Recurring concern

Unreliable daily logs for multidisciplinary prisoner safety information

First to latest report 10 Nov 2022 — 27 Apr 2023

Reports that mention this concern
2
Times this concern has been raised
2
Stated actions linked to this concern
2

What this concern includes

Includes failures in the dedicated use, accessibility, reliability and maintenance of daily logs used by multidisciplinary prison or care teams to record, communicate or review safety-relevant information.

What is not included
  • Excludes generic clinical, custody or care-record deficiencies where no daily log is the material safety control.
  • Excludes other logs, such as movement, incident or observation logs, unless the assertion specifically concerns the same multidisciplinary daily-log process.
  • Excludes failures to act on complete and reliable daily-log information when the daily-log process itself operated adequately.
  • Excludes generic staffing, communication or documentation deficiencies that do not directly impair the reliability or use of the daily log.

Reports and published responses 2 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. West Sussex, Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Caroline Victoria Forte · 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 Victoria Forte had been receiving inpatient mental health treatment and was granted Section 17 weekend leave to stay at her parents' address. She was found hanging on 20 February 2022. Concerns included inadequate communication within the ward and with her family, the absence of an overarching care plan or risk assessment before leave, failure to follow the Section 17 leave policy, and difficulties sharing information from her private psychiatrist with NHS 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 complete the daily care log

    Wider context from the report

    “The Jury in their findings found the following matter contributed to the death of Caroline namely 1. Inadequate communication within Amberley Ward. 2. Inadequate communication between Amberley ward and Caroline's family. 3. No evidence of an overnight care plan or risk assessment prior to leaving the ward. 4. Failure to follow the section 17 leave of Absence policy. During the course of the evidence we heard that:- a) The daily care log was not completed so it was not possible to ascertain who was the last person to see Caroline leave the ward. b) There was no record to show which nurse carried out a risk assessment before she left. c) There was no overnight care plan. d) The “My care and safety plan” had not been updated with regards to “My family will do” section. e) The family were not provided with a copy of the Section 17 leave form f) At the time of this leave the family were unaware that Caroline had self-harmed in the hospital by tying a ligature. Therefore, the family told the Inquest that they therefore had no strategies in place to minimise the risks of such an event. Similarly there was no communication with the hospital as to how to minimise Caroline’s risk. f) Senior Officers from the ward showed a lack of knowledge of the Trust’s own Section 17 leave policy and Safe and Effective Assessment & Management of Clinical risk: Risk Management Police and Procedure. ”

    Source location

    Caroline Victoria Forte · 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

    Introduce the new Record of Patient Leaving Ward document across Trust wards and provide local staff training on its consistent use.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “During the aforementioned improvement works, it was recognised that the existing 'log' did not sufficiently enable staff to be prompted to capture all relevant information, and needed improving in a number of areas. So, new documentation has now been created, in the form of a new 'Record of patient leaving ward' document, a copy of which I attach. This will be introduced on the Trust's wards from 1 July, with local training being provided to staff to ensure the importance of its consistent use is fully understood. As with any new documentation there will then be a review of the new documentation's efficacy; this will be done in 3 months' time and the findings reported through the Trust's Acute Care Forum.”

    Source location

    Response from Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 May 2023

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review the new Record of Patient Leaving Ward document’s effectiveness after three months and report findings to the Acute Care Forum.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “During the aforementioned improvement works, it was recognised that the existing 'log' did not sufficiently enable staff to be prompted to capture all relevant information, and needed improving in a number of areas. So, new documentation has now been created, in the form of a new 'Record of patient leaving ward' document, a copy of which I attach. This will be introduced on the Trust's wards from 1 July, with local training being provided to staff to ensure the importance of its consistent use is fully understood. As with any new documentation there will then be a review of the new documentation's efficacy; this will be done in 3 months' time and the findings reported through the Trust's Acute Care Forum.”

    Source location

    Response from Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 5 May 2023

    Open published response

  2. County Durham and Darlington

    AI-generated summary

    Michael Raymond SMITH · Prevention of Future Deaths report

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

    Report summary

    Michael Raymond SMITH entered HMP Durham on 10 July 2020, was transferred to SACU after being found to have packages concealed internally, and was discovered self-suspended on 11 July; he died in hospital on 13 July 2020. The principal concerns included the absence of medical and mental health assessments, inadequate staffing while he was subject to three-man unlock, delays in responding to the suspension, and weaknesses in SACU record keeping and multidisciplinary oversight.

    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

    Under-utilisation of the daily log as a multidisciplinary tool

    Wider context from the report

    “Between his arrival in SACU at 18.37 on 10 July 2020 and his being discovered self suspended with a ligature at 17.45 on 11 July 2020 there, Michael was subject to a 3 man unlock. On the morning of 11 July, a Saturday, there were 3 officers on duty on SACU. This did permit his cell to be unlocked for a meal to be delivered and for a cursory one and a half minute conversation with a nurse that fell short, on her evidence, of an actual medical examination. On the afternoon of 11 July there were only one or (briefly) two officers on SACU duty per the staff duty log, albeit, as CCTV footage shows, more officers did attend intermittently for specific tasks. The SACU staff duty log shows only one officer on duty for the whole afternoon to 17.00. In any event medical assessments of Michael were not undertaken at any stage while he was on SACU, the reason being given that he was on three man unlock. It appears that there were never sufficient staff available for a dedicated medical assessment to be undertaken. This notwithstanding that evidence from prison officers and a nurse was that during the course of the afternoon Michael`s presentation had become “angrier” and “bizarre”. In fact, it is now known, he had been ingesting toxic amounts ████████, an unlicensed drug, he had secreted into the prison (his being detected at reception as plugged lead him to SACU). ████████ is a highly potent ████████ which effects judgement and lowers inhibitions. The jury subsequently concluded that the absence of medical, and mental health, assessments, and the use of the ████████ (which was never diagnosed), contributed to the Michael`s death. From 17.00, when patrol state commenced, there was clearly only one officer on duty and present. When she discovered Michael self suspended that officer made a perfectly defensible dynamic assessment, electing not to enter the cell unsupported. She made ready to enter for when back up arrived. In the event, partly because there was another discipline incident unfolding on a different wing, this took 2-3 minutes. There were only 16 prison officers available while on patrol state across the entire prison, and they were already at full stretch, and probably beyond it (the Tactical Resources Unit from Doncaster were en route). The evidence was that without knowing precisely when Michael self-suspended any such delay could not be held, on a balance of probabilities, to have entered the chain of causation death. However, the fact remains that there was a delay consequent to Michael being on a three man unlock but there being only a single officer available on SACU while in patrol state. It is reasonable to conjecture that this could have made the difference between life and death in this case, and the repetition of these circumstances could well do so in future. In your response dated 15 November 2021 to the Regulation 28 report of HM Assistant Coroner James Thompson of 21 September 2021 following the Inquest into the death of Charlie Brian Todd at HMP Durham, you wrote, amongst other things: “There is clear management oversight of the SACU”. This is not what the evidence in the instance case showed. Rather, what it made clear was that: 1) the SACU staff log plus CCTV further demonstrated that officers, including officers not posted to SACU, but covering for a shift, were required to allocate various task between themselves on an ad-hoc basis” was an ongoing problem, and this appears to be still ongoing; 2) NOMIS record keeping was unhelpfully sparse (“you would expect more” was the evidence of SACU manager); 3) the daily log was under-utilised as a multi-disciplinary tool, and this appears to be ongoing. You also stated: “I am confident that the staffing levels and supervisory arrangements in place are sufficient to deliver all of the SACU`s regime”. This, too, is clearly not the case. Staffing levels remain the same. Safeguarding of prisoners is comprised as a consequence. With a three man unlock imposed, there should be three officers available at all times to ensure safety. Staffing levels at HMP Durham should be increased. ”

    Source location

    Michael Raymond SMITH · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026