Recipient

Adferiad Recovery

Pin Request correction

First report 14 Jul 2023•Latest report 14 Jul 2023

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Care-home operator. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Adferiad Recovery linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. North Wales (East and Central)

    AI-generated summary

    Emily Corfield · 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

    Emily Corfield, aged 41, was found deceased at home on 19 September 2021 after a history of alcohol misuse and two hospital admissions for coffee ground vomiting and alcohol withdrawal. The principal concern was the lack of evidence that the alcohol liaison team provided inpatient or outpatient support or that referrals to external organisations were made.

    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. The report was sent to Adferiad Recovery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unavailability of telephone communication for people requiring support

    Wider context from the report

    “Firstly, evidence was heard during the Inquest that Emily had self-referred on a number of occasions for support to Adferiad (formerly Cais). It could not be established whether or not Emily had received written correspondence from them relating to appointments and/or offer of support as correspondence was not retained by Adferiad. Emily was on occasion closed to the service for not having responded to correspondence. The system at the time was that communicating with service users was in writing only. It appears that more recently, policies and procedures have been established to ensure that correspondence relating to those who require support and / or contact the service is now retained though these were not provided at the Inquest. Without clear and thorough policies and procedures relating to all contact with service users or those who seek support, the organisation will not be able to adequately monitor the support processes. Secondly, it was indicated that due to resource restrictions that communication cannot be by telephone with those requiring support / service users (in writing only) and the waiting time for support sessions / counselling is long. This will have a detrimental impact and deaths may occur if the treatment and support is not afforded in a timely manner. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Adferiad Recovery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to retain and monitor correspondence relating to service users and people seeking support

    Wider context from the report

    “Firstly, evidence was heard during the Inquest that Emily had self-referred on a number of occasions for support to Adferiad (formerly Cais). It could not be established whether or not Emily had received written correspondence from them relating to appointments and/or offer of support as correspondence was not retained by Adferiad. Emily was on occasion closed to the service for not having responded to correspondence. The system at the time was that communicating with service users was in writing only. It appears that more recently, policies and procedures have been established to ensure that correspondence relating to those who require support and / or contact the service is now retained though these were not provided at the Inquest. Without clear and thorough policies and procedures relating to all contact with service users or those who seek support, the organisation will not be able to adequately monitor the support processes. Secondly, it was indicated that due to resource restrictions that communication cannot be by telephone with those requiring support / service users (in writing only) and the waiting time for support sessions / counselling is long. This will have a detrimental impact and deaths may occur if the treatment and support is not afforded in a timely manner. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Adferiad Recovery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delays in providing support sessions and counselling

    Wider context from the report

    “Firstly, evidence was heard during the Inquest that Emily had self-referred on a number of occasions for support to Adferiad (formerly Cais). It could not be established whether or not Emily had received written correspondence from them relating to appointments and/or offer of support as correspondence was not retained by Adferiad. Emily was on occasion closed to the service for not having responded to correspondence. The system at the time was that communicating with service users was in writing only. It appears that more recently, policies and procedures have been established to ensure that correspondence relating to those who require support and / or contact the service is now retained though these were not provided at the Inquest. Without clear and thorough policies and procedures relating to all contact with service users or those who seek support, the organisation will not be able to adequately monitor the support processes. Secondly, it was indicated that due to resource restrictions that communication cannot be by telephone with those requiring support / service users (in writing only) and the waiting time for support sessions / counselling is long. This will have a detrimental impact and deaths may occur if the treatment and support is not afforded in a timely manner. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Adferiad Recovery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide alcohol liaison team support to inpatients and outpatients

    Wider context from the report

    “Emily had two inpatient admissions in the year of her death. Whilst the clinician had noted that she was for referral to the alcohol liaison team there was no evidence that Emily had in fact received any input from them either as an inpatient or as an outpatient nor any referrals to external organisations. It is concerning that there appears to have been no evidence that Emily was receiving support from the Alcohol Liaison Team whilst an inpatient on either occasion despite her long history of alcohol misuse and need for support. In the event that clinicians advise referral to alcohol liaison team, either as an inpatient or as an outpatient there ought to be systems and processes to ensure that this occurs. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Adferiad Recovery; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of systems and processes to ensure completion of alcohol liaison team referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “Emily had two inpatient admissions in the year of her death. Whilst the clinician had noted that she was for referral to the alcohol liaison team there was no evidence that Emily had in fact received any input from them either as an inpatient or as an outpatient nor any referrals to external organisations. It is concerning that there appears to have been no evidence that Emily was receiving support from the Alcohol Liaison Team whilst an inpatient on either occasion despite her long history of alcohol misuse and need for support. In the event that clinicians advise referral to alcohol liaison team, either as an inpatient or as an outpatient there ought to be systems and processes to ensure that this occurs. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026