Recipient

Prestwick Care Limited

Pin Request correction

First report 9 Oct 2025•Latest report 9 Oct 2025

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 Prestwick Care Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Gateshead and South Tyneside

    AI-generated summary

    Pauline Stirling · 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

    Pauline Stirling, who had Alzheimer’s disease and Lewy Body Dementia, deteriorated with immobility, reduced nutritional intake and increased frailty before developing worsening pressure damage. She died on 7 March 2024 at Covent House Care Home in Gateshead; the inquest recorded chronic infection due to pressure damage on a background of natural disease. Concerns included inadequate wound monitoring and documentation, inconsistent positional changes and wound care, gaps in staff training, and ongoing record-keeping problems.

    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 Prestwick Care Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to undertake evidenced wound-management training

    Wider context from the report

    “3. Despite safeguarding referrals made due to concerns about wound management, and the issue of wound care, incorrect classification of pressure damage, and absence of expected documentation being raised initially by tissue viability nurses in January 2024, there is no evidence before the Court of training having been undertaken, including training offered by tissue viability nurses. The only training carried out was online webinar training by a former member of staff in March 2024. ”
    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 Prestwick Care Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to complete documentation to an accepted standard

    Wider context from the report

    “4. There were candid acceptances that documentation was not completed to an accepted standard and there were gaps in the records. This is not the first inquest where acceptances were made, therefore I remain concerned that this is an ongoing issue despite evidence that this has been addressed with an auditing system. ”
    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 Prestwick Care Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of positional-change documentation to record positional tilt relevant to pressure-damage prevention

    Wider context from the report

    “1. To date, the documentation for recording positional changes only requires care staff to input the position right, left, back, in chair with no reference to positional tilt to avoid pressure damage. ”
    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 Prestwick Care Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of evidenced training requirements for agency nurses

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Whilst evidence was provided about the training requirements for full time members of nursing and care staff, to include mandatory full induction and refresher training, I am concerned having heard evidence that to adhere to the ratio of 2 RGNs per shift, agency nurses were regularly utilised, and no evidence about training requirements was provided. ”
    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