Recipient

Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Integrated Care Board

Pin Request correction

First report 1 Jul 2026•Latest report 1 Jul 2026

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

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 Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Integrated Care Board linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent

    AI-generated summary

    Graham Keith HOLLIS · 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

    Graham Keith Hollis, who had dementia and increasing frailty, developed swallowing difficulties and experienced coughing and choking episodes while being fed under an agreed modified-diet plan. He was admitted to hospital with aspiration pneumonia and died on 14 August 2025. The principal concern was that staffing shortages prevented a further face-to-face Speech and Language Therapy assessment, resulting in a best-interests decision to feed him at risk without specialist assessment; safeguards relating to his diet and medical review were also not consistently followed.

    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 Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unavailability of alternative provision when Speech and Language Therapy assessment is absent

    Wider context from the report

    “The Speech and Language Therapy team advised the care home that, due to current staffing levels, the service was unable to undertake assessments of care homes residents, and that this issue had been escalated to the Integrated Care Board. This was the position in July 2025, and the evidence confirmed that it remained unchanged at the time of the inquest in June 2026. In the absence of a SALT face to face assessment and with no alternative provision available, a best interests meeting was convened involving the care home manager, the social worker, the GP Surgery’s care coordinator, and the deceased’s daughter. It was agreed that the deceased would be fed with accepted risk on a Level 5 diet without specialist assessment. ”
    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 Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Integrated Care Board; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unavailability of Speech and Language Therapy assessments for care home residents

    Wider context from the report

    “The Speech and Language Therapy team advised the care home that, due to current staffing levels, the service was unable to undertake assessments of care homes residents, and that this issue had been escalated to the Integrated Care Board. This was the position in July 2025, and the evidence confirmed that it remained unchanged at the time of the inquest in June 2026. In the absence of a SALT face to face assessment and with no alternative provision available, a best interests meeting was convened involving the care home manager, the social worker, the GP Surgery’s care coordinator, and the deceased’s daughter. It was agreed that the deceased would be fed with accepted risk on a Level 5 diet without specialist assessment. ”
    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