PFD report

Ruariri Thomas STEWART · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 10 Mar 2026•Cheshire

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
14

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
19

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 raised14

  1. Fragmented storage of clinical records without a central access point
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable access to relevant clinical records for safe care
  2. Failure to notify the CQC of periods of absence without leave
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable reporting of safety-relevant information to the CQC
  3. Investigations failing to identify and report safety issues
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate safety incident investigations
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.16

  1. Action

    Monitor task completion during daily handovers, escalate outstanding work and audit compliance monthly through a senior practitioner.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 March 2026.
  2. Action

    Allocate every clinical task to a named individual and record the allocation in the DSR system.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 March 2026.
  3. Action

    Document all clinical and Mental Health Act decisions in patient files, the DSR system and relevant meeting minutes.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 March 2026.

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

  1. Position

    Medical information may legitimately remain across multiple appropriate sources; a structured collation and disclosure process can address this without a single central record.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedDisputes 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

Fragmented storage of clinical records without a central access point

Wider context from the report

“11. Over the course of the inquest there were multiple, serious, disclosure issues relating to non-disclosure of medical records. It appears that at the time medical records were kept across a variety of locations and programmes, electronic and in paper. Staff therefore would not have had a central place to go to find all relevant clinical information about a patient. I am informed that there are plans to implement an electronic record keeping system but I do not have information about the nature, scope or timeframes for this. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable access to relevant clinical records for safe care.

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 notify the CQC of periods of absence without leave

Wider context from the report

“10. The CQC were not notified of periods when the patient went absence without leave ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable reporting of safety-relevant information to the CQC.

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

Investigations failing to identify and report safety issues

Wider context from the report

“12. The post event reflective practice report from AFG does not identify any of these issues. The "summary of issues / concerns highlighted" are wholly positive. Post incident reflection and investigation is an important tool to improve practices and prevent future deaths. Similar concerns about the quality of investigations by AFG were raised in a Regulation 28 report issued by the Manchester City Coroner in 2022 in relation to a death in 2019 (Shona Campbell). ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate safety incident investigations.

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 include recent drug-use information in shift handovers

Wider context from the report

“6. On multiple occasions information about recent drug use was not part of the shift handover notes ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable shift handover processes.

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 hand over information about intended continued cocaine use

Wider context from the report

“8. Information from the patient that he intended to carry on taking cocaine was not handed over to the staff who made the final decisions about leave and checked the patient on return ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to communicate relevant risk information during patient leave.

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 assign individual accountability for planned drug testing

Wider context from the report

“3. The MDT made plans for a patient to have drug tests. These were not allocated to an individual to be accountable and were instead allocated to "staff". These tests were not carried out as planned. ”

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

Failure to fully consider recent substance misuse history in unescorted-leave decisions

Wider context from the report

“7. Decisions were made to grant unescorted leave to a patient with a known and recent history of cocaine use whilst on unescorted leave, without a full appreciation of their recent substance misuse history ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to incorporate relevant clinical history and diagnoses into care decisions; Unsafe management of inpatient leave and absence.

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 document and formalise leave reinstatement decisions

Wider context from the report

“4. When the responsible clinician was away for an extended period, leave was managed by a non s12 doctor. There is no contemporaneous documentary evidence of the decision making process by that doctor to reinstate leave as decisions were made outside the formal s17 MHA framework. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable mental-health patient leave arrangements; Unsafe clinical responsibility for mental health leave and detention decisions; Unsafe management of inpatient leave and absence.

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

Leave management by a non-s12 doctor during responsible-clinician absence

Wider context from the report

“4. When the responsible clinician was away for an extended period, leave was managed by a non s12 doctor. There is no contemporaneous documentary evidence of the decision making process by that doctor to reinstate leave as decisions were made outside the formal s17 MHA framework. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable mental-health patient leave arrangements; Unsafe clinical responsibility for mental health leave and detention decisions; Unsafe management of inpatient leave and absence.

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 create and complete required care plans

Wider context from the report

“9. Care plans that should have been in place were either not created at all or were not fully completed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable care-planning processes.

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 suspected drug use during leave suspension

Wider context from the report

“5. On at least one occasion leave was suspended due to suspected drug use but no drug test was taken and no search carried out, and there was no documentation indicating that consideration had been given to undertaking these acts. ”

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

Failure to disclose relevant medical records

Wider context from the report

“11. Over the course of the inquest there were multiple, serious, disclosure issues relating to non-disclosure of medical records. It appears that at the time medical records were kept across a variety of locations and programmes, electronic and in paper. Staff therefore would not have had a central place to go to find all relevant clinical information about a patient. I am informed that there are plans to implement an electronic record keeping system but I do not have information about the nature, scope or timeframes for this. ”

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

Failure to enable named-nurse participation in MDTs

Wider context from the report

“1. The timing of the shifts of the named nurse for the patient meant that she was not able to attend any MDT for the patient over many months and her input was therefore only in writing ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe operation of multidisciplinary clinical meetings.

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

Inaccurate named-nurse reporting to MDTs

Wider context from the report

“2. The named nurse written reports provided inaccurate information to the MDT, giving a reassuring picture of compliance which is not reflected by the written records ”

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

Monitor task completion during daily handovers, escalate outstanding work and audit compliance monthly through a senior practitioner.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Task completion by the assigned individual is monitored daily during shift handovers by oncoming staff, with any outstanding action either being completed by the incoming staff or escalated to senior management. Ongoing compliance is monitored via monthly handover form audit by a senior practitioner, which also enables early identification of trends and implementation of remedial action where appropriate.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 2 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Allocate every clinical task to a named individual and record the allocation in the DSR system.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• All clinical tasks are now clearly and unequivocally allocated to a named individual and recorded within the DSR system, to ensure clear accountability and ownership.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 2 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Document all clinical and Mental Health Act decisions in patient files, the DSR system and relevant meeting minutes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• All clinical decision-making, including that relating to MHA matters, is now documented within each patients’ file, both within the DSR system as well as additionally in any relevant minutes – for example within MDT meeting minutes, where a clinical decision has been taken during the course of that meeting.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 3 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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 MDT scheduling that enables named-nurse attendance or requires an appropriate alternative clinician to attend and prepare with the patient.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• An updated standard operating procedure has been implemented requiring MDT scheduling to take account of named nurse availability.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 1 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Record named-nurse or alternative-clinician MDT attendance and monitor compliance through monthly senior-practitioner audits.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Attendance at MDTs by a patient’s named nurse, or an alternative in their place, is formally recorded, with ongoing compliance monitored through routine monthly audits by a senior practitioner.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 1 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Operate a monthly clinician-led quality and practice development forum to coach and mentor nurses in care-plan best practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• There is also a clinician-led quality and practice development forum in place to coach and mentor nurses on care plan best practice, which meets monthly.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 4 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Revise MDT documentation to include a current risk summary and the patient’s perspective, informed by review of patient documentation and interactions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• MDT documentation has been revised and updated to require inclusion of a clear and current risk summary, and staff have been reminded to consider all the patient’s documentation including interactions with the patient. The patient’s perspective is included as part of the MDT preparation documents.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 4 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Require relevant patient information, including externally generated clinical documents, to be recorded, stored and uploaded through the expected DSR process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Staff have been reminded that relevant person/patient information, including externally generated clinical documents received by a property, must be recorded, stored and uploaded in line with the expected DSR process.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 6 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Require admission care plans, 72-hour manager review, at least monthly named-nurse updates, and monthly audits of care-plan reviews and accuracy.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Before a new service user is accepted into a service, an admission care plan is carried out, and this is uploaded to the DSR system. Within 72 hours of admission, the registered manager reviews the admission care plan to ensure that the correct care plan is in place and meets the individual’s needs. Following admission and initial review, the DSR system creates a prompt, assigned to a patient’s named nurse, to review and where necessary update the care plan on an at least monthly basis. Care plans will also be updated on a shorter timescale if there is a clinical need, for example an adverse event or change in a patient’s presentation/ risk profile. Care plan reviews and updates are audited on a monthly basis to ensure continuing compliance, so that any remedial actions can be taken swiftly if required.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 4 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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 a structured Disclosure Control Toolkit and governance process for mapping, searching, collating, reviewing and disclosing records.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• In response to the Coroner’s concern, AFG has reviewed its approach to record collation and disclosure and has taken action to strengthen the consistency and auditability of this process.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 5 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Update the search policy, document required searches and drug tests in DSR, and provide refresher search training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The search policy has been updated and where a search or drug test is required, this is documented within the DSR system. Staff have received refresher training in conducting searches as part of the compliance process, and reminded of the importance of documenting all such actions.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 4 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Submit general safeguarding concerns to the CQC and clarify staff statutory reporting requirements, including safeguarding duties.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Following the Inquest, a safeguarding submission was made by AFG to the CQC as regards the general concerns raised at the hearing, and AFG has in addition clarified and reminded all staff of their statutory reporting requirements, including in respect of safeguarding.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 5 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Use a standardised DSR MDT reporting template completed before meetings, with automated compliance checks and senior-practitioner clinical supervision.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• A standardised MDT reporting template has been introduced into the Digital Support Record (DSR) system, AFG’s electronic patient record software. The named nurse (or an alternative individual, as detailed in response to Concern 1) is sent the template attached to the MDT invite, and is required to complete this form seven days prior to the MDT meeting. The completion of this form triggers other processes within the DSR system, including monthly compliance checks and clinical supervision by a senior practitioner.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 2 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Require material disclosures in handovers and MDTs, using an updated handover template with monthly senior-practitioner and registered-manager audits.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Staff are required, and have been reminded to record in handover notes and MDT meetings, all material disclosures. To help with this process, the handover template has been reviewed and updated, to ensure it adheres to national standards and guidance. The adequacy of handover notes, and sufficiency of information provided, is reviewed monthly by a senior practitioner, and are also audited by a service’s registered manager to ensure appropriate completion and provision of information.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 4 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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 all future serious incidents in accordance with the PSIRF framework.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• All future serious incidents will be reviewed in accordance with PSIRF framework.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 6 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Reissue section 17 guidance and use separate escorted/emergency and unescorted leave forms for each patient.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Specifically in respect of s.17 MHA decision-making, AFG has updated and reissued to staff guidance as to the process to be followed. In addition, AFG has moved to a system of two leave forms for each patient: one that covers all escorted and emergency arrangements; and a second which covers unescorted leave, to minimise the impact to restriction and recovery.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 3 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Medical information may legitimately remain across multiple appropriate sources; a structured collation and disclosure process can address this without a single central record.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Over the course of the inquest there were multiple, serious, disclosure issues relating to non-disclosure of medical records. It appears that at the time medical records were not kept across a variety of locations and programmes, electronic and in paper. Staff therefore would not have had a central place to go to find all relevant clinical information about a patient. I am informed that there are plans to implement an electronic record keeping system but I do not have information about the nature, scope or timeframes for this.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 5 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

AFG was not legally required to report unauthorised absences to the CQC because Weaver Lodge did not meet the prescribed security-unit categories.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The CQC were not notified of periods when the patient went absence without leave.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 5 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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.3

  1. 1

    Hold a formal clinical-supervision discussion with all registered professionals about accurate record-keeping, document management and patient-safety prioritisation.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 12 March 2026.
  2. 2

    Audit clinical supervision at service level and incorporate findings into organisational quality reporting.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 March 2026.
  3. 3

    Introduce regular cross-peer audits of section 17 leave checklists.

    Stated by Alternative Futures Group LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 March 2026.

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 formal clinical-supervision discussion with all registered professionals about accurate record-keeping, document management and patient-safety prioritisation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• In light of the evidence heard during the inquest, a formal conversation with all registered professionals will take place at their next clinical supervision session, to reinforce the paramount importance of accurate record-keeping, document management and prioritisation of patient safety at all times.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 2 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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

Audit clinical supervision at service level and incorporate findings into organisational quality reporting.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• That supervision is then itself subject to separate audit by management at service level, with any findings being incorporated into organisational quality reporting to ensure oversight and continuous improvement.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 2 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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 regular cross-peer audits of section 17 leave checklists.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• To ensure ongoing compliance AFG has introduced regular cross-peer audits of the s.17 leave checklists. The results of the most recent process in March 2026 showed that there were no risks or major issues in any of AFG’s other sites.”

Source location

Response from Alternative Futures Group
Page 3 · response
Published 12 March 2026

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