Unity Multi Academy Trust

Other public bodies · Academy trust

Pin Request correction

First report 8 Nov 2023•Latest report 8 Nov 2023

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

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

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Unity Multi Academy Trust linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Warwickshire

    AI-generated summary

    Owen Paul Garnett · 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

    Owen Garnett, a 19-year-old student with severe learning difficulty, swallowing problems and Pica, died after choking on a significant amount of blue paper towel while unsupervised at school. The principal concerns were that carers’ repeated concerns were not acted on, that required supervision was not provided despite the risk assessment, and that the school’s subsequent action plan lacked clear guidance and oversight.

    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of staff guidance on identifying health and safety concerns

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence showed that the concerns of Owen’s carers were not acted on. Evidence was given that had the school seen the photographs they would have been more likely to have reacted to the information, but less weight was placed on an oral report by carers. The new plan seems to recognise that carers’ concerns should be acted upon by recording as a near miss incident any health and safety concerns and these should be reviewed. It appears that the decision to regard any such concerns as relating to health and safety and then record the concerns can be made at class staff level. There is no guidance as to what should or should not be regarded as a health and safety concerns by staff. There is no guidance as to how carers will be assisted to participate in this process or what steps can be taken by carers who feel their concerns have been disregarded. ”
    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to act on carers’ health and safety concerns

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence showed that the concerns of Owen’s carers were not acted on. Evidence was given that had the school seen the photographs they would have been more likely to have reacted to the information, but less weight was placed on an oral report by carers. The new plan seems to recognise that carers’ concerns should be acted upon by recording as a near miss incident any health and safety concerns and these should be reviewed. It appears that the decision to regard any such concerns as relating to health and safety and then record the concerns can be made at class staff level. There is no guidance as to what should or should not be regarded as a health and safety concerns by staff. There is no guidance as to how carers will be assisted to participate in this process or what steps can be taken by carers who feel their concerns have been disregarded. ”
    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of clarity about the timing and responsibility for reviewing plan implementation

    Wider context from the report

    “3. The Health and Safety Inspector present at the inquest indicated that the Inspectorate had not had the opportunity to review the plan and would be considering whether to participate further by reviewing the implementation of the plan. However, as the relevant inspector could not be present, it was unclear when the plan could be reviewed and by whom. ”
    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Retrospective feedback on prioritising supervision

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Had Owen been supervised as envisaged in his risk assessment, he would not have been able to consume the significant quantities of blue paper towel found in his mouth and throat. The class teachers’ evidence was that after her initial training, the process of advice on prioritising of supervision was retrospective in that she only received feedback on events that had already occurred. The current plan appears to permit the class teacher to deviate from the planned supervision and prioritising of supervision in circumstances that are not made clear. ”
    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of arrangements for carers to participate in and challenge the concerns process

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The evidence showed that the concerns of Owen’s carers were not acted on. Evidence was given that had the school seen the photographs they would have been more likely to have reacted to the information, but less weight was placed on an oral report by carers. The new plan seems to recognise that carers’ concerns should be acted upon by recording as a near miss incident any health and safety concerns and these should be reviewed. It appears that the decision to regard any such concerns as relating to health and safety and then record the concerns can be made at class staff level. There is no guidance as to what should or should not be regarded as a health and safety concerns by staff. There is no guidance as to how carers will be assisted to participate in this process or what steps can be taken by carers who feel their concerns have been disregarded. ”
    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 Unity Multi Academy Trust; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unclear circumstances for deviating from planned supervision

    Wider context from the report

    “2. Had Owen been supervised as envisaged in his risk assessment, he would not have been able to consume the significant quantities of blue paper towel found in his mouth and throat. The class teachers’ evidence was that after her initial training, the process of advice on prioritising of supervision was retrospective in that she only received feedback on events that had already occurred. The current plan appears to permit the class teacher to deviate from the planned supervision and prioritising of supervision in circumstances that are not made clear. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

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