Local government · English unitary authority. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.
Reports
3
Naming this recipient
Published responses
100%
Found for named reports
Concerns addressed
5
Across all linked responses
Stated actions
20
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
20stated actions described
Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.
Concerns and recipient responses
Statements from Herefordshire Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
Herefordshire
Concerns raised2
Limited visibility at the junction
National Speed Limit at the junction
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Reassess the junction during the 2025/26 programme to determine whether visibility improvements should be prioritised.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 31 October 2024.
Action
Install an official highways mirror at the junction and remove the privately installed mirror.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 31 October 2024.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.2
Position
Limited funds and existing prioritisation mean the Council cannot currently undertake engineering improvements at this lower-collision site.
Unable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
The Council considers the road’s National Speed Limit appropriate under Department for Transport criteria, which do not support isolated speed-limit interventions.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Herefordshire
Concerns raised3
Failure to progress applications to establish vulnerability
Lack of an effective system for identifying process failure
Failure to make contact with the deceased or approved contacts
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.6
Action
Complete the overhaul of housing systems, procedures and operating practices.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Action
Strengthen housing processes from first contact through decision-making and provide ongoing management guidance to frontline officers.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Action
Roll out partnership working with health colleagues to share relevant information for decision-making.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Action
Develop and roll out a case-auditing programme within the quality-assurance framework.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Action
Operate supervision, CRM oversight and weekly case reviews to identify and address process failures.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Action
Review housing procedures to align them with the Homelessness Reduction Act.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 July 2023.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.1
Position
A vulnerability assessment was not required initially because the applicant owed a Prevention Duty; it became relevant only if a Relief Duty arose.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Herefordshire
Concerns raised1
Limited visibility at the footpath crossing of the A44
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
Action
Remove foliage to improve forward visibility at the crossing.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 6 October 2022.
Action
Reinstate visibility splays along the bypass to improve visibility for pedestrians and motorists.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 6 October 2022.
Action
Add the Kington Bypass to an enhanced maintenance regime with quarterly safety inspections and designated steward awareness of site safety requirements.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 6 October 2022.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.3
Position
The existing pedestrian guardrail is considered adequate protection, so the historic crossing will not be moved or bridged.
Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
The pedestrian guardrail is considered adequate, so its position and layout will not be altered.
Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
The speed limit will not be lowered below 50mph because that is considered appropriate for this road and limits apply by road section.
No action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations