PFD report

Joseph Michael Miller · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 14 Mar 2024•Manchester South

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
1

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised1

  1. Failure to ensure consistent ambulance call categorisation pathways across England
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe emergency call handling
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    Existing mapping and continual review of triage categorisation are considered sufficient to reduce unwarranted variation and support appropriate ambulance prioritisation.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to ensure consistent ambulance call categorisation pathways across England

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard evidence that different ambulance services use different pathways that can impact how calls are categorised /downgraded. The consequence of this is that how the ambulance services across England deal with a call varies depending on where you live. As an example in this inquest, because of where Joseph lived, calls can go to EMAS or NWAS depending on which mobile telephone mast the call pings on. The initial call went to EMAS who on being told he was no longer fitting downgraded the call, in line with their pathway. The inquest was told that had the call been dealt with by NWAS they would not have downgraded the call to a category 3 in this situation because that was not how their pathway operated. 2. The consequence of these different pathways is that there is not a consistent approach to call categorisation across the country which can have a significant impact on the dispatch of potentially lifesaving attendance by the ambulance service. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe emergency call handling.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Existing mapping and continual review of triage categorisation are considered sufficient to reduce unwarranted variation and support appropriate ambulance prioritisation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In considering the concerns raised about the potential for variation between categorisation, NHSE has advised the Department that it has in place a process to appropriately map the outcomes of 999 call triage systems against ambulance response time categories. NHSE has responsibility for the production, maintenance, review and revision of the dataset used in these systems, which is managed by the NHSE-chaired Emergency Call Prioritisation Advisory Group (ECPAG). ECPAG keeps the categorisation of calls under continual review, and ambulance services support this process through providing evidence and expertise to reduce unwarranted variation across services, helping ensure appropriate prioritisation, equity of access and uniformity of response across England.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 1 · response
Published 19 March 2024

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

NHS England is responsible for overseeing ambulance services and maintaining, reviewing and revising the triage dataset through ECPAG.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your report raised concerns about the two call triage systems in use by NHS ambulance trusts, and the potential for patients to be given a different ambulance categorisation depending on the system used. The Department’s officials have shared your report with the East Midlands Ambulance Service (EMAS), North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) and NHS England (NHSE) as the body responsible for oversight of NHS ambulance services.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 1 · response
Published 19 March 2024

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. 1

    Share the coroner’s report with EMAS, NWAS and NHS England for consideration and oversight.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 19 March 2024.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Share the coroner’s report with EMAS, NWAS and NHS England for consideration and oversight.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your report raised concerns about the two call triage systems in use by NHS ambulance trusts, and the potential for patients to be given a different ambulance categorisation depending on the system used. The Department’s officials have shared your report with the East Midlands Ambulance Service (EMAS), North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) and NHS England (NHSE) as the body responsible for oversight of NHS ambulance services.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 1 · response
Published 19 March 2024

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026