PFD report

Brenda SHIELDS · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Jun 2023•Cumbria

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
7

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. Failure to involve family or carers in discharge processes
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to involve families and carers in discharge planning and decisionsPart of recurring concern: Unreliable hospital discharge processes
  2. Failure to involve family in discharge processes
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to involve families and carers in discharge planning and decisions
  3. Failure to adequately incorporate alcohol problems, reported assurances and recent history into risk assessment
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to incorporate relevant clinical history and diagnoses into care decisions
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.5

  1. Action

    Monitor caregiver inclusion in safety and discharge planning through daily MDT review, audits and supervisory checks.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 June 2023.
  2. Action

    Review the risk-assessment approach to move from quantified risk scoring towards a narrative approach aligned with NICE guidance.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 June 2023.
  3. Action

    Record onward referrals and receiving-team acceptance on the electronic MDT proforma, with monthly compliance audits.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 June 2023.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.3

  1. Position

    The FACE risk assessment contained relevant risks, and its scoring was appropriate for the risks presented at discharge.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustDisputes 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 to involve family or carers in discharge processes

Wider context from the report

“(3) I refer you to the PFD report I issued referring to Charlotte Grace on 29/10/19. Assurances were given in response to that report which again focused on discharge without family/carer involvement which is surely paramount. I note actions mentioned in the incident report in this case but am still concerned that similar events may occur in future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to involve families and carers in discharge planning and decisions; Unreliable hospital discharge 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 involve family in discharge processes

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brenda was discharged without any planned follow up. Her family were not involved in the discharge process despite assurances that they would be, her GP did not receive discharge notification from the Hadrian unit until 8 days after the event or from the Crisis team until 10 days after Brenda's death. Referrals promised from Hadrian unit to Drug/Alcohol services and Persistent Physical Symptoms Service were not made. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to involve families and carers in discharge planning and decisions.

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 adequately incorporate alcohol problems, reported assurances and recent history into risk assessment

Wider context from the report

“(2) Inadequate weight seems to have been given to Brenda's alcohol problems and her assurances that all was, and would continue to be well were accepted at face value despite her recent history, her family find it hard to understand how she could be graded low risk on the day she died. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to incorporate relevant clinical history and diagnoses into care decisions.

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 plan follow-up after discharge

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brenda was discharged without any planned follow up. Her family were not involved in the discharge process despite assurances that they would be, her GP did not receive discharge notification from the Hadrian unit until 8 days after the event or from the Crisis team until 10 days after Brenda's death. Referrals promised from Hadrian unit to Drug/Alcohol services and Persistent Physical Symptoms Service were not made. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely and adequate follow-up after discharge; Unreliable hospital discharge 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

Delays in sending discharge notifications to GPs

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brenda was discharged without any planned follow up. Her family were not involved in the discharge process despite assurances that they would be, her GP did not receive discharge notification from the Hadrian unit until 8 days after the event or from the Crisis team until 10 days after Brenda's death. Referrals promised from Hadrian unit to Drug/Alcohol services and Persistent Physical Symptoms Service were not made. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably notify primary care of changes affecting patient care; Unreliable hospital discharge 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 make promised referrals to relevant specialist services

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brenda was discharged without any planned follow up. Her family were not involved in the discharge process despite assurances that they would be, her GP did not receive discharge notification from the Hadrian unit until 8 days after the event or from the Crisis team until 10 days after Brenda's death. Referrals promised from Hadrian unit to Drug/Alcohol services and Persistent Physical Symptoms Service were not made. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably refer patients to required specialist services; Unreliable integration of substance misuse services into patient care.

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 caregiver inclusion in safety and discharge planning through daily MDT review, audits and supervisory checks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions/Recommendations:”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 risk-assessment approach to move from quantified risk scoring towards a narrative approach aligned with NICE guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Consequently, the Trust is in the process of reviewing its approach to risk assessment with the intention of moving away from quantification of risk to that of a more narrative approach in line with recommendations made by NICE in their Self Harm: assessment, management and preventing recurrence [NG225] guidance of 2022.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 6 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 onward referrals and receiving-team acceptance on the electronic MDT proforma, with monthly compliance audits.

Verbatim wording from the response

“"Discharge processes to be reviewed by Hadrian Ward to ensure onward referrals are communicated with receiving teams”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 rolling out carer-awareness and Getting To Know You training, including one-to-one training for new staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Carer leads continue to roll out carer awareness training. This is at 80% across the service currently. A further 8 staff have had Carer Awareness and Getting To Know You training over the past 4 months. Carer leads also offer 1:1 Training for new staff working within CRHT.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 5 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 and discuss Hadrian Unit discharge processes with staff to improve communication of onward referrals.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions/Recommendations:”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 FACE risk assessment contained relevant risks, and its scoring was appropriate for the risks presented at discharge.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In relation to the risk assessment conducted on the day Brenda was discharged, the Serious Incident Investigation Report found that the FACE risk assessment contained all of the relevant risks and scoring was appropriate for the presenting risks.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 6 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 discharge included planned follow-up, with ongoing support from the Cumbria East Crisis Team and planned referrals to other services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to the above, this concern also suggests that Brenda was discharged from the Hadrian Unit and the Crisis Team without any planned follow up. Again, by way of clarification and in accordance with the written evidence provided, immediately following discharge from the Hadrian Unit, Brenda was supported in the community by the Cumbria East Crisis Team, and she continued to be supported by this service until the date of her sad death (on which date she was also discharged from the service). The role of crisis services is to provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care whilst they remain in mental health crisis. Where appropriate and as in this case, the crisis service offers home treatment intervention to allow people to be discharged from hospital earlier whilst still experiencing an acute phase of illness.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 investigation concluded that identified family-involvement issues were not causative or contributory to the death.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We note that the extent to which the issues with family involvement in this case were not explored in evidence due to the absence of any Trust witnesses however, the written evidence from the SI investigation concluded that the findings/learning identified in this investigation were not considered to be causative or contributory to Brenda's death, particularly as carers' views had been sought at a number of points during Brenda's care and treatment and the Getting To Know You documentation had been completed.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 6 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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.2

  1. 1

    Provide senior-lead attendance at multidisciplinary team meetings seven days a week.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 June 2023.
  2. 2

    Audit and monitor physical-health discussions, checks and documentation through monthly MDT, weekly crisis-team and twice-weekly caseload audits.

    Stated by Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 June 2023.

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 senior-lead attendance at multidisciplinary team meetings seven days a week.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In relation to the second recommendation, the Trust has reviewed completed MDT audits and they have shown good compliance with capturing onward referrals and the acceptance of referrals as evidence on the MDT Proforma on the Trust's electronic records system. This is now audited monthly. The compliance figures are January 2023 93%, February 93%, March 2023 95%, April 87%, May 88% and June 95%. Senior leads now attend MDTs 7 days a week to ensure that senior leadership is now offered at all MDTs.”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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 and monitor physical-health discussions, checks and documentation through monthly MDT, weekly crisis-team and twice-weekly caseload audits.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Actions/Recommendations:”

Source location

Response from Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust
Page 5 · response
Published 13 June 2023

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