Recipient

Stoke Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Team

Pin Request correction

First report 19 Mar 2025•Latest report 19 Mar 2025

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Other public bodies · Sub-organisation. 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 Stoke Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Team 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

    Mr William Anthony Grieve · 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

    Mr William Anthony Grieve was found deceased at his home on 20 August 2024. The inquest recorded hanging as the cause of death and concluded with suicide. Concerns included separate electronic systems preventing Stoke Talking Therapies and the Stoke crisis Evolution Team from accessing each other’s notes, resulting in incorrect suicide risk assessments, and staff training needs not being addressed.

    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 Stoke Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Team; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of access to other teams’ electronic notes during suicide risk assessments

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Both assessments, were incorrect, and took account of incorrect information because neither had access to the others computer system. Stoke Talking Therapies used IAPTUS and Crisis resolution used Lorenzo. There was no way for either team to see the others electronic notes. ”
    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 Stoke Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Team; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to conduct risk assessments properly

    Wider context from the report

    “3. It was said in evidence, that a member of staff had not carried out a risk assessment properly whoever, nothing had been done to address this and there were no plans to address this. The concern being that staff training needs are not being addressed. ”
    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 Stoke Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Team; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to address staff training needs

    Wider context from the report

    “3. It was said in evidence, that a member of staff had not carried out a risk assessment properly whoever, nothing had been done to address this and there were no plans to address this. The concern being that staff training needs are not being addressed. ”
    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