Stanley Charles Dodson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 23 Jul 2013•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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
1

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 raised1

  1. Failure to report patient non-response to operatives
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to maintain follow-up of patients who disengage from care

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. Department of Health and Social Care

    Develop fundamental standards of care with the Care Quality Commission, reflecting service-user and carer experiences.

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

  1. Department of Health and Social Care

    Existing legal staffing requirements and CQC regulation are considered sufficient, so specific staffing ratios will not be added to registration requirements.

    Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
  2. Department of Health and Social Care

    Fixed staffing ratios are impractical because residents’ levels of need vary substantially between care and nursing homes.

    Disputes 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 report patient non-response to operatives

Wider context from the report

“Although the Doctor made several attempts to directly contact Mr Dodson and left a telephone message for him, these difficulties were not reported back to the operative to enable consideration of further action to contact him. I would be grateful if you could consider the appropriateness of extending your existing protocols to requirements that locum doctors should inform the operatives in the event of the non response of patients. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to maintain follow-up of patients who disengage from 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

Develop fundamental standards of care with the Care Quality Commission, reflecting service-user and carer experiences.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Department and the CQC will develop the fundamental standards of care to reflect the experiences of service users and carers. CQC is currently consulting on the new standards, which, when finalised, will be incorporated in to the registration requirements, alongside other ‘expected standards’ that providers will also need to meet. The regulation requirements will still include a requirement related to staffing, which will be similar to the current requirement referred to above. There is no intention to add specific staffing ratios to the registration requirements.”

Source location

2013-0303-Response-by-Department-of-Health
Page 2 · response
Published 7 November 2013

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 legal staffing requirements and CQC regulation are considered sufficient, so specific staffing ratios will not be added to registration requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You are correct that there are no set ratios of staff to residents in care and nursing homes. The levels of need of residents can vary a great deal and it would simply not be practical to devise ratios which would be suitable for all circumstances. However, all homes are required by law to ensure that sufficient numbers of properly qualified staff are on duty at all times.”

Source location

2013-0303-Response-by-Department-of-Health
Page 1 · response
Published 7 November 2013

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

Fixed staffing ratios are impractical because residents’ levels of need vary substantially between care and nursing homes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In your letter you asked me to consider reviewing the staff ratios in care homes and establishing national guidelines or regulations.”

Source location

2013-0303-Response-by-Department-of-Health
Page 1 · response
Published 7 November 2013

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