Recurring concern

Inadequate assurance and review of commissioned care services and care packages

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 29 Jul 2022•Latest report 2 Apr 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes mandatory reviews, quality checks and assurance mechanisms for commissioned, privately arranged or packaged care provision.

Not included

  • Direct care-delivery failures with no commissioning or assurance deficiency
  • Clinical care-plan review within a provider
  • Regulatory inspection outside the commissioning relationship
Reports
4

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
5

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2022–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
9

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 England2
Cygnet Health Care Limited1
Department of Health and Social Care1
Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk1
NHS North West London Integrated Care Board1

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. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Peter PETTITT · 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 PETTITT, aged 86, died on 11 September 2023 after developing sepsis due to bronchopneumonia and acute pyelonephritis. The report raised concerns about inadequate care records, gaps in medication and catheter support, and insufficiently assured training and management arrangements for the commissioned care provided to him.

    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

    Inadequate assurance of commissioned care services

    Wider context from the report

    “Training material and records provided to the Court suggested that no formal, assured training arrangements were in place to deliver the commissioned care to Mr. PETTITT. Evidence of subsequent actions following Mr. PETTITT’s death provided no confidence to the Court that inadequacies in training, assurance and management identified at the time of Mr. PETTITT’s death have subsequently been addressed. ”

    Source location

    Peter PETTITT · 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 care records and care-plan activities, addressing identified concerns and non-compliance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following the incident, Multi-Care undertook a full audit of all care records and care plan activities across the service. Any concerns or areas of non-compliance identified during the audit process were addressed immediately.”

    Source location

    Response from Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 April 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

    Implement weekly governance meetings and strengthened supervision, performance management, auditing, competency review, senior oversight and stakeholder feedback processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Multi-Care has significantly strengthened management oversight and governance arrangements to ensure sustained improvement and organisational learning.”

    Source location

    Response from Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 April 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

    Commission and maintain a quarterly programme of external audits and service reviews for independent scrutiny.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To further strengthen independent scrutiny, Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk Ltd. commissioned external audits and service reviews. These reviews include ongoing involvement and oversight from Daniel Joy (Suffolk County Council Commissioning and Contracts Officer, Strategic Commissioning & Contract Management Adult & Community Services). Additionally, they conducted a PAMMS inspection on the 9th of April 2025, which resulted in a "Good" standard rating. This followed up on a document review from the 30th of March 2026, which resulted in good feedback.”

    Source location

    Response from Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 April 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

    Review quality-assurance reporting directly at Board level to maintain accountability for care quality and compliance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Quality assurance reporting is now reviewed directly by the Board of Directors to ensure accountability and sustained oversight of care quality and compliance.”

    Source location

    Response from Multi-Care Community Services Suffolk
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 April 2026

    Open published response
  2. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Diane Margaret Austin-Martin · 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

    Diane Margaret Austin-Martin was a vulnerable adult with multiple sclerosis and significant care needs who was found severely underweight, with multiple pressure ulcers, in filthy and squalid living conditions on 22 March 2021. The report identified concerns about failures to notify Stockport Social Services of her move, the absence of adequate quality assurance for private care, and her becoming unseen by agencies after an initial benefits claim and GP visit.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a mechanism to ensure appropriate quality of privately arranged care

    Wider context from the report

    “2. DWP were aware of her presence and payments were made recognising her needs but there was no mechanism to ensure that the care provided was of an appropriate quality; 3. The inquest heard that where a private care arrangement exists as in this case there is no mechanism to ensure that the care is of a sufficient and appropriate quality in contrast to a resident of a care home; ”

    Source location

    Diane Margaret Austin-Martin · 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

    Local authority safeguarding duties provide a mechanism to investigate private home-care arrangements where poor quality places an adult at risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Adult safeguarding is relevant because local authorities have a duty, under the Care Act 2014, to make enquiries when they suspect that an adult with care and support needs is a) at risk of abuse or neglect and b) unable to protect themselves as a result of those needs. You were concerned that there is no mechanism to ensure that domiciliary care is of a sufficient and appropriate quality, in contrast to regulation of care homes. While it is correct that CQC does not inspect unregulated home care settings, local authority adult safeguarding duties do provide a mechanism by which to investigate private home care arrangements if the quality of care puts the cared-for person at risk of harm.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 October 2022

    Open published response
  3. South Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Chelsea Blue Louise Mooney · 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

    Chelsea Blue Louise Mooney died two days after tying two non-fixed ligatures while in hospital, following inadequate observations and delays in the emergency response. Principal concerns included insufficient review of her diagnosis, inadequate exploration of allegations and information-sharing decisions, a failure to learn from previous ligature incidents, uncertainty among staff about responding to her, and delays and poor coordination during the final emergency response.

    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 commissioners to obtain assurance about ligature practice and individual safety

    Wider context from the report

    “9. There were opportunities for commissioners to support Cygnет earlier when case managing Chelsea's package of care. The new behaviour of using ligatures should have invited professional curiosity from Commissioners who should have sought assurance about the overall practice of ligature use and intervention from Cygnет but also what that meant specifically for Chelsea and how Cygnет were keeping her safe. This may have led to a review by Cygnет and a better understanding of Chelsea's ligature use. ”

    Source location

    Chelsea Blue Louise Mooney · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Weekly meetings, reports, care-plan discussions and review of serious incidents were considered sufficient commissioner oversight of ligature risks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As set out in our letter to the Coroner’s Court dated 23 June 2022 (see copy attached for ease of reference), the NHS England Case Manager attended weekly meetings at Cygnet Hospital Sheffield, and this included discussions about Chelsea’s care. The Case Manager was unable to physically visit Chelsea due to COVID19 visiting restrictions after March 2020. However, weekly virtual contact was maintained through the meetings with Cygnet and with attendance at Care Programme Approach (CPA) meetings. The case manager saw Chelsea frequently and they discussed the care she was receiving. Chelsea reported to her Case Manager that she had a good relationship with ward staff, and she was able to talk to them and always said she was happy on the ward.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 1 · response
    Published 3 October 2022

    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 England is responsible for commissioning and assuring the quality of the service, including management of risk and ward culture.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “40. NHS England are responsible for the commissioning and quality of the service they are commissioning. The management of risk and ward culture are central to their quality assurance.”

    Source location

    Response from Cygnet Health Care
    Page 10 · response
    Published 3 October 2022

    Open published response
  4. West London

    AI-generated summary

    Asher William Robert Sinclair · 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

    Asher William Robert Sinclair was a ventilator-dependent child who died in hospital on 8 October 2019 after life support was withdrawn, following a displaced tracheal tube and a prolonged loss of oxygen. The report identified concerns about inadequate staffing, training, planning, oversight, review and escalation within his complex care package, including that he was left in the care of a sole nurse who did not follow the emergency procedure.

    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 conduct mandatory care-package quality checks and reviews

    Wider context from the report

    “The care package, despite being described as one of the most complex and most expensive was not appropriately reviewed and there was no mandatory system of quality checks or formal review when there was a significant change in family circumstances. Quarterly reviews were not carried out without explanation. ”

    Source location

    Asher William Robert Sinclair · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of scrutiny and reconciliation of the care package

    Wider context from the report

    “There was a lack of scrutiny or reconciliation of Asher’s care package, which could have identified gaps that needed to be addressed. ”

    Source location

    Asher William Robert Sinclair · 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

    Conduct scheduled and needs-based care-package reviews with families and multidisciplinary teams, formally record and panel-discuss them, and monitor performance through senior managers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In accordance with the national framework, reviews are undertaken of all children’s packages of care, initially at three months from a new package of care commencing and then on an annual basis or more frequently where there is a need/change of circumstance identified by the family, care provider or health/social care professional. All reviews are now undertaken with the family and the multidisciplinary team involved in the child’s care. Reviews are now recorded and discussed formally”

    Source location

    Response from NHS NorthWest London
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 October 2022

    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

    Hold quarterly case-manager meetings with commissioned providers’ clinical leads and the child’s lead professional to identify concerns and monitor whether clinical needs are safely met.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The children’s continuing care case managers now meet at quarterly intervals with the clinical leads for the provider commissioned to provide a children’s care package, within this meeting, the appropriate lead professional for the child is also involved, to identify any clinical concerns and monitor the provision of the package of care, as well as identifying and ensuring that the child’s clinical needs are being safely and appropriately met.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS NorthWest London
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 October 2022

    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

    Issue NHS standard contracts requiring provider quality checks, monthly care reports, staff competency assurance and care-package risk assessments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “When commencing a package of care, an NHS standard contract is issued to all providers commissioned by NHS North West London which sets out specific key performance indicators, including;”

    Source location

    Response from NHS NorthWest London
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 October 2022

    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 quarterly monitoring meetings between senior continuing-care managers, the care brokerage officer and commissioned care providers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Senior Managers responsible for children’s continuing care and our care brokerage officer meet with commissioned care providers on a quarterly basis to monitor the care packages.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS NorthWest London
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 October 2022

    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

    Benchmark and peer-review care packages to identify support hours meeting assessed clinical needs and promote safe, fair and consistent provision.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Benchmarking of care is now undertaken to identify hours of support to meet assessed children’s clinical needs. This is also peer reviewed, to ensure safe, fair and consistent packages of care are provided.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS NorthWest London
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 October 2022

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026