PFD report

Janet WILLIAMS · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 11 Sep 2017•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
11

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 raised11

  1. Failure to respond to or act on family concerns
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to acknowledge and act on family and carer safety concerns in patient care
  2. Failure to conduct reviews in accordance with CPA protocol
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable Care Programme Approach care coordination
  3. Failure to identify retrospective medical-record entries
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable traceability of retrospective amendments to safety records
Responses linked to these concerns

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

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 respond to or act on family concerns

Wider context from the report

“7. When Ms Williams’ family attempted to raise concerns with her care co-ordinator, at times their calls were not returned and at other times their concerns were simply not acted upon. She had recently been diagnosed with a very serious mental health condition, but she was not monitored with sufficient care or in some instances at all, and she was therefore not assessed or treated appropriately. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to acknowledge and act on family and carer safety concerns in patient 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 conduct reviews in accordance with CPA protocol

Wider context from the report

“3. Ms Williams was not reviewed in accordance with the protocol for a person on a CPA. A medical review with her consultant psychiatrist scheduled for 12 May 2016 was cancelled by her care co-ordinator. The reason given was that the psychiatrist was unwell, though in fact she was not. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable Care Programme Approach care coordination.

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 identify retrospective medical-record entries

Wider context from the report

“8. Finally, as I know you are aware, the care co-ordinator made several retrospective entries in the medical records that she did not record as being made retrospectively. These entries were made up to eleven months after events, and were made after Ms Williams’ death and mostly after my request for a statement from the care co-ordinator in preparation for the inquest. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable traceability of retrospective amendments to safety 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 investigate conflicting reports about mental health symptoms

Wider context from the report

“2. Ms Williams told her care co-ordinator that she was no longer hearing voices, but her daughter raised concerns that this was not true. Ms Williams’ care co-ordinator did not at any point in April 2016 or afterwards raise this with Ms Williams, but instead accepted Ms Williams’ narrative as accurate. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable assessment of patients’ mental state.

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 detect missing computer records of CPA care plans

Wider context from the report

“1. Ms Williams’ care plan approach (CPA) was not recorded on the computer system and so there were no automatic alerts generated when she was not seen for review at the appropriate times. The lack of computer record of her CPA was never noted. ”

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 record CPA care plans in the computer system

Wider context from the report

“1. Ms Williams’ care plan approach (CPA) was not recorded on the computer system and so there were no automatic alerts generated when she was not seen for review at the appropriate times. The lack of computer record of her CPA was never noted. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable Care Programme Approach care coordination; 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 maintain care-coordinator meetings

Wider context from the report

“5. Between 11 October 2016 when Ms Williams was discharged by the home treatment team, to 21 February 2017 when she saw her general practitioner and her care co-ordinator together, Ms Williams’ care co-ordinator did not meet with her. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable care-coordinator provision and cover for mental health service users.

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

Insufficient monitoring of patients with serious mental health conditions

Wider context from the report

“7. When Ms Williams’ family attempted to raise concerns with her care co-ordinator, at times their calls were not returned and at other times their concerns were simply not acted upon. She had recently been diagnosed with a very serious mental health condition, but she was not monitored with sufficient care or in some instances at all, and she was therefore not assessed or treated appropriately. ”

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

Delays in arranging required medical reviews

Wider context from the report

“4. A meeting was then scheduled three months’ away, for 9 August 2016, despite the need for medical review and the lack of any alternative arrangement in the meantime. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely continuing mental health reviews and follow-up.

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 maintain timely medical review arrangements

Wider context from the report

“3. Ms Williams was not reviewed in accordance with the protocol for a person on a CPA. A medical review with her consultant psychiatrist scheduled for 12 May 2016 was cancelled by her care co-ordinator. The reason given was that the psychiatrist was unwell, though in fact she was not. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Delays in consultant review of patients.

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 arrange psychiatrist medical reviews

Wider context from the report

“6. Between 11 October 2016 when Ms Williams was discharged by the home treatment team, and her death on 8 March 2017, Ms Williams’ care co-ordinator did not arrange for a medical review by the psychiatrist. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely continuing mental health reviews and follow-up.

Open source report
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
0/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.