PFD report

Nicholas CORK · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 11 Jan 2024•Inner North London

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
6

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
11

Described in 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 raised6

  1. Lack of consistent criteria for welfare checks and their recording
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern
  2. Failure to undertake required welfare checks at least every 24 hours
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to conduct required welfare checks on people in distressPart of recurring concern: Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern
  3. Inadequacy of the welfare-check recording system
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern
Responses linked to these concerns

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

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.10

  1. Action

    Formulate and use a written contractor induction package covering the conduct and recording of welfare checks.

    Stated by Sapphire Independent HousingStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 19 January 2024.
  2. Action

    Introduce a shift leader on every shift to oversee At Risk compliance and effective handover.

    Stated by Sapphire Independent HousingStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 19 January 2024.
  3. Action

    Reinforce policy and procedure guidance through team meetings, away days, online training, refresher training and an accessible policy library.

    Stated by Sapphire Independent HousingStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 19 January 2024.

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

  1. Position

    The existing At Risk procedure remains fit for purpose and provides adequate welfare checks and escalation mechanisms when correctly followed.

    Stated by Sapphire Independent HousingExisting 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

Lack of consistent criteria for welfare checks and their recording

Wider context from the report

“(1) There was evidence that staff at Conway House were significantly concerned for Mr Cork’s welfare, which is why he was deemed as ‘at risk’. As a result of being ‘at risk’ I was told that welfare checks were required to be undertaken, at least every 24 hours. Such checks required a staff member to physically see and interact with Mr Cork or, in the alternative, to telephone him and speak to him. Welfare checks were then required to be recorded on a spreadsheet. Despite this, I was told in evidence that welfare checks would only be recorded if the resident in question was actually ‘seen’ by the staff member undertaking the check; this raises the concern that there is disparity about what constitutes a welfare check and what will or will not be recorded. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern.

Open source report

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 undertake required welfare checks at least every 24 hours

Wider context from the report

“(2) I heard evidence that prior to Mr Cork being found unresponsive in his room on 22 May 2023, the last recorded welfare check for Mr Cork was during the early shift of Saturday 20 May 2023. The concern here is that Mr Cork, despite being required to have welfare checks at least once every 24 hours, was not properly checked upon for between 36-48 hours prior to his death. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to conduct required welfare checks on people in distress; Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern.

Open source report

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

Inadequacy of the welfare-check recording system

Wider context from the report

“(4) In evidence, I was taken through the spreadsheet that is used to record all checks and/or welfare checks required for any residents of Conway House. The record system appears to have been a basic Microsoft Excel spreadsheet devised by staff. I was told that the computer and/or spreadsheet often ‘crashed’, which led to data sometimes not being able to be recorded. I also observed that some fields of the spreadsheet were often left blank. Staff undertaking and recording checks regularly appeared not to input their name(s) or the time at which checks were undertaken. I was also told that while there was some training on how to undertake and record welfare checks, this was not needed because it was a simple task. The concern here is that the recording system for welfare checks may not be adequate and that the approach taken to filling in the data required on the spreadsheet varied from one staff member to another, which may also indicate that there is a training need. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern.

Open source report

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

Inconsistent staff performance in completing welfare-check records

Wider context from the report

“(4) In evidence, I was taken through the spreadsheet that is used to record all checks and/or welfare checks required for any residents of Conway House. The record system appears to have been a basic Microsoft Excel spreadsheet devised by staff. I was told that the computer and/or spreadsheet often ‘crashed’, which led to data sometimes not being able to be recorded. I also observed that some fields of the spreadsheet were often left blank. Staff undertaking and recording checks regularly appeared not to input their name(s) or the time at which checks were undertaken. I was also told that while there was some training on how to undertake and record welfare checks, this was not needed because it was a simple task. The concern here is that the recording system for welfare checks may not be adequate and that the approach taken to filling in the data required on the spreadsheet varied from one staff member to another, which may also indicate that there is a training need. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records.

Open source report

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 physically verify residents’ welfare when welfare concerns arise

Wider context from the report

“(3) A night project worker at Conway House told me in evidence that they had opened Mr Cork’s door at about 20:35 on Sunday 21 May 2023, but did not enter the room to see or assess Mr Cork. The only reason for opening the door appears to have been the arrival of the ‘EMS team’ who were required to check that Mr Cork was at home for the purposes of conditions imposed by the criminal justice system. Having heard what they believed to be snoring, the staff member closed the door and left. This fact was verified by Metropolitan Police Officers who checked CCTV footage as part of their initial investigation following Mr Cork’s death. The concern here is that staff made assumptions that the ‘snoring’ noise was coming from Mr Cork’s room and not an adjoining room, and that the noise was snoring, without investigating further. This was a missed opportunity to properly check on Mr Cork’s welfare, as required. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to conduct required welfare checks on people in distress.

Open source report

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 investigate and implement improvements to welfare-check systems

Wider context from the report

“(5) I was told in evidence that the same spreadsheet is still used to record any checks and/or welfare checks required for residents. I was told that the issues identified with a lack of checks for Mr Cork were caused by the fact that there were a significant number of agency staff on duty and that Conway House no longer uses agency staff. However, the staff member that opened Mr Cork’s door at 20:35 (without entering the room or seeing Mr Cork) on 21 May 2023 and subsequently found him unresponsive on the morning of 22 May 2023 was a substantive member of staff. I was not reassured that any proper investigation into these issues had been undertaken or that any action(s) required to bring about improvements in the system of undertaking and recording welfare checks have been identified and/or implemented. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable welfare-check processes for people whose health is of concern.

Open source report

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

Formulate and use a written contractor induction package covering the conduct and recording of welfare checks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“████████ was not a substantive member of staff but, it is accepted, had worked at Conway House as a member of agency staff for a prolonged period. Sapphire continue to use agency staff at Conway House. However, there have been material improvements in how this is managed and how the processes to be followed are communicated; in particular a thorough written contractor induction package has been formulated, which focuses both on the conduct of welfare checks and their recording.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 7 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Introduce a shift leader on every shift to oversee At Risk compliance and effective handover.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It has been recognised that the weekend is the lowest level of staffing at Conway House due to the nature of the funding, rota and management working pattern. The Homeless Link report suggested that consideration be given to whether there should be management checks taking place at these times, for example, the organisational on-call system could incorporate a management check of the At Risk register during the weekend with a view to tightening the safety net of checks so that they are not missed. A shift leader position has now been introduced for each shift, tasked (in part) with ensuring that the At Risk procedure has been complied with and that an effective handover is completed with the next shift.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 7 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Reinforce policy and procedure guidance through team meetings, away days, online training, refresher training and an accessible policy library.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Since October 2023, there has been greater focus on revisiting the guidance derived from policies and procedures to support day to day practice; not just at induction but on a continuing basis, through team meetings, team away days, and a wider organisational approach. The At Risk procedure, while well-established as a precursor to the Missing Persons policy, has not historically been set out fully in a written policy document. A standalone policy document is in the process of being drafted and is expected to be presented to the Sapphire Board in May, for wider publication in June 2024. All staff receive online training in policies and procedures with periodic refresher training. There is also an easily accessible online hub where a policy library is available.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 5 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Review the welfare-check spreadsheet every Friday and recruit an administration assistant to provide qualitative oversight and sample testing.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Serious consideration has been given to an alternative method of recording welfare checks but, following a thorough review, it has been decided to maintain the current format, with which staff are familiar, and which has functionality to record all the required information relevant to welfare checks. The additional focus on training, management oversight and accountability that has been a feature of revisions to the At Risk process as a whole, equally applies to the record-keeping of the welfare checks on the spreadsheet and should ensure operational improvement. The spreadsheet is currently reviewed by a manager every Friday. Additionally, a recruitment process is underway for a new administration assistant to assist with housing management tasks, which will include the oversight of the spreadsheet with qualitative checks and sample testing.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 6 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Deliver and continue welfare-check, risk-management, complex-needs and related At Risk training for resident-facing and Conway House staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Further training provision has also been (and continues to be) implemented in relation to the At Risk procedure with a view to offering staff an increased level of support and knowledge. Training in complex needs, dual diagnosis and personality disorder was delivered by Homeless Link on 22nd September 2023 for all resident-facing colleagues. A workshop covering welfare checks and risk management was attended by all Conway House staff in February 2024. Following a Homeless Link recommendation that Sapphire services are reflective of psychologically informed environment approaches, as these environments naturally reduce the levels of incidents and are more conducive to positive residential operations, the Camden Commissioning team are providing training in this area and regular refresher courses to all staff in Pathways.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 5 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Recruit permanent night staff with job descriptions incorporating the At Risk procedure.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Permanent night staff have been recruited by Sapphire (with a start date of the end of April 2024) with a specific job description that incorporates the At Risk procedure, which should increase continuity of knowledge and experience across the staffing body.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 7 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Implement smaller, more frequent working patterns instead of seven consecutive shifts to reduce fatigue and missed checks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In September 2023, Sapphire completed a review of working shift patterns and how the removal of a ‘7 days in a row’ shift pattern and its replacement with a more balanced working pattern may mean staff are more refreshed and less prone to burnout (which could have lead to an increased risk of missed checks). Smaller more frequent working patterns have been implemented across the board.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 7 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Draft and submit a standalone At Risk policy for Board approval and wider publication.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Since October 2023, there has been greater focus on revisiting the guidance derived from policies and procedures to support day to day practice; not just at induction but on a continuing basis, through team meetings, team away days, and a wider organisational approach. The At Risk procedure, while well-established as a precursor to the Missing Persons policy, has not historically been set out fully in a written policy document. A standalone policy document is in the process of being drafted and is expected to be presented to the Sapphire Board in May, for wider publication in June 2024. All staff receive online training in policies and procedures with periodic refresher training. There is also an easily accessible online hub where a policy library is available.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 5 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Introduce and monthly monitor At Risk procedure performance indicators through operational management meetings, with senior management review and Board reporting of incidents and KPI failures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Sapphire has recognised that there needs to be a greater level of management review of the At Risk procedure, and greater accountability for proper checks being carried out. The Homeless Link report noted that if the completion of the At Risk checks was a process for which managers were forensically held to account by the Executive Team and reviewed at Board level, culturally the missing of checks would be far less likely to happen, whatever the chaotic dynamic of the service. This culture of accountability has been implemented through, for example, a housing operations team away day in April 2024, which focused on discussing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), including in relation to the operation of the At Risk procedure, which are to be introduced and monitored monthly as part of the Operational Management meeting.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 5 · response
Published 19 January 2024

Open published response

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

Extend night-shift hours and use a mandatory handover template to communicate failed welfare checks and At Risk issues between shifts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In particular, the handover process has been reviewed to place further emphasis on the At Risk procedure. This review was completed on 8th August 2023. There has, as a result, been an increase in the working hours of night shift workers, thereby extending the handover period between shifts to ensure an appropriate face to face interaction to discuss any incidents that have occurred. There is an expectation that any failed welfare checks, or any problems with the At Risk procedure, will be highlighted at this handover. There is a”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 4 · response
Published 19 January 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

The existing At Risk procedure remains fit for purpose and provides adequate welfare checks and escalation mechanisms when correctly followed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Sapphire considers that this policy, if understood and followed correctly, properly provides for the welfare checking of the vulnerable persons within its care and includes appropriate mechanisms for failed safety checks to result in an escalation of checks and, if necessary, the triggering of the missing persons procedure.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 3 · response
Published 19 January 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

The existing spreadsheet is considered adequate for recording welfare checks, so its format will be maintained rather than replaced.

Verbatim wording from the response

“At the time of May 2023, the spreadsheet used to record welfare checks was considered to be adequate, insofar as it allowed for the timing of the check, the identification of who had completed it and any additional comments to be recorded. It is recognised that its use was dependent on the computer that stores it being functional, but technical issues were extremely rare and there was a manual workaround about which staff were fully informed. Any manual records were promptly recorded on the digital spreadsheet.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 6 · response
Published 19 January 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

    Hold a Monday morning managers-and-staff meeting to hand over weekend issues, including At Risk procedure concerns.

    Stated by Sapphire Independent HousingStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 19 January 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

Hold a Monday morning managers-and-staff meeting to hand over weekend issues, including At Risk procedure concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“There is also now a Monday morning meeting between managers and staff in order to facilitate a thorough handover of any issues that have arisen over the weekend; there is an expectation that this will include a focus on any issues with the At Risk procedure.”

Source location

Response from Devonshires
Page 7 · response
Published 19 January 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