Recipient

Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service

Pin Request correction

First report 8 Dec 2023•Latest report 8 Dec 2023

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Local government · Fire and rescue service. 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
7

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
7stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Claire Nicole Briggs · 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

    Claire Nicole Briggs died at Stepping Hill Hospital on 28 November 2022 after a propranolol overdose. The report identified delays in ambulance response and failures to conduct timely clinical reviews, alongside the absence of a consistent and reliable process for police officers to escalate concerns about suspected drug overdoses to the ambulance service.

    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 Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of consistent and reliable understanding of respective emergency service roles for suspected drug overdoses

    Wider context from the report

    “The evidence I heard was that a Joint Operating Protocol between the North West Ambulance Service and the five regional police forces designed to address the issues of which emergency service should take responsibility for incidents involving drug overdoses and the method by which the police officers attending such incidents prior to the arrival of the ambulance service can escalate their concerns over a person suspected to have taken a drug overdose, was in an advanced stage of completion, but was stalled in July 2022. Whilst I heard that discussions have recently recommenced, they now encompass the Right Care, Right Person model, the findings of the Manchester Arena Bombing Enquiry and that additionally, the Fire and Rescue Service and the British Transport Police have now become involved. Pending agreement of a Joint Operating Protocol, there does not appear to be any consistent and reliable understanding in place across the police forces and the North West Ambulance Service to provide clarity as to the roles of the respective services and the method by which concerns about individual patients can be escalated to the ambulance service by police officers dealing with those who are suspected to have taken drug overdoses. ”
    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 Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a consistent and reliable method for police escalation of suspected drug overdose concerns to the ambulance service

    Wider context from the report

    “The evidence I heard was that a Joint Operating Protocol between the North West Ambulance Service and the five regional police forces designed to address the issues of which emergency service should take responsibility for incidents involving drug overdoses and the method by which the police officers attending such incidents prior to the arrival of the ambulance service can escalate their concerns over a person suspected to have taken a drug overdose, was in an advanced stage of completion, but was stalled in July 2022. Whilst I heard that discussions have recently recommenced, they now encompass the Right Care, Right Person model, the findings of the Manchester Arena Bombing Enquiry and that additionally, the Fire and Rescue Service and the British Transport Police have now become involved. Pending agreement of a Joint Operating Protocol, there does not appear to be any consistent and reliable understanding in place across the police forces and the North West Ambulance Service to provide clarity as to the roles of the respective services and the method by which concerns about individual patients can be escalated to the ambulance service by police officers dealing with those who are suspected to have taken drug overdoses. ”
    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

    Provide frontline personnel with access to NWAS remote clinical support through SOPs and fallback telephones.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Within numerous SOP’s (Communications, Gaining Entry, Immediate Emergency Care), guidance is provided for personnel to access remote clinical support. If there is a delay in NWAS response, or if the casualties condition appears to be deteriorating, personnel are directed to utilise the clinical support lines provided by NWAS Clinical Support Hub or Trauma Cell. All frontline fire appliances and officers have access to these numbers via fallback telephones. Clinical advice and guidance will be provided over the phone with the potential for the NWAS response to be upgraded.”

    Source location

    Response from Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 December 2023

    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

    Continue adopting JESIP principles and operational guidance to promote collaborative working between blue-light partners.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “LFRS were not involved in this tragic incident but we are committed to a culture of improvement and learning from lessons identified. LFRS actively supports and works to the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Programme (JESIP) doctrine, promoting effective interagency working through its principles of Co-Location, Communication, Co-ordination, Joint Understanding of Risk and Shared Situational Awareness. LFRS regularly review policies, procedures and training in line with JESIP. LFRS has adopted the National Fire Chiefs (NFCC) National Operational Guidance, which is considered good practice; this guidance has been incorporated into LFRS Standard Operating Procedures (SOP).”

    Source location

    Response from Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service
    Page 1 · response
    Published 12 December 2023

    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

    Existing LFRS guidance and processes are considered sufficient to address the recommendations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to the recommendations made, LFRS believes that appropriate guidance and processes are available and in place, and I trust this response addresses the matters raised. LFRS will continue to adopt existing JESIP principles and operational guidance, promoting collaborative working between blue-light partners, whilst striving to develop guidance and process to ensure the most effective response is delivered.”

    Source location

    Response from Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 December 2023

    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
100%
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