PFD report

Christopher David TAYLOR · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 13 Feb 2015•Avon

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
14

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 raised2

  1. Failure of dispatch staff to continuously see incoming incidents
  2. High-risk stretch of river
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.7

  1. Action

    Adopt a call-scripting system with flags, tags and alerts to support dynamic assessment of call needs and priority.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  2. Action

    Commence co-location of Call Handlers and Dispatchers under a single supervisor.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  3. Action

    Erect permanent waist-height fencing along the upper carpark walkway after obtaining planning permission.

    Stated by Sainsbury's Supermarkets LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 February 2015.

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

  1. Position

    The concern that staff must always see an incoming-incidents screen is not fully accepted because combined measures reduce reliance on any specific screen.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 of dispatch staff to continuously see incoming incidents

Wider context from the report

“1. In this particular case it appears that the team in dispatch were not aware of the immediate incident which resulted in a delay in it being actioned by them. Staff need to be able to see at all times a screen which displays incoming incidents for them to be able to action in an appropriate manner. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

High-risk stretch of river

Wider context from the report

“2. I appreciate that Sainsburys were not represented at the inquest and I do not have any evidence from them in relation to their plans for the bank next to the River Avon in Bath however I would ask that they consider their responsibility as land owner along this stretch of river in question which falls within the high risk area. Specifically I would ask that they liaise with Bath and North East Somerset Local Authority in relation to potentially the provision of a vandal proof life buoy station along that stretch of river. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Adopt a call-scripting system with flags, tags and alerts to support dynamic assessment of call needs and priority.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Finally, and perhaps most fundamental to the redesigning of our communication services, from April 2015 the Constabulary will adopt a new call scripting system which is designed with flags, tags and alerts for the benefit of the Call Handler/Dispatch team’s ability to dynamically and continually assess of needs/priority of any one call.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Commence co-location of Call Handlers and Dispatchers under a single supervisor.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As per Inspector ████████ statement, once the call has been ‘taken’ it is transferred to from FSC to Dispatch, which is sited in another location away from FSC. The disparity between the call taker’s actions and the period of approximately 5 minutes during which no recorded action appears to have been taken is the first area the Constabulary has sought to address.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 1 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Erect permanent waist-height fencing along the upper carpark walkway after obtaining planning permission.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9. Following the meeting on 29 January it was agreed that SSL would look at putting waist height fencing along the upper carpark walkway area. It was decided that it would be more appropriate for the fencing to be positioned there rather than along the actual water's edge at the bottom of the (newly cleared) sloped bank because it was thought that putting the fencing at the pavement/carpark level would encourage people to stay further away from the river bank. It was also considered that there was no need for the previously heavy planted area to become accessible to passers-by.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Maintain temporary waist-height fencing along the upper carpark walkway until permanent fencing is erected.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9. Following the meeting on 29 January it was agreed that SSL would look at putting waist height fencing along the upper carpark walkway area. It was decided that it would be more appropriate for the fencing to be positioned there rather than along the actual water's edge at the bottom of the (newly cleared) sloped bank because it was thought that putting the fencing at the pavement/carpark level would encourage people to stay further away from the river bank. It was also considered that there was no need for the previously heavy planted area to become accessible to passers-by.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Install bespoke safety signage at four locations on the temporary fencing and attach it to the permanent fencing.

Verbatim wording from the response

“12. Appropriate signage has been erected on the temporary fencing in four locations and will also be attached to the permanent fencing. The signage is "bespoke" in design in that it encompasses a hard hitting local message and was agreed with the Council at the meeting on 29 January 2015.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Maintain the cleared sloped bank through service-level agreements to preserve improved visibility and emergency access.

Verbatim wording from the response

“15. SSL has put in place service level agreements suitable to maintaining the sloped bank area in its current cleared/cut down state of vegetation in order to maintain the improved visibility and emergency access that has resulted from the clearance measures undertaken.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Provide replacement life-saving buoys, maintain spare floats at the store, and check the buoys weekly for damage.

Verbatim wording from the response

“13. So far as life-saving buoys were concerned SSL had already replaced the damaged/missing buoy referred to in evidence during the course of the Inquest. A stock of spare floats is kept at the store as vandalism is, as recognised by the evidence given at the Inquest, a problem. The life buoys are checked weekly as part of the store manager's normal safety routine and hence any damage will be noted and dealt with promptly.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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 concern that staff must always see an incoming-incidents screen is not fully accepted because combined measures reduce reliance on any specific screen.

Verbatim wording from the response

“If taken in isolation, none of the above steps comprehensively addresses the specific concern in your report that staff may not be able to ‘see at all-times a screen which displays incoming incidents.’ However, I hope you would share my view that when put into operation in concert with each other, the cumulative effect is such that staff no-longer rely solely upon visual access to any specific screen.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Existing replacement buoys, spare floats and weekly checks are relied on instead of providing tamper-proof buoy equipment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“13. So far as life-saving buoys were concerned SSL had already replaced the damaged/missing buoy referred to in evidence during the course of the Inquest. A stock of spare floats is kept at the store as vandalism is, as recognised by the evidence given at the Inquest, a problem. The life buoys are checked weekly as part of the store manager's normal safety routine and hence any damage will be noted and dealt with promptly.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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.7

  1. 1

    Introduce the THRIVE call-grading matrix to align deployment decisions with threat, harm and risk.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  2. 2

    Train all newly recruited Call Handlers in accordance with the enhanced role requirements.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  3. 3

    Rewrite the Call Handling role to require enhanced skills and capacity.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  4. 4

    Roll out comprehensive training for Call Handlers and Supervisors to support their modified roles.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  5. 5

    Refresh organisational learning through a consolidated Learning Board and portfolio-level Learning Forums to capture and advance lessons.

    Stated by Avon and Somerset ConstabularyStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  6. 6

    Continue working with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service to consider and address future or ongoing public-safety concerns.

    Stated by Sainsbury's Supermarkets LimitedStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 February 2015.
  7. 7

    Keep the implemented safety measures under review and raise concerns about their validity or appropriateness with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service.

    Stated by Sainsbury's Supermarkets LimitedStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 February 2015.

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 the THRIVE call-grading matrix to align deployment decisions with threat, harm and risk.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Secondly, the Constabulary is introducing a new THRIVE (Threat, Harm, Risk, Investigation, Vulnerability, Engagement) call grading matrix, as is in use by other Forces nationally. The focus of this new grading matrix is to ensure deployment decision making is in line with threat, harm and risk. In the context of this system should operate to ensure that decision making processes, such as that which lead to the decision to call the ambulance service, are prompted at every stage.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Train all newly recruited Call Handlers in accordance with the enhanced role requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Thirdly, and in order to best embed effective use of THRIVE, the Call Handling role has been re-written to require a greater range of skills and capacity, such as were in evidence in this case. All new staff recruited into this role will be trained in accordance with the enhanced requirements.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Rewrite the Call Handling role to require enhanced skills and capacity.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Secondly, the Constabulary is introducing a new THRIVE (Threat, Harm, Risk, Investigation, Vulnerability, Engagement) call grading matrix, as is in use by other Forces nationally. The focus of this new grading matrix is to ensure deployment decision making is in line with threat, harm and risk. In the context of this system should operate to ensure that decision making processes, such as that which lead to the decision to call the ambulance service, are prompted at every stage.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Roll out comprehensive training for Call Handlers and Supervisors to support their modified roles.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Fourthly, and in addition to the revamping of the Call Handler role, we are investing in our staff in rolling out a comprehensive scheme of training for Call Handlers and Supervisors to enable the modifications to their respective roles to be supported by learning.”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Refresh organisational learning through a consolidated Learning Board and portfolio-level Learning Forums to capture and advance lessons.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Organisational Learning”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Avon-Somerset-Constabulary
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Continue working with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service to consider and address future or ongoing public-safety concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“16. SSL will keep the measures outlined above under review and if it has any reason to call into question the validity and/or appropriateness of those measures will raise those concerns with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service. Similarly SSL will continue to work with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service and has made it plain to those organisations that should they have any future or”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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

Keep the implemented safety measures under review and raise concerns about their validity or appropriateness with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“16. SSL will keep the measures outlined above under review and if it has any reason to call into question the validity and/or appropriateness of those measures will raise those concerns with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service. Similarly SSL will continue to work with the Council and Avon Fire and Rescue Service and has made it plain to those organisations that should they have any future or”

Source location

2015-0055-Response-by-Sainsburys-Supermarkets-Limited
Page 2 · response
Published 13 February 2015

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
2/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026