Recipient

MacLeod Pinsent Care Homes Ltd

First report 21 Dec 2017•Latest report 21 Dec 2017

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Care-home operator. 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 MacLeod Pinsent Care Homes Ltd linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Brighton and Hove

    AI-generated summary

    Sheila ROSS · 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

    Sheila ROSS sustained a fatal fall down a flight of stairs at Carlton House Rest Home on 17 September 2017. The report’s principal concern was that no falls risk assessment had been completed despite earlier indicators of vulnerability; the inquest concluded that the death was accidental, to which neglect contributed.

    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 MacLeod Pinsent Care Homes Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to complete falls risk assessments

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Mrs Ross became a resident at Carlton House Rest Home in October 2014 following having fallen and fractured her hip, yet even at this early stage a falls risk assessment was not completed for her. The years went by and there were no falls but on the 9th December 2016 Mrs Ross had what was described in the GP’s letter as a fall. The Rest Home Manager described it as ‘slip’ - she slipped off the edge of the bed. This is not uncommon but in the absence of any falls over for over two years it’s worrying and should have triggered a falls risk assessment but it didn’t. In July of 2017 Mrs Ross was admitted to hospital very unwell with sepsis due to coli cystitis. On her return to the Rest Home she was less well and more agitated, her sleep which had always been of irregular pattern became worse and she was wandering more. Physically, she apparently didn’t need a stick but her behaviour was such that it was believed she lacked mental capacity – an application was made and she was placed on a Deprivation of Liberty Safe Guarding Order from the 23rd August 2017. The assessments in connection with this highlighted her vulnerability and the fact that she needed 24 hour care and yet there was still no falls risk assessment carried out. By the time she had the fatal fall on the 17th September when she fell down a flight of stairs (which led to a floor on the Rest Home that she had no need to visit) she still had no falls risk assessment. It is, of course, entirely possible for falls to occur even in the best regulated of situations with all paperwork properly in place. However, if a falls risk assessment had been carried out it would have highlighted Mrs Ross’ inability to make any assessment of her own personal safety and there is a possibility that this fall could have been prevented. Since this catastrophic injury there has been significant changes in personnel at the Rest Home and I have no doubt that steps have been initiated to ensure that all residents have the appropriate risk assessments and I also believe that the Inquest itself will be a catalyst to speed this process up. ”
    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