Recurring concern

Failure to act appropriately on safeguarding referrals and notices

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 12 Sep 2014•Latest report 5 Mar 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of the end-to-end safeguarding response involving safeguarding notices, referrals or identified safeguarding concerns, including inadequate assignment, follow-up, escalation, investigation or protective action.

Not included

  • Excludes generic communication, documentation or staffing deficiencies unless they are directly tied to the safeguarding response.
  • Excludes failures concerning clinical referrals or other service referrals without an explicit safeguarding concern.
  • Excludes failures to issue general warnings or safety notices that are not safeguarding notices.
Reports
39

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
44

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
74

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 Care4
Care Quality Commission3
East London NHS Foundation Trust2
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust2
Surrey County Council2
Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust1
Berrycroft Manor1
Broadland View Care Home1
Cafcass1
Catholic Safeguarding Standards Agency1
Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust1
Chippenham Community Hospital1
Church of England1
Clifton Court Nursing Home1
Community Health Care1

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. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Caroline Adeyelu · 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

    Caroline Adeyelu died after suffering a fatal stab wound to her chest at home on 30 October 2022, inflicted by her son, who was under the care of community mental health services. The inquest identified inadequate risk assessment and management, insufficient safeguarding and family engagement, poor care coordination and information sharing, and ineffective communication between mental health services and the police.

    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 safeguarding referrals for parents at risk of adult child to parent domestic abuse

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence at the inquest reflected very poor appreciation of the risks posed to Mrs Adeyelu by her mentally unwell adult son. This poor appreciation of risk was observed at all levels of clinical staff. Whilst I note that the safeguarding training within the trusts includes reference to the adult child to parent domestic abuse, I am concerned that the extent of training on this subject is insufficient to address the widespread concerns encountered in this case. In relation to the risk of domestic abuse in this case there was a lack of information gathering from wider family members; there was a lack of carer support; a lack of home-based risk-assessment; a lack of home visits by the clinical team; an absence of safeguarding referrals for Mrs Adeyelu and an absence of multi-agency risk assessment/risk management. It has been brought to my attention that the Femicide Census (2000) found that for women killed by immediate family members, over 80% were mothers killed by their sons. Mental health of the perpetrator was a context of the violence in 58% of those cases. In light of this, and in light of the evidence heard at the inquest, I am concerned that the risk of adult child to parent domestic abuse is a matter that requires more substantive consideration in safeguarding training, than is currently provided. ”

    Source location

    Caroline Adeyelu · 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

    Strengthen mandatory Level 3 safeguarding training to address intergenerational domestic abuse, parental vulnerability, and risks to family members.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• The Trust’s level three safeguarding training now highlights domestic abuse from children (with or without mental health needs) to parents.”

    Source location

    Response from East London Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Update Tower Hamlets’ admissions checklist to include intergenerational safeguarding concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Tower Hamlets’ admissions checklist was updated on 23 December 2025 to include intergenerational safeguarding concerns.”

    Source location

    Response from East London Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response
  2. City of London

    AI-generated summary

    Tony Montana Duncan · 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

    Tony Montana Duncan had a long-term mental health condition and, during an acute deterioration, told healthcare services that he had suicidal thoughts and planned to jump from a bridge. He was assessed by a psychiatric liaison team and discharged without medication review, admission, documented risk assessment, or follow-up safeguarding, despite information about his suicide plan. On 4 July 2024, he jumped into the River Thames and likely died shortly afterwards; the report identified concerns about the response of mental health services to the risks he presented.

    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 involve Crisis or Home Treatment teams for immediate safeguarding follow-up

    Wider context from the report

    “2. When the Deceased attended the hospital, the Accident and Emergency team’s triage notes included express reference to his specific suicide plan and attached the GP’s letter of referral. The Deceased was then assessed by a psychiatric liaison nurse who concluded that his presentation was as a result of psycho-social stressors rather than mental illness; she was not concerned about the risk of suicide because he had no plan or intent; and she referred the Deceased to the homelessness team and discharged him back to the care of his GP. The nurse did not take any steps to review the Deceased’s medication or consider admission, or escalate these matters to a doctor, nor did she involve the Crisis or Home Treatment teams for follow up / immediate safeguarding. Despite there being a recognised risk to self and to others, both of which the Deceased himself said he could not control, there is no evidence of any risk assessment documentation being completed. ”

    Source location

    Tony Montana Duncan · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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

    Doctor referral was not initially indicated because the established pathway covered admission, medication changes and other clinical complexities, with senior psychiatric doctors available continuously.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Referral by the PLN to a doctor was not clearly indicated, as this pathway is for those who may require admission under the Mental Health Act, or changes to their medication, or for other complexities as deemed by the assessing clinician. The AAR explored onward referral to doctors by PLNs and this was thought to be working well, with senior psychiatric doctors available 24 hours a day. Mr Duncan initially presented as calm and without signs or symptoms of affective disorder or psychosis. Later, when Mr Duncan became agitated, referral to a doctor to consider next steps (including potential referral to a crisis team) may have been indicated, and his self-discharge without further review or discussion was a lost opportunity to review the assessment and offer further support.”

    Source location

    Response from South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 20 October 2025

    Open published response
  3. Wiltshire and Swindon

    AI-generated summary

    Christopher John O’Donnell · 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 John O’Donnell died on 12 December 2023 in supported living accommodation after taking a substantial amount of methadone, vomiting and suffering airway obstruction by vomit. The principal concern was that excess medication remained within his control despite recognised risks, with no apparent basis or consideration for the accommodation provider to remove it as a safeguarding measure during a mental health crisis.

    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 have a safeguarding policy and process for acting on resident risk without relying solely on consent

    Wider context from the report

    “The issue that I had was that there appeared to be no basis for or consideration of the supported living accommodation provider, taking action to provide safeguarding for Christopher by removing the excess medication so that it was not within his control. I was informed by ████████ that the supported living accommodation provider did not show staff to hold any medication even if it was done with the intention of providing safeguarding to someone, who by all accounts, was undergoing a mental health crisis. I would hope that the organisation will review its policies as to what action (if any) it can take when it is made aware of a risk to a resident, rather than to only take action with the resident’s consent. ”

    Source location

    Christopher John O’Donnell · 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

    Continue consulting mental health, pharmacy and substance-misuse agencies on safeguarding responses to medication stockpiling.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Home Group are committed to working in partnership with key agencies to mitigate the risks associated with the stockpiling of prescribed medication in supported housing settings, within the limits of what is legally permissible and within our service remit.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 3 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review and update the Support Practice Policy, consulting customers, partner agencies and stakeholders and considering inquest learning on risk management.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “b) Planned policy review”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 5 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review and refresh the LIFE support practice model to strengthen risk assessment and management for people at risk of self-harm or suicide.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are currently in the process of reviewing and refreshing our LIFE support practice model to ensure that it is effective in facilitating compliance with the practice standards set out in the Support Practice Policy. Our review is focussed on strengthening our approach to risk assessment and risk management, especially when working with individuals thought to be at risk of self-harm or suicide.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 6 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review the Tenure Policy, including standards governing house rules and room access in suspected medication-stockpiling situations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are also planning to carry out a concurrent review of our Tenure Policy, which includes standards around the enforcement of tenancy terms and conditions.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 6 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review and update risk-assessment templates, risk-management plans, training resources and quality-assurance checks for medication-stockpiling concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of Home Group’s wider planned policy review, we plan to review and update risk assessment templates and risk management plans, alongside training resources and quality assurance checks, to support accurate and timely risk management where there are concerns in relation to stockpiling medication.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 6 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop and pilot a medication-stockpiling risk-assessment checklist with accompanying staff guidance and training.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It was agreed with CGL that as part of expectations moving forward, any concerns regarding the stockpiling of medication by a service user will be reported by Home Group directly to the relevant local pharmacy who can then either arrange for the collection of the medication or instruct CGL to manage removal. We also agreed that matters concerning the stockpiling of medication should be dealt with at manager rather than support worker level, and that the guidance for support workers will be to escalate any concerns to management. To support this, we are looking to implement a risk assessment checklist as a useful resource for support workers. This checklist is addressed in more detail below.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 4 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Use manager oversight and quality-assurance review to document and follow up staff concerns recorded through the medication-stockpiling checklist.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Where there is evidence that a customer is stockpiling medication, the checklist alerts staff to discussing this as a safeguarding risk with partner agencies, including the prescriber and relevant pharmacy. Managers will have oversight of the checklist as part of our quality assurance approach. Staff are required to review the checklist with their manager and to document what was discussed and any actions agreed.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 7 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Responsibility for handling or administering medication in these services lies with Change Grow Live, not the supported housing provider.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Home Group’s services in the Swindon area, encompassing Canal House, are not commissioned by the local authority to provide support to service users in relation to the handling or administering of medication. In this situation, the responsibility for this would lie with Change Grow Live (“CGL”).”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Where a service user has capacity, medication cannot be removed without authority, and controlled drugs cannot lawfully be retained or stored on the premises.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As detailed in your PFDR, we understand that you are concerned that action was not taken by Home Group in removing stockpiled medication from Mr O’Donnell’s room in circumstances where concerns had been raised both internally and externally that he was stockpiling prescribed medication.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Group Limited
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 July 2025

    Open published response
  4. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Linda Sitch · 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

    Linda took her own life on 11 November 2023 after prolonged strain associated with caring for her husband, who had significant physical and mental health problems. Adult Social Care did not substantively respond to safeguarding and carer assessment referrals or the family’s escalating concerns before her death. The report raises concerns about inadequate oversight and the risk that urgent referrals could be inappropriately downgraded or insufficiently reviewed, potentially contributing to future deaths.

    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 respond substantively to safeguarding and carer’s assessment referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “a. Although not determined to be probably causative of the death, by the date of Linda’s death ASC had failed to respond substantively or at all to the Adult Safeguarding Referral dated 29th September 2023; the referral for a Carer’s Assessment for Linda herself, received by ASC on 2nd October 2023; the concerns reiterated by Linda’s family when chasing the 2nd October referral on 16th October 2023. These failures were explained as ‘human error’. ”

    Source location

    Linda Sitch · 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

    Increase safeguarding triage capacity and screen every alert before progressing qualifying referrals for further enquiry.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Central Safeguarding Triage Team has undergone transformative change, which has included increasing the resource of the team, implementing an initial screening check of all safeguarding alerts raised and those which are deemed to meet the criteria for safeguarding are then progressed to a safeguarding concern for further enquiries. As a result of these changes, 96% are triaged for a decision as to whether to proceed to safeguarding section 42 enquiry within 72 hours, with outcomes shared back with referrers and next actions agreed. The remaining 4% take a little longer with continuous oversight, whilst waiting for information at the triage stage to enable decision making. Therefore, there are no longer significant delays in progressing safeguarding referrals received.”

    Source location

    Response from Essex County Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 April 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Introduce carers practice guidance and core practice guidance covering assessments, reviews, support planning and safeguarding.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• New Carers practice guidance for Adult Social Care operational workers to support better and more timely outcomes for carers.”

    Source location

    Response from Essex County Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 April 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement recommendations from the external end-to-end safeguarding-process review to improve safeguarding practice and the customer journey.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In Spring 2024, Adult Social Care commissioned an external review of the end-to-end safeguarding process. There were several recommendations, that we are implementing to improve the customer journey and safeguarding practice.”

    Source location

    Response from Essex County Council
    Page 3 · response
    Published 28 April 2025

    Open published response
  5. Cumbria

    AI-generated summary

    Janet Scott · 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

    Janet Scott, who had schizophrenia and diabetes and was at serious risk of self-neglect, was found unresponsive at home on 28 March 2023 after concerns about her living conditions and welfare had been raised. She died in hospital on 30 March 2023 after developing sepsis. The report identified missed opportunities to provide assistance and a failure to activate multi-agency safeguarding procedures, raising concern that safeguarding referrals may not be made when agencies assume others are already aware.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to make safeguarding referrals when other agencies are thought to be aware

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Although individual agencies referred me to training they had provided to staff since Ms Scott's death, I also received evidence that, for instance, the GP surgery might not raise a safeguarding referral if the same circumstances were repeated because social services had already been informed. This leads me to be concerned that the message that 'safeguarding is everyone's responsibility' has not been taken on board. I am concerned that future cases will occur in which a multiagency approach is not adopted or that individuals will not make safeguarding referrals because they assume that other agencies are already aware of the issue. ”

    Source location

    Janet Scott · 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

    Audit cases involving self-neglect risk, assess referral, escalation and management oversight, and share findings with partners for practice review.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Audits of clients at risk of self-neglect have evidenced a range of referral sources including (but not limited to) family, friends and neighbours; community health staff; probation workers; fire service personnel and GPs. Close examination of records includes historic cases as well as recent referrals and consideration of whether appropriate and timely action was taken (including escalation to safeguarding procedures) and if there has been sufficient management oversight. Findings from these audits will be shared with partners across NCASP via the task and finish group once completed and implications for practice considered and kept under review.”

    Source location

    Response from Northumberland Children's and Adults Safeguarding Partnership
    Page 2 · response
    Published 27 February 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Introduce a multi-agency risk management framework within six months for earlier intervention and referrals involving adults with complex needs and serious-risk concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Multi-agency Risk Management (MARM) Framework NCASP will introduce a multi-agency risk management framework within 6 months, which will set out a shared commitment across agencies who work with risk in Northumberland and will provide practice guidance to practitioners who are working with adults who have multiple and complex needs and are at risk of serious harm or abuse. This framework will support professionals to provide earlier multi-agency intervention than traditional safeguarding procedures and encourage referrals for low level concerns before they become significant and critical.”

    Source location

    Response from Northumberland Children's and Adults Safeguarding Partnership
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 February 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The Integrated Care Board is leading work to ensure escalation processes and safeguarding responsibilities are understood across primary care services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, as a Statutory Partner, the Integrated Care Board are taking the lead in relation to ensuring escalation processes and safeguarding responsibilities are widely known and understood across Primary Care services and will ensure evidence of this is shared with NCASP.”

    Source location

    Response from Northumberland Children's and Adults Safeguarding Partnership
    Page 3 · response
    Published 27 February 2025

    Open published response
  6. Mid Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Ella Louise Murray · 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

    Ella Louise Murray was 13 years old when she died at Kings College hospital on 15 November 2023 following an episode of hanging, after a period of self-harm, suicidal ideation and deteriorating mental health. The report raised concerns about the adequacy of her risk assessment and the failure to take urgent protective action, including removing her from home or convening an urgent multi-agency response. It also identified the lack of shared information and records across health, social care and education 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 take urgent safeguarding steps to remove children from an unsafe family home

    Wider context from the report

    “(1)During the course of the inquest it became clear that Ella was a child in a complex family situation and showing signs of deterioration of her mental health. Her school had raised concerns about her with social services and taken steps to make sure she was seen by healthcare professionals when she indicated to staff at school she wanted to end her life on 13 November 2023. She was assessed by mental health nursing staff and accepted to the caseload of the Intensive Home Treatment Team. She was seen the following day and told the staff nurse who saw her that she was frightened of her stepfather and had run away from home barefoot and police called but she was brought back home by her mother who “grabbed her face” the morning she was seen. She told the nurse that she did not want to be in the family home and would rather go to prison and would harm herself or others is she had to stay at home. (2) This disclosure led to the nurse making a Safeguarding Referral but this was made after she left Ella’s home and no urgent steps were taken to remove Ella either to a hospital bed or to ask social services to consider if she should be removed from the family home. Her school had raised concerns about her and she herself had indicated she wished to end her life. Evidence heard at the inquest was that this was the procedure in place and there is no shared access to records for all agencies and no way to convene an urgent multi-agency meeting to determine if Ella was safe to remain at home. Had steps been taken to share information between her school, social services and the mental health providers when she attend the emergency department on 13 November 2023 or early the following day rather than leave her at home she may have been removed from her home and may still be alive today. ”

    Source location

    Ella Louise Murray · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 5 · 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

    NHS England and the integrated care board are responsible for addressing the local concerns and explaining missing safeguarding action and mitigations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I understand that NHS England and Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board have also received this report and I trust that they will adequately address your concerns at the local level. I look forward to reading their responses and working with them on any proposed changes.”

    Source location

    2025-0182 Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 April 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Actions taken by the Integrated Care Board, social services and local authority fall outside the national policy or programme remit.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “My response to the Coroner focuses on those areas of concern that sit within NHS England’s national policy or programme remit. It would not be appropriate at this juncture for NHS England to provide comment on actions taken by Kent & Medway Integrated Care Board, Kent Social Services or the Local Authority involved in Ella’s care.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 April 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The Integrated Care Board is responsible for providing a separate system-level response detailing local actions taken.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Ella’s case includes learnings for teams across NHS England and local organisations, as well as more broadly. It is NHS England’s understanding that Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board will be responding to the Coroner separately with a system-level response detailing the local actions taken. NHS England will consider the ICB’s response in due course. My colleagues from national NHS England teams have also provided the below input.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 16 April 2025

    Open published response
  7. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Peter Good · 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

    Peter Good, a resident of Hilltop Hall Nursing Home, was admitted to hospital on 26 December 2023 with a blocked gastrostomy tube and was described on admission as being in poor condition, with concerns about his hygiene, wounds and oral care. He deteriorated despite antibiotic treatment and died on 9 January 2024 from pneumonia and complications associated with a previous cerebral infarction, Parkinson’s disease and skin ulceration. The principal concern was that Harbour Healthcare had not investigated how he was cared for at the nursing home, including potential ongoing risks to other residents and learning for staff and managers.

    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 investigate the care provided to residents following safeguarding concerns

    Wider context from the report

    “I am concerned in the light of this description that Harbour Healthcare as the owner and operator of Hilltop Hall has not instigated its own investigation into the way which Mr Good was cared for, with a view to considering any ongoing risk of harm to other residents and whether any learning can be derived for staff and managers of the home. ”

    Source location

    Peter Good · 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

    Complete a root cause analysis, full investigation and candid lessons learned for every death referred to the Coroner, with central monitoring.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “c) In all deaths that are referred to the coroner, Harbour Healthcare will complete a root cause analysis, a full investigation and complete a candid lessons learnt. This information has been shared across the company to promote best practice and mitigate risk. This information has been shared via a Bulletin to all home management teams, regional support teams and the Senior leadership team on the 19/2/25. This will be monitored by the Director of Strategic Risk, Safeguarding & Regulation.”

    Source location

    Response from Harbour Healthcare Ltd
    Page 4 · response
    Published 9 January 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The records indicate required care was delivered and do not support the description of Mr Good as dirty, unkempt, or neglected.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A full investigation has been carried out into the Coroner’s concerns. This included taking statements from those present who denied that he left the home appearing dirty and unkempt.”

    Source location

    Response from Harbour Healthcare Ltd
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 January 2025

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    An internal investigation was not considered usual without a specific reason, which was absent because the death was expected and notification was delayed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As Mr Good died in hospital, it would not be our usual practice to conduct an internal investigation unless there was reason to. We were not notified of the safeguarding referral until the Inquest. Furthermore, he was receiving End of Life care and his death was expected.”

    Source location

    Response from Harbour Healthcare Ltd
    Page 5 · response
    Published 9 January 2025

    Open published response
  8. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Regina Olufunmilola Ademiluyi · 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

    Regina Olufunmilola Ademiluyi was an 83-year-old woman who was bed-bound following surgery for a broken hip and died in March 2024 after declining cognition and physical health, malnutrition, a grade 4 sacral pressure ulcer and an aspiration incident. The report raised concerns that state-funded domiciliary care was not provided, and that the NHS Trust and local authority did not adequately assess or respond to safeguarding, mental-capacity and carer-support concerns.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficiently detailed safeguarding reports failing to trigger further investigation

    Wider context from the report

    “1. From October 2023 until her death in March 2024, Regina Ademiluyi was deprived of the state-funded domiciliary care to which she was entitled. The NHS Trust and local authority responsible for her care during this period failed to ensure effective care was provided in the following ways; a. A safeguarding report submitted by NHS district nurses was insufficiently detailed to reflect the concerns that had developed regarding the deceased. The content of the safeguarding report did not trigger the threshold to investigate the matter further. b. When faced with the limited information within the safeguarding report the local authority did not seek further information or clarification from the Trust on the basis of the report. c. The Trust failed to formally assess Mrs Ademiluyi’s mental capacity, had they done so it is possible that an IMCA would have been appointed to act as her voice, over-ruling her daughter’s views which may have resulted in effective care being put in place. d. Despite the concerns raised regarding the behaviour of Mrs Ademiluyi’s daughter no effort was made to offer a carers assessment to address whether she was overwhelmed by the task in hand. ”

    Source location

    Regina Olufunmilola Ademiluyi · 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

    Deliver quarterly safeguarding adults training for Newham Community Health Services staff, including guidance on completing high-quality referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “9. Whilst the detail in the safeguarding referral was not the reason the safeguarding concern was not investigated further; the Named Professional agrees that it provided insufficient information. To ensure this does not occur again, the following training and supervision has been arranged for Community Health Services staff in Newham area:”

    Source location

    Response from East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 25 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

    Remind Newham Community Health Services staff to follow the internal safeguarding escalation pathway and escalate barriers without waiting for monthly forums.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “11. Additionally, Newham Community Health Services staff have been reminded of the Trust’s internal escalation pathway which they are expected to follow when there are concerns about the safeguarding process between public bodies during supervision. The escalation pathway is a tool to support staff with recognising their”

    Source location

    Response from East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 25 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

    Add mandatory pressure-care refresher training, including reporting, notification and safeguarding interfaces, to the 2024/25 training plan for operational adult social care staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Action: | By who: | By when: 1.1 Immediate s.44 Safeguarding Adult Review (SAR) Referral completed and submitted for presentation at the next SAR subcommittee of Newham’s Safeguarding Adults Board on 7th May 2024 | Team Manager Neighbourhood Team | 27.03.24 1.2 Review and improve training and awareness of pressure care and risks for ASC staff. This will include:”

    Source location

    Response from London Borough of Newham
    Page 1 · response
    Published 25 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

    Maintain regular safeguarding meetings between ELFT Community Health Newham and Council neighbourhood teams to address referral quality, thresholds and recurring safeguarding themes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition to this summary of internal action, we also recognise that further activities need to be considered with our system partners at East London NHS Foundation Trust (ELFT). Regular Safeguarding meetings have now been established between ELFT Community Health Newham and the Council’s Neighbourhood Teams for Older People and Disabilities (mirroring the same processes which are in place in Mental Health services and have been shown to be successful in improving communication between professional groups). This space will be used to address issues such as the quality of referrals, thresholds and reoccurring safeguarding themes. Attendance at these meetings will also be reviewed to consider involvement from the Council’s Safeguarding Adults Team who are responsible for screening referrals.”

    Source location

    Response from London Borough of Newham
    Page 4 · response
    Published 25 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 safeguarding referral’s insufficient detail did not cause the investigation failure; LBN’s backlog delayed the safeguarding enquiry.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “6. According to LBN, the referral was screened according to their own internal safeguarding policy and the Trust was advised that it met threshold for the Section 42 safeguarding enquiry. However, LBN is managing a backlog of such referrals. Therefore, it was not addressed before Ms Ademiluyi’s sad death. Please refer to LBN’s response to this Regulation 28 report.”

    Source location

    Response from East London NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 25 March 2024

    Open published response
  9. Gateshead and South Tyneside

    AI-generated summary

    Christopher Paul Vickers · 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 Paul Vickers had worsening mental health and ADHD symptoms, with escalating risks of self-harm and harm to others. He was found with a ligature around his neck on 18 July 2021 and death was certified that day. The report identified repeated missed opportunities to coordinate his care through multi-disciplinary or multi-agency meetings and to make safeguarding referrals despite the escalating risks.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to make safeguarding referrals for formal safeguarding supervision

    Wider context from the report

    “1. There were multiple repeated missed opportunities to co-ordinate the Deceased’s care with the convention of multi-disciplinary and multi-agency meetings despite known escalating risk. 2. There were multiple repeated missed opportunities to make safeguarding referrals for formal safeguarding supervision from the safeguarding adult public protection team despite known escalating risk to self and to others. There remains a risk that future deaths could occur as the missed opportunities were significant and multiple and relate to clear processes and policies that were not followed. Current action that has been undertaken does not address my concerns. ”

    Source location

    Christopher Paul Vickers · 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

    Establish a daily multi-agency Police Triage Process to review Police Concern Notifications, share information and determine safeguarding actions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Police have a duty to recognise the signs and symptoms of abuse and to act on any concerns. This includes notifying the Local Authority of safeguarding concerns relating to vulnerable adults. The process for the Police to refer safeguarding concerns to South Tyneside Council is via a Police Concern Notification (ACN) form. Adult Social Care receives ACNs from Northumbria Police daily and the number of ACNs has significantly increased year-on-year.”

    Source location

    Response from South Tyneside Council
    Page 5 · response
    Published 14 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

    Launch the Safeguarding Adults Threshold Guidance Tool across adult social care teams, provide training and require recorded rationale for safeguarding decisions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1.6. Tools and Guidance”

    Source location

    Response from South Tyneside Council
    Page 9 · response
    Published 14 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

    Establish the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub to screen all safeguarding contacts and referrals through integrated multi-agency information gathering and decision-making.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2.1. Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH)”

    Source location

    Response from South Tyneside Council
    Page 11 · response
    Published 14 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

    Deliver bespoke training, email communications and team meetings to improve staff awareness and skills regarding safeguarding referrals and procedures.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As explained at the inquest, since Mr Vickers' death, there has been a lot of work within the Trust to improve awareness and skills, through bespoke training, email communication and team meetings. This has emphasised the importance of when referrals to safeguarding should be made, and what process should be followed.”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 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

    Conduct weekly telephone-triage reviews of selected crisis contacts to assess contact quality, safeguarding actions and whether multi-agency meetings were required.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Within Crisis services a new process of a weekly telephone triage review has been implemented. This looks at all crisis team, which have not required a face-to-face assessment, as was sometimes the case in the past and in relation to Mr Vickers.”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 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

    Use a safeguarding incident-reporting template to support consistent practitioner advice on referrals and multi-agency communication, with recommended actions monitored by managers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Safeguarding issues are reported through an incident reporting system, which is reviewed by a dedicated Safeguarding Practitioner who will offer any relevant safeguarding advice to the reporting service and its manager. This advice will, where appropriate, advise on local authority referral and multiagency communication, with any recommended actions monitored by managers. A template has now been implemented for the Safeguarding Practitioner to assist with ensuring that the advice is provided in a consistent way.”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 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

    Update and circulate the domestic abuse policy, including guidance on identifying abuse risk and requesting MARAC referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In Mr Vickers' case, the concerns highlighted around referrals to safeguarding related to issues of domestic abuse to others. Since Mr Vickers' death the Trust's Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) policy (now the domestic abuse policy) has been updated and circulated to staff via the Trustwide policy bulletin. As part of this policy, there is guidance for staff around identifying if someone is at risk of abuse and when a referral for a MARAC should be requested (which is a police coordinated multi agency meeting including health representatives, police and children and adult social care).”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 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

    Review the domestic violence policy to incorporate inquest and incident learning and clarify staff roles and responsibilities for safeguarding referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, following the inquest, a decision was made to review the domestic violence policy, and this is due to be completed by July 2024, to ensure that the Trust incorporates all the learning from this inquest, and other incidents, and provides clarity on staff roles and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding referrals.”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 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

    Conduct compliance audits against the domestic abuse policy to check that MARAC referrals are actioned in line with safeguarding advice.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A compliance audit against the domestic abuse policy will look to ensure that MARAC referrals are being actioned in line with Safeguarding advice.”

    Source location

    Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 May 2024

    Open published response
  10. Plymouth, Torbay and South Devon

    AI-generated summary

    Adrian Stuart Green · 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 Stuart Green, aged 55, died at Torbay Hospital on 1 November 2021 from alcoholic liver disease after living at Whiteley Court, where he was supposed to receive assistance with medication, support and care, meals, and shopping. The inquest heard that he did not receive appropriate care or visits for several weeks and was found in squalid and unhygienic conditions in an almost unresponsive state. Concerns included whether the local authority had adequate policies for overseeing independent providers, the CQC’s role and jurisdiction, and the lack of acknowledgement or response to a Disclosure and Barring Service referral.

    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 acknowledge safeguarding referrals and communicate action taken

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) ████████ made a referral to the Disclosure and Barring service in respect of the former manager’s actions and received no response as to what action if any the service were taking or an acknowledgement of her concerns . ”

    Source location

    Adrian Stuart Green · 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

    The Disclosure and Barring Service concern could not be answered by the Trust and should be raised directly with that Service.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “b) ████████ made a referral to the Disclosure and Barring service in respect of the former manager’s actions and received no response as to what action if any the service were taking or an acknowledgement of her concerns. Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust are unable to answer this concern and this should be raised directly with the Disclosure and Barring Service.”

    Source location

    Response from Torbay and Devon NHS
    Page 9 · response
    Published 6 March 2024

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026