Gloria FOSTER · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 10 Sep 2014•Surrey

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
0

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
2

Described in responses

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 raised0

    Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

    1. Care Quality Commission

      Review how information from Regulation 28 reports and other sources is systematically incorporated into intelligent monitoring, inspection and registration processes.

    2. Care Quality Commission

      Maintain guidelines requiring prompt notification of relevant agencies when urgently cancelling a provider’s registration, using telephone contact followed by written notice.

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

    1. Care Quality Commission

      Local authorities and Clinical Commissioning Groups hold the primary duties and powers to ensure robust communication arrangements when care providers close.

      Redirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
    2. Care Quality Commission

      The statutory framework does not give CQC the duty or power to manage a closed provider’s communication lines as proposed.

      Outside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

    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 how information from Regulation 28 reports and other sources is systematically incorporated into intelligent monitoring, inspection and registration processes.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We greatly value the intelligence provided in your report and intend to address the concern raised at paragraph 5(4) in particular. The CQC is currently also undertaking a detailed review designed to ensure that the valuable information provided by Regulation 28 reports, as well as from other sources of information, systematically and effectively into our intelligent monitoring, inspection and registration processes.”

    Source location

    2014-0399-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 September 2014

    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 guidelines requiring prompt notification of relevant agencies when urgently cancelling a provider’s registration, using telephone contact followed by written notice.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The CQC does recognise the fundamental importance of notifying the relevant duty-holding agencies in circumstances where urgent cancellation is sought in order to avoid the possibility that circumstances such as those that led to the death of Ms Foster might arise. The CQC also recognises that such cooperation and notification is crucial. For that reason, the CQC has clear guidelines on who must be informed when we urgently cancel a provider’s registration. Those guidelines were in place at the time of Ms Foster’s death and were followed in this case. What follows is a copy of the guidance, which includes sets out as follows in particular at paragraph 11:”

    Source location

    2014-0399-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 September 2014

    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

    Local authorities and Clinical Commissioning Groups hold the primary duties and powers to ensure robust communication arrangements when care providers close.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The current statutory and regulatory framework does not confer on the CQC the duty or power to manage the lines of communication specifically in the way that you envisage. By contrast we understand that Local Authorities and Clinical Commissioning Groups (‘CCGs’) do have such primary duties and powers. Accordingly, those bodies are required to have sufficiently robust arrangements and procedures in place to ensure that they meet those duties without relying on third party agencies such as the CQC.”

    Source location

    2014-0399-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 September 2014

    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 statutory framework does not give CQC the duty or power to manage a closed provider’s communication lines as proposed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In drafting this response significant consideration and consultation has been given to your report by policy and operational teams. In particular we have considered what the current statutory framework empowers and obliges both the CQC and other relevant agencies to do in circumstances such as those that led to Mrs Foster’s tragic death.”

    Source location

    2014-0399-Response-by-Care-Quality-Commission
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 September 2014

    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
    1/2

    Data last updated 7 September 2026