Recipient

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

First report 21 Aug 2023•Latest report 21 Aug 2023

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Central government · Ministerial department. 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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. West Yorkshire Eastern

    AI-generated summary

    David Joseph Celino · 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

    David Joseph Celino, aged 16, took tablets sold as an illicit drug at Leeds Festival in August 2022, developed an adverse reaction, and died after being treated at the festival field hospital and in hospital. The concerns included inadequate information about the number of under-18 attendees, the absence of national oversight and reliable data on drug-related casualties at music festivals, insufficient action to deter drug supply, and a failure by festival staff to identify and assist David as his condition deteriorated.

    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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of authoritative guidance on permitted front-of-house drug testing

    Wider context from the report

    “(6) Various witnesses raised the issue of “Front of House” drug testing, expressing views as to the benefits and disadvantages of this being permitted. It would help all those involved in the management of events similar to the Leeds Festival to have authoritative guidance on this subject, from the Home Office, along with clarification as to exactly what is permitted. ”
    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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of festival staff and volunteers to proactively identify and assist people showing signs of adverse drug reactions

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) Evidence at the inquest indicated David Celino had walked about the Leeds Festival site between approximately 7pm and 8.45pm on the evening of Saturday 27 August 2022. As the signs of his adverse drug reaction developed, he was unable to walk straight, was pale, sweating profusely and agitated. In the latter stages he needed help from two other 16-year-olds to prevent him falling over. In this period, he passed through at least one check point manned by stewards or security staff. It is likely he encountered other festival staff and/or volunteers in this period also. Lamentably, no staff or volunteers spotted the need to intervene to ask about his well-being or offer assistance. This history suggests further instruction or training for festival staff and volunteers is required as to the need to be proactive, particularly in view of the prevalence of illicit drugs and teenagers. As it was, David Celino’s friends only obtained advice as to his condition from the drug dealer they happened to encounter, who reassured them that his reaction as “normal”. ”
    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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of reliable records of drug-related festival casualties

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) It was said in the course of the evidence that some 4-5 people die annually from illicit drug related causes at the various music festivals held in Britain. It is understood that there is no governing body with oversight of music festivals and hence no record of drug related casualties, which might reveal the extent of the problem. (3) Without reliable numbers, it is not possible to interrogate the data or establish what proportion of the drug related casualties belong to the under 18 cohort of attendees. National oversight would enable comparisons to be made between different festivals and their respective demographics, as well as providing useful information as to the breadth and depth of the drug problem at different events. This in turn is likely to assist in an assessment of the effectiveness of control measures to prevent (or at least restrict) illegal drugs being brought onto festival sites. ”
    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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of governing oversight of music festivals

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) It was said in the course of the evidence that some 4-5 people die annually from illicit drug related causes at the various music festivals held in Britain. It is understood that there is no governing body with oversight of music festivals and hence no record of drug related casualties, which might reveal the extent of the problem. (3) Without reliable numbers, it is not possible to interrogate the data or establish what proportion of the drug related casualties belong to the under 18 cohort of attendees. National oversight would enable comparisons to be made between different festivals and their respective demographics, as well as providing useful information as to the breadth and depth of the drug problem at different events. This in turn is likely to assist in an assessment of the effectiveness of control measures to prevent (or at least restrict) illegal drugs being brought onto festival sites. ”
    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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of accurate information about the number of under-18 festival attendees

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Neither the organiser of the festival (Festival Republic) nor Leeds City Council which licenced the event had accurate information about the number of people under 18 who were attending the festival. It was estimated to be 20% of the 90,000 attending, so about 18,000. In consequence, the magnitude of the problem of potentially vulnerable, naïve teenagers exposed to possible exploitation by drug dealers, was not appreciated. ”
    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