Recipient

FernleaIncludes reports addressed to a minister or senior office-holder acting for this organisation.

Pin Request correction

First report 16 Dec 2019•Latest report 16 Dec 2019

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Residential care home. 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 Fernlea linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Addressed to: Registered Manager of Fernlea Nursing Home.

    Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Arnold Fletcher Ward · 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

    Arnold Fletcher Ward was a resident at Fernlea Nursing Home who developed a deteriorating grade 4 sacral pressure ulcer, later associated with osteomyelitis, and died in hospital on 21 January 2019 from a myocardial infarction. Concerns included inadequate monitoring and escalation of the pressure ulcer, failure to follow up a referral to the Tissue Viability Nursing Team, and the resulting lack of appropriate wound dressing.

    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 Fernlea; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to recognise and escalate significant pressure-ulcer deterioration promptly

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest heard that within the home the forms used did not capture the deterioration of the pressure ulcer or require detailed monitoring/use of photographs to track its progress. This meant that the significant and steep deterioration was not recognised and escalated at an early opportunity to the Tissue Viability Nursing team for expert wound management input. As a result the type of wound dressing he required were not utilised/available. It had been captured in the notes that there had been a referral to the Tissue Viability Nursing team in October. There was no system in the home to chase up the team after a number of weeks had elapsed and there had been no response. The inquest heard that even in non-urgent cases the Tissue Viability Nursing team would contact a home requesting support in at least 10 days and more quickly in an urgent case. ”
    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 Fernlea; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unavailability or non-use of required wound dressings

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest heard that within the home the forms used did not capture the deterioration of the pressure ulcer or require detailed monitoring/use of photographs to track its progress. This meant that the significant and steep deterioration was not recognised and escalated at an early opportunity to the Tissue Viability Nursing team for expert wound management input. As a result the type of wound dressing he required were not utilised/available. It had been captured in the notes that there had been a referral to the Tissue Viability Nursing team in October. There was no system in the home to chase up the team after a number of weeks had elapsed and there had been no response. The inquest heard that even in non-urgent cases the Tissue Viability Nursing team would contact a home requesting support in at least 10 days and more quickly in an urgent case. ”
    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 Fernlea; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of pressure-ulcer forms to capture deterioration and require detailed monitoring

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest heard that within the home the forms used did not capture the deterioration of the pressure ulcer or require detailed monitoring/use of photographs to track its progress. This meant that the significant and steep deterioration was not recognised and escalated at an early opportunity to the Tissue Viability Nursing team for expert wound management input. As a result the type of wound dressing he required were not utilised/available. It had been captured in the notes that there had been a referral to the Tissue Viability Nursing team in October. There was no system in the home to chase up the team after a number of weeks had elapsed and there had been no response. The inquest heard that even in non-urgent cases the Tissue Viability Nursing team would contact a home requesting support in at least 10 days and more quickly in an urgent case. ”
    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 Fernlea; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a system to follow up unanswered specialist referrals

    Wider context from the report

    “The inquest heard that within the home the forms used did not capture the deterioration of the pressure ulcer or require detailed monitoring/use of photographs to track its progress. This meant that the significant and steep deterioration was not recognised and escalated at an early opportunity to the Tissue Viability Nursing team for expert wound management input. As a result the type of wound dressing he required were not utilised/available. It had been captured in the notes that there had been a referral to the Tissue Viability Nursing team in October. There was no system in the home to chase up the team after a number of weeks had elapsed and there had been no response. The inquest heard that even in non-urgent cases the Tissue Viability Nursing team would contact a home requesting support in at least 10 days and more quickly in an urgent case. ”
    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