Recipient

City Health Care Partnership CIC

First report 9 Mar 2024•Latest report 9 Mar 2024

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Community interest company. 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
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
2

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
4

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.

100%published responses found
4stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from City Health Care Partnership CIC linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. East Riding and Hull

    AI-generated summary

    Linda Heath · 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

    Linda Heath was discharged from hospital with a sacral sore, but the discharge information did not include a required district nursing referral and no referral was made. Her condition worsened, she was admitted to hospital, and she died on 31 March 2022 from sepsis caused by an infected sacral sore. The substantive concerns included inadequate discharge information, failure to arrange district nursing care, insufficient follow-up after discharge, and over-reliance on private domiciliary carers without sufficient enquiry into their remit.

    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 City Health Care Partnership CIC; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficient inquiry into the parameters of care provided by private domiciliary carers

    Wider context from the report

    “(4) An over reliance upon private hygiene care packages with insufficient inquiry into the parameters of care provided by the private domiciliary carers. ”
    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 City Health Care Partnership CIC; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of immediate discharge summaries to include relevant and sufficient community treatment and nursing information

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The Immediate Discharge Summary did not include relevant or sufficient information about treatment in the community needs or a nursing summary. ”
    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 City Health Care Partnership CIC; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Absence of GP follow-up triggers for recently discharged patients with worsening conditions and missed routine appointments

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) No trigger appears to exist whereby GPs conduct follow up enquiries or visits to patients who have recently been discharged from hospital and who are complaining of a condition which may worsen and failing to attend routine appointments due to a worsening of their condition. ”
    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 City Health Care Partnership CIC; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to make post-discharge referrals for patients needing district nursing care

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Despite the presence of a difficult sacral sore which would have benefitted from district nursing care, no referral was made post discharge by the GP surgery. ”
    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

    Explore enabling external SystmOne users to send referrals directly into CHCP’s SystmOne system.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Internally CHCP services can send SystmOne to SystmOne referrals, (SystmOne is CHCP main Electronic Care Record (ECR) system). CHCP is currently exploring options to enable external SystmOne users to also send SystmOne to SystmOne referrals.”

    Source location

    Response from City Healthcare Partnership Hull
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 May 2024

    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

    Share referral criteria, available services and referral instructions regularly with GPs and other healthcare organisations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• CHCP regularly shares updates in relation to the referral criteria, services offered and how to refer with GPs and other HCP organisations including Secondary Care, and GPs and HCP organisations also have access to the Directory of Services (DoS) via www.directoryofservices.nhs.uk & NHS Service Finder via www.servicefinder.nhs.uk”

    Source location

    Response from City Healthcare Partnership Hull
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 May 2024

    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

    Participate in HUTH’s time-limited task group to explore digital discharge-planning solutions for patients with complex wounds or pressure ulcers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The preferable solution to transferring care between CHCP and HUTH would be a digital solution between the two ECRs. CHCP TVNs are currently attending a time limited Task and Finish Group established by HUTH in relation to exploring discharge planning for patients with complex wounds/pressure ulcers and seek a digital solution. This Task and Finish Group is in addition to the Triangulation meetings.”

    Source location

    Response from City Healthcare Partnership Hull
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 May 2024

    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

    Feedback on the concerns cannot be provided because no referral was made to Community Nursing, and the referral hub manages all CHCP referrals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “City Health Care Partnership (CHCP) is unable to provide any feedback in relation to the above concerns, as there was no referral made to CHCP Community Nursing by Hull University Teaching Hospital (HUTH) or St Andrew’s Surgery Hull. CHCP has a 24-hour Care Co-ordination Hub, which manages all referrals into CHCP.”

    Source location

    Response from City Healthcare Partnership Hull
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 May 2024

    Open published response
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

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

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
50%50%
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