Recurring concern

Failure to maintain an open and accountable safety culture

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 10 Feb 2015•Latest report 1 Aug 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures of organisational culture and leadership arrangements that suppress, discourage, dismiss or defensively respond to safety concerns, errors or poor practice, including lack of candour, fear of speaking up, failure to listen independently and failure to support accountable safety learning.

Not included

  • Excludes generic poor management, bullying, harassment or workplace dissatisfaction where no safety-concern, error-reporting, candour or accountable-response dimension is identified.
  • Excludes failures confined to a specific complaint, incident investigation, clinical pathway or operational process when organisational safety culture is not itself the shared unsafe condition.
  • Excludes ordinary disagreement or disputed professional judgement without evidence that the organisational culture suppresses or defensively handles safety concerns.
  • Excludes generic organisational learning or corrective-action failures where the specific unsafe condition is not an open and accountable culture for raising and addressing safety concerns.
Reports
15

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
17

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2015–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
31

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.

Care Quality Commission3
Department of Health and Social Care3
NHS England2
Aneurin Bevan University LHB1
Capital Care Group Limited1
Children's Commissioner for Wales1
Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Local Health Board1
Department for Education1
Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust1
Grange Clinic1
Gwent Police1
Health and Safety Executive1
Health Services Safety Investigations Body1
HM Prison and Probation Service1
Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Aniyah Jasmine Winston · 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

    Aniyah Jasmine Winston was delivered vaginally in an undetected breech presentation and was in poor condition at birth after manipulation during delivery. Resuscitation was commenced and ceased at 10:59am. The concerns included the challenges of undetected breech births and the administration of Syntocinon without further review, examination, counselling or a written prescription; professionals involved reportedly felt unable to challenge the decision.

    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 multidisciplinary team members to challenge incorrect clinical decisions

    Wider context from the report

    “2. The inquest was told by a number of medical professionals involved in Aniyah's birth that they whilst they felt the decision to give Syntocinon was incorrect they did not feel comfortable challenging the decision. The expert instructed was clear that at the time it was given it should not have been. The Trust has since the death of Aniyah put in place a detailed programme to improve confidence in challenging decision-making within a MDT setting. However the extent of recognition of the issue and steps to counter it nationally were unclear. ”

    Source location

    Aniyah Jasmine Winston · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  2. Gwent

    AI-generated summary

    ELLIE MAY CLARK · 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

    Ellie May Clark was a child with severe asthma who became seriously unwell after attending her GP surgery and was later found to have died from bronchial asthma. The report identified concerns about care planning, triage delays and systems, her being turned away from an emergency appointment without clinical assessment or safeguarding advice, the recording of her severe asthma, and staff support when challenging decisions.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of support for staff who challenge clinical decisions or seek second opinions

    Wider context from the report

    “(6) Support staff did not feel they would be supported if they challenged a doctor's decision or sought a second opinion. ”

    Source location

    ELLIE MAY CLARK · 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

    Direct management of service delivery and oversight of independent primary care contractor staff falls outside the Health Board’s functions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It may be helpful to clarify that the Health Board does not directly manage the delivery of services or the oversight of staff employed within independent primary care contractors. Independent contractors are directly responsible for ensuring that the delivery of services is safe and also for ensuring that services conform to the expected professional standards and regulations and are appropriately accessible to patients. Nonetheless, there is a requirement for practices to provide assurance to the Health Board in respect of the adequacy of services provided. The Health Board has established processes to monitor the compliance of practices with contractual requirements and to intervene where it has concerns, contractually or professionally.”

    Source location

    2018-0066-Response-by-University-Health-Board
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 June 2018

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Independent primary care contractors are responsible for safe service delivery, professional standards, regulatory compliance and patient accessibility.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It may be helpful to clarify that the Health Board does not directly manage the delivery of services or the oversight of staff employed within independent primary care contractors. Independent contractors are directly responsible for ensuring that the delivery of services is safe and also for ensuring that services conform to the expected professional standards and regulations and are appropriately accessible to patients. Nonetheless, there is a requirement for practices to provide assurance to the Health Board in respect of the adequacy of services provided. The Health Board has established processes to monitor the compliance of practices with contractual requirements and to intervene where it has concerns, contractually or professionally.”

    Source location

    2018-0066-Response-by-University-Health-Board
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 June 2018

    Open published response
  3. Nottinghamshire

    AI-generated summary

    James David Allbones · 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

    James David Allbones, aged five, died from sepsis caused by Influenza B virus infection at Bassetlaw Hospital on 2 March 2016, after being admitted within 12 hours and having been unwell with cough and breathlessness. The report identified concerns that the seriousness of his condition and red-flag signs of sepsis were not recognised, sepsis fluid management was not given, Consultant management and review were limited, and he was not considered early for transfer to a hospital providing Paediatric Intensive Care. Further concerns included paediatric staffing, handover arrangements, and communication about deteriorating children.

    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 support frank discussion and staff speaking up about deteriorating children

    Wider context from the report

    “that the Consultant team have rejected a model of care that encourages frank discussion with nursing and other staff on the ward, aimed at helping all staff speak up when worried about a deterioration child (the RCPCH SAFE model) ”

    Source location

    James David Allbones · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  4. Central Lincolnshire

    AI-generated summary

    Thor Harrison Dalhaug · 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

    Thor Dalhaug was delivered by caesarean section on 23 September 2013 in poor condition after difficulties delivering his deeply engaged head, and died approximately one hour after birth. The report identified concerns including lack of supervision of the operating surgeon, use of an inappropriate forceps technique, inadequate contemporaneous records and shortcomings in the internal investigation and disclosure of the circumstances of his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Interference with candid disclosure of the circumstances of a death

    Wider context from the report

    “(IV) The failure to identify in the immediate aftermath of Thor's death that the operating surgeons had neglected to make a full note of the circumstances in which he died and to obligate them to provide the same; in particular ████████ was advised to amend the Caesarean pro forma, to include the fact that forceps were used in the interests of candour. He was then dissuaded from doing so by senior management as a result of their concerns as to how this would be perceived if the matter was investigated. This raises very serious concerns as to the degree of candour in disclosing the circumstances of this death. What steps have been taken to obviate a repetition of this behaviour in the future? ”

    Source location

    Thor Harrison Dalhaug · 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

    Audit the accuracy of medical-record information and remind medical and midwifery staff of their candour duties.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust fully accepts, however, that any inference that a later timed addendum should not be added to provide greater clarity to the records was not appropriate. By way of reassurance, whilst reminding staff of the need to complete full contemporaneous notes we will also be auditing the accuracy of information within medical records, the Clinical Director and Head of Midwifery have written to all medical and midwifery staff to remind them of their duties regarding candour.”

    Source location

    2015-0063-Response-by-United-Lincolnshire-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 4 · response
    Published 6 March 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Embed the duty of candour into complaints and serious-incident systems, with compliance reported to the Quality Governance Committee.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The duty of candour has been incorporated into our complaints policy. It is also incorporated into our DATIX incident management system for moderate and severe harms. The compliance with the documentation of duty of candour is reported upward to the Quality Governance Committee – one of four sub-committees that report to the Trust Board.”

    Source location

    2015-0063-Response-by-United-Lincolnshire-Hospitals-NHS-Trust
    Page 5 · response
    Published 6 March 2015

    Open published response
  5. Leicester City and South Leicestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Jane Helen Robinson · 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

    Jane Helen Robinson, who had alcoholic liver disease with ascites, was admitted to hospital with shortness of breath and underwent a TIPS procedure. Her condition deteriorated and she died on 4 May 2014; the inquest recorded natural causes. Concerns included basic observations reportedly not being recorded, lack of senior review and written rationale for observation frequency, and no evidence of a reporting and support system for staff not meeting accepted standards.

    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 support for healthcare professionals who report departures from accepted standards

    Wider context from the report

    “(4) No evidence of any reporting system of healthcare professionals that do not practice in accordance with accepted standards and no evidence of support given to those who do report. ”

    Source location

    Jane Helen Robinson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026