such we therefore do not yet have a local solution.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Sussex
    Page 3 · response
    Published 7 July 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 provider workforce and practices to seek a local resolution to Mental Health Liaison Team employment issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Two of the actions that we will take forwards as a matter of some urgency are to make contact with other ICBs to explore how they are addressing the employment of Mental Health Liaison Teams within the Acute Care hospitals and also to look at workforce and practices within our Providers to try to resolve these issues on a local level. Whilst we are still trying to resolve the concerns that have been raised, this is a recognised National issue and as such we therefore do not yet have a local solution.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Sussex
    Page 3 · response
    Published 7 July 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

    Administering or delegating Mental Health Act holding powers within trusts or systems is outside NHS England’s remit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within the remit of NHS England to manage how MHA powers are administered or delegated within Trusts or systems. Some Acute Trusts will provide mental health liaison teams with honorary contracts, to ensure that they can exercise holding powers outside of their substantive Trust. While I note that this arrangement was not in place in Rachel’s case, NHS England has engaged with NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board (ICB) on this matter, who have advised that the following actions are being undertaken:”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 July 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

    NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board is undertaking local pathway and safety improvements concerning detention powers in acute emergency departments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is not within the remit of NHS England to manage how MHA powers are administered or delegated within Trusts or systems. Some Acute Trusts will provide mental health liaison teams with honorary contracts, to ensure that they can exercise holding powers outside of their substantive Trust. While I note that this arrangement was not in place in Rachel’s case, NHS England has engaged with NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board (ICB) on this matter, who have advised that the following actions are being undertaken:”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 July 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

    Commissioners do not usually have a role in determining the employment model for particular services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As Commissioners of NHS services, NHS Sussex does not usually have a role in relation to the employment model of staff for particular services. However, if NHS Sussex, are made aware of an issue that is creating a risk for patients then recognising that as the Commissioners, we do have a duty to raise the issue with the Provider/s concerned and to ensure that the issue is addressed.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Sussex
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 July 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

    No local solution is currently available because the employment issue is recognised as a national problem.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Two of the actions that we will take forwards as a matter of some urgency are to make contact with other ICBs to explore how they are addressing the employment of Mental Health Liaison Teams within the Acute Care hospitals and also to look at workforce and practices within our Providers to try to resolve these issues on a local level. Whilst we are still trying to resolve the concerns that have been raised, this is a recognised National issue and as such we therefore do not yet have a local solution.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS Sussex
    Page 3 · response
    Published 7 July 2023

    Open published response
  7. Gwent

    AI-generated summary

    Siwan Llio SMITH · 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

    Siwan Smith had a long-standing history of anxiety and depression, which worsened during the Covid-19 pandemic, and she died by hanging at home on 23 November 2020. The report raised concern that, when she sought an earlier appointment and was distressed, reception staff did not identify whether she required urgent mental health support or arrange a call from a clinically trained person.

    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 awareness among reception staff of when patients require urgent clinical assessment for mental health concerns

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Response to Mental Health Concerns by Reception Staff During the course of the inquest, Mr Martin Smith, Siwan’s husband, raised concerns that on 18th November 2020, Siwan telephoned the Medical Centre to obtain an urgent appointment with a doctor. She was informed by the receptionist that the earliest appointment was on 30th November 2020. The Medical Centre provided me with a report which indicated that when Siwan asked about whether there were any emergency appointments for mental health problems she was advised that these are not routinely offered unless a patient is having “bad thoughts”. Your report states that an emergency appointment was not requested and at no point was it suggested the call was a mental health emergency. The Medical Centre provided me with a recording of the telephone exchange between Siwan and the receptionist. I found during the inquest that Siwan asked repeatedly if she could have an earlier appointment and was clearly upset that she could not. She was not asked if she was having bad thoughts or whether she required urgent mental health support. It was clear towards the end of the conversation that Siwan was distressed. I also received in evidence a letter dated 8 March 2021 written By ████████, the Practice Manager to Mr Smith, in which she implies that the receptionists are not clinically trained to make assessments. I accept this, however in the circumstances I determined that Siwan should have received a call back from someone who was clinically trained to ascertain whether she required an urgent mental health assessment. In the circumstances I did not find that a different course of action would have prevented Siwan’s death or would have altered the outcome. However I am concerned that lives could be put at risk in the future if there continues to be a lack of awareness of when a patient may require a clinical assessment in relation to their mental health. ”

    Source location

    Siwan Llio SMITH · 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

    Display a high-risk mental-health alert when records of patients with mental-health medication or history are opened.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have implemented the following strategies:”

    Source location

    2021-0306-Response-from-Taffs-Well-Medical-Centre_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 17 September 2021

    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

    Offer patients contacting the practice about mental-health concerns the next available appointment and urgent same-day GP triage when requested.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have implemented the following strategies:”

    Source location

    2021-0306-Response-from-Taffs-Well-Medical-Centre_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 17 September 2021

    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 e-consult depression risk assessment, continuously monitor submissions, and arrange immediate clinician callbacks for high-risk results.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The e-consult platform provides an excellent risk assessment of depression and provides a PHQ-9 depression score. This provides a convenient and safe method of accessing help from the practice. It enables patients who may struggle to get their concerns across verbally, especially when discussing sensitive points, to articulate these in a structured manner with prompts. We hope that providing this service will help our younger, working age population such as Mrs Smith to alert us of their mental health issues promptly at their convenience. E-consults are continuously monitored throughout the day and those flagged as high risk based on PHQ-9 score (which includes a question on suicidal thoughts) are passed to the on-call”

    Source location

    2021-0306-Response-from-Taffs-Well-Medical-Centre_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 17 September 2021

    Open published response
  8. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    KENNETH SMITH · 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 Smith, who had cognitive impairment and was at high risk of falls, died on 9 November 2020 after falling at a care home and developing acute-on-chronic subdural haematomas. The report raised concerns about reducing his supervision, failing to set a review date, inadequate escalation of care after further falls, and insufficient consideration of medication and mental-health factors in assessing his falls 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

    Delay in seeking mental health practitioner advice for progressive agitation

    Wider context from the report

    “After a proposed re-assessment of the falls risk posed by the deceased on the 22nd of October 2020 the 14-day period expired on the 22nd and 29th of October established that the deceased was to suffer 6 falls between the 22nd and 29th of October 2020. Two of these falls took place on the 22nd of October 2020 – the same date of the reduction in the level of care being offered. The evidence from the care home indicated that there was no date that had been given for a future review. It was also accepted that there was no action taken to consider whether any fall or falls resulted in the Accident Record including no action taken on the 29th of October 2020 when the deceased suffered two falls, resulting in tears and a head injury. Additionally, the evidence established that on release from hospital to the care home on the 6th of October 2020, the discharge clinicians had stopped the prescription of Trazodone due to its known sedative qualities. There was no evidence of this (as part of the falls risk assessment) being taken into account by carers adequately, or at all. Care staff had only escalated concerns over the deceased's progressive agitation to a general practitioner on 30th of October 2020. This had resulted in a referral to the Older Persons' Mental Health Team. There was no evidence as to why further advice from a mental health practitioner was not sought earlier, or as part of the risk assessment on the 22nd of October 2020. The nature and quality of the care received by the deceased between the 22nd and 31st of October 2020 reveal the following concerns: 1. The decision to reduce the level of supervision was suboptimal, incorrect and unlawful. 2. The failure to consider and specify a review date; 3. The lack of appropriate scaling up of care to meet identified problems or issues with the reduced level of care, with no prompt to act on urgent review. 4. Care plan guidance, whilst not triggered, was serious or untoward incidents review by the care home, the CCG, or local authority; ”

    Source location

    KENNETH SMITH · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  9. North East Kent

    AI-generated summary

    PAUL HILLS · 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 Hills was found deceased at home in his garage on 24 April 2020 after suspending himself from a rafter. He had a history of post-traumatic stress disorder, reported episodes and dry runs of self-harm, and was receiving treatment. Concerns included inadequate risk assessment and care-plan updates, failure to document or share escalating risk information, insufficient planning for remote treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic, and limitations affecting local treatment and communication.

    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

    Absence of an urgent assessment and review pathway for deteriorating mental health

    Wider context from the report

    “1. No risk assessment was completed on the issue of moving mental health appointments to virtual during the COVID-19 pandemic and how patients could be kept safe in the event of deterioration in his mental health. There was no plan in place for patients that required urgent assessment/review due to deterioration in their mental health. ”

    Source location

    PAUL HILLS · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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

    Existing processes enable emergency inpatient admission whenever a patient significantly deteriorates.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As outlined above, there is a stepped approach to the provision of mental healthcare. The assessing clinician will consider the severity of a patient’s condition. This is largely a decision based on clinical assessment and observation. In a case where a patient is significantly deteriorating, MOD has processes in place to arrange, at any time, emergency admittance to an inpatient mental health unit. Service personnel are assessed, stabilised and treated in hospitals as close to their home or parent Unit as possible.”

    Source location

    2020-0247-Response-from-MP-MOD-Redacted.pdf
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 December 2020

    Open published response
  10. West Sussex

    AI-generated summary

    John Ashley · 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

    John Ashley took his own life while suffering a deterioration in his mental illness, according to the inquest conclusion. The report identified concerns about failures to update his care and treatment plan, record and share key information, review his deterioration and medication non-compliance, and provide adequate clinical oversight and cover arrangements.

    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 weekly professional team meetings to review mental health deterioration and medication non-compliance

    Wider context from the report

    “4. Mr Ashley had not been seen by a Psychiatrist for over a year and there was no evidence that the deterioration of his mental health (and his non compliance with his medication) had been reviewed by the professionals weekly team meetings. ”

    Source location

    John Ashley · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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

    Whether to discuss a patient at weekly MDT meetings is left to clinical judgment because experienced staff may review care without MDT discussion.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In respect of your concern that Mr Ashley's condition was not discussed in the multidisciplinary (MDT) meetings, I would like to reassure you that MDT meetings occur weekly and Lead Practitioners and other colleagues are invited to present cases where they require advice and support, or cases which require a multidisciplinary approach. The decision as to whether a case should be discussed at a MDT meeting, is a matter of clinical judgment, and in Mr Ashley's case, his Lead Practitioner and others involved in his care, did not consider this support was necessary and his care was reviewed by the experienced staff who were directly involved in his care. My understanding is that it is not common practice for every patient to be discussed at a MDT meeting.”

    Source location

    2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
    Page 4 · response
    Published 8 April 2020

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026