Recipient

Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch

First report 19 Mar 2026•Latest report 19 Mar 2026

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Domiciliary care provider. 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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. West Sussex, Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    John Malcolm FISHER · 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

    John Malcolm Fisher was admitted to hospital on 22 April 2025 with persistent focal seizures that developed into status epilepticus, and he died on 4 May 2025 after the seizures could not be controlled. The report raises concerns about inaccurate or incomplete medication information during transfers between community services and the omission of sodium valproate from the care agency’s medication record, resulting in six days without that medication.

    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficient medication verification during care-needs assessment

    Wider context from the report

    “4) Coastal Homecare confirmed that an assessment of needs was carried out on 15 April 2025 by a supervisor attending Mr Fisher's home address. The UCR handwritten medication forms were used to digitally record the required medications into the Coastal Homecare electronic system. Initially I was told that photographs of the medication were taken as well but on checking no photographs could be recovered save one of skin creams. It is apparently not standard practice for photographs to be taken during this kind of assessment but during the inquest it was agreed this would be good practice in future to achieve greater clarity for daily carers who frequently change. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to prevent administration of GP-discontinued medication

    Wider context from the report

    “1) I heard evidence from Mr Fisher's GP practice (Trinity Medical Centre) that they received a letter from Brighton Urgent Community Response (UCR) team indicating that they had, in turn, received a referral from the local Adult Social Care Team requesting a package of care assessment on 8 April. This assessment was carried out on 9 April and from handwritten medication administrative records (MAR) complied by the UCR Team from Brighton hospital, support was provided to Mr Fisher until 15 April. According to the UCR records this apparently included phenobarbital tablets twice a day even though Mr Fisher's GP had discontinued the phenobarbital on 8 April 2025. 3 liquid AEDs were also given including sodium valproate. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to follow up medication incidents for learning affecting vulnerable patients

    Wider context from the report

    “6) Coastal Homecare management then self-reported the incident to the local Adult Safeguarding Team and also the Care Quality Commission but at the time of the inquest there has been no follow-up by either organisation to ascertain if there are any lessons to learn for the benefit of other vulnerable patients. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide complete current medication and stop-date information during care handover

    Wider context from the report

    “3) UCR then arranged for a care agency, Coastal Homecare, to take over supporting Mr Fisher. During the inquest I saw a referral from prepared by UCR confirming that Coastal Homecare were required to assist Mr Fisher three times a day to help with his personal care and medicine administration. However, the only medication information that was supplied by the UCR team to Coastal Homecare referred to blister packs and liquid medication including antibiotics for chest infection. No further details of current regular medication, dosage, timing or form of medication (eg blister pack, separate boxes or liquids) were provided at all. In addition, the antibiotics were only for a short number of days but no clear indication is given when they were to stop and may well have finished by the time Coastal took over care. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to transfer all prescribed medication into the electronic MAR and cross-check it at agency handover

    Wider context from the report

    “5) Coastal Healthcare indicated that a mistake was made when documenting the medications in that although the UCR handwritten forms included sodium valproate oral solution, this was not added at all into the Coastal Homecare electronic MAR chart. As a result, Coastal Homecare accepted that between 16 April to 21 April (6 days) Mr Fisher did not receive any sodium valproate oral solution. This was one of three liquid antiepileptic drugs Mr Fisher should have received to help control possible seizures. This mistake was not spotted at all and there is no system in place to cross check what has previously been given when there is a handover between different care agencies nor was there any liaison with the community pharmacy who regularly dispensed Mr Fisher's medication. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Inaccurate or incomplete recording of medication administration

    Wider context from the report

    “2) It is far from clear whether the UCR records are accurate regarding whether phenobarbital was given or not. The handwritten evidence says it was given but not whether this was from a blister pack or a separate box. Mr Fisher’s community pharmacist gave evidence that for some years he had dispensed phenobarbital in a separate box and not in a blister pack. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to liaise with the community pharmacy about regularly dispensed medication

    Wider context from the report

    “5) Coastal Healthcare indicated that a mistake was made when documenting the medications in that although the UCR handwritten forms included sodium valproate oral solution, this was not added at all into the Coastal Homecare electronic MAR chart. As a result, Coastal Homecare accepted that between 16 April to 21 April (6 days) Mr Fisher did not receive any sodium valproate oral solution. This was one of three liquid antiepileptic drugs Mr Fisher should have received to help control possible seizures. This mistake was not spotted at all and there is no system in place to cross check what has previously been given when there is a handover between different care agencies nor was there any liaison with the community pharmacy who regularly dispensed Mr Fisher's medication. ”
    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 Coastal Homecare – Hove Branch; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Risk of discontinued or essential seizure-control medication being incorrectly administered

    Wider context from the report

    “Overall, after hearing evidence over two days regarding the administration of Mr Fisher's AED medication, I remain concerned that patients in the community are at risk of either being given medication that has been discontinued by a GP or not being given essential medication to control seizures. ”
    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