Recurring concern
Failure of police operational communications to reliably share safety-critical information
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 21 Oct 2013•Latest report 17 Mar 2026
What this concern includes
Includes failures in police force control, incident, custody or inter-force communications where relevant risk or safety information is not reliably shared with attending personnel or partner services, including the anchor's omission of recent s136 detention information and failures to pass complete incident information to attending officers.
Not included
- Excludes generic clinical, social-care or non-police handover and documentation failures unless they are explicitly part of a police operational communication pathway.
- Excludes failures concerning the content, training or policy of a police process where communication of safety-critical information is not itself the shared unsafe condition.
- Excludes generic information-technology, staffing or supervision deficiencies that are not explicitly tied to the reliability of police operational communications.
- Excludes communications about non-safety-critical administrative information.
- Reports
- 34
- Individual concerns
- 40
- Date range
- 2013–2026
- Stated actions
- 65
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to pass relevant incident and vulnerability information to ambulance and hospital staff
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Improve officers’ sharing of vital incident information with colleagues, ambulance crews and medical staff.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to share complete relevant information between police and CPS
This report raised 21 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Re-issue guidance to CPS Direct prosecutors requiring MG3 records to include details of relevant police conversations.
Stated by CPS North West
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
The police are responsible for complying with prosecutor action plans and providing further evidence, material or information within agreed periods.
Stated by CPS North West
-
Position
Other named respondents are responsible for addressing the coroner’s concerns; this response covers only broader learning-sharing issues within its remit.
Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to share relevant police information with Probation
This report raised 8 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Operate the MK-flag and MASH process to queue relevant offender-record changes, share information with NPS, and retain emails for audit.
Stated by Northumbria Police -
Action
Update Category 2 Level 1 offender warning screens with instructions requiring officers to share risk-relevant information with the relevant probation area.
Stated by Northumbria Police -
Action
Disseminate force-wide bulletins informing and reinforcing officers’ responsibility to share relevant information with NPS.
Stated by Northumbria Police
-
Action
Add newly notified Category 2 Level 1 offenders to Northumbria Police systems immediately upon notification from NPS.
Stated by Northumbria Police
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
Existing Northumbria Constabulary information-sharing steps are accepted by MAPPA and NPS representatives as a permanent solution at this time.
Stated by HM Prison and Probation Service
-
Position
The agreed police and probation information-sharing process is considered definitive and sufficient, although it may evolve with future IT development.
Stated by Northumbria Police
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to pass relevant rider age information to tactical decision-makers
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Maintain a dedicated six-role police pursuits and follows pod supporting risk assessment and information gathering.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service -
Action
Review the pod’s roles and responsibilities to maximise information and intelligence opportunities by 31 October 2019.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service -
Action
Consider whether to introduce a mandatory checklist of information sources at the start of pursuits.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service
-
Action
Ensure Pan London courses and refresher training include information and intelligence-gathering instruction.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The dedicated pursuits pod and its resources are considered sufficient to address the concern, although its practices will be reviewed further.
Stated by Metropolitan Police Service
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of radio read-back checks for critical information
This report raised 7 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide police control with essential incident information
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised2
Failure to ensure the Police Search Advisor is aware of recommendations for a more thorough search
Failure to ensure the Police Search Advisor is aware of the cursory nature of a graveyard search
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Refer the case to the National Missing Persons Operational Group to consider working with POLSA on amending search-coordination guidance.
Stated by Christopher Johnson
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
The individual search decisions appeared reasonable, although a more comprehensive search strategy and recording process was needed.
Stated by Christopher Johnson
-
Position
The National Missing Persons Operational Group will consider amending guidance on coordinating, tasking and recording similar searches with POLSA involvement.
Stated by Christopher Johnson
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to convey the need for urgent police intervention in a welfare-check request
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
-
Position
The patient did not display behaviour indicating immediate risk, requiring detention, restraint, or an active police search.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust and Whittington Health NHS Trust
-
Position
The patient was not considered an immediate risk requiring detention, restraint, or an active police search.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust and Whittington Health NHS Trust -
Position
Existing joint police protocols already govern communication about people who abscond or go missing, including conveying immediate-risk information.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust and Whittington Health NHS Trust
-
Concerns raised2
Failure to inform the GP when a welfare check request is downgraded
Failure to share welfare check policy changes with the London Ambulance Service
This report raised 10 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Provide the current Metropolitan Police welfare-check briefing note to address uncertainty about the policy version in force.
Stated by London Ambulance Service NHS Trust -
Action
Incorporate the March 2015 Metropolitan Police welfare-check policy into the LAS/MPS Joint Memorandum of Understanding through the annual review process.
Stated by London Ambulance Service NHS Trust
-
Concerns raised2
Failure to pass complete incident information to attending officers
Failure to provide Appropriate Adults with relevant custody risk information
This report raised 26 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026