PFD report

Mr John Hay · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 31 Mar 2026•Northamptonshire

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
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
3

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
15

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 raised5

  1. Unclear process for escalating cases to obtain medical input
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable escalation policy for care concerns
  2. Failure of the care team to assess situations and make care decisions
  3. Unclear process for notifying the responsible person about missing or spent medication
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.9

  1. Action

    Make contact management a key focus of future monitoring visits at the Care Bureau and wider provider services.

    Stated by West Northamptonshire CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  2. Action

    Add the insufficient-medication protocol to existing Care Plans as they undergo periodic review.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  3. Action

    Update the standard anticoagulant risk assessment to require emergency calls after falls or head blows and disclosure of anticoagulant use.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 April 2026.

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

  1. Position

    Implemented measures are considered sufficient to address the concerns and reduce the likelihood of similar issues arising.

    Stated by West Northamptonshire CouncilExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Unclear process for escalating cases to obtain medical input

Wider context from the report

“2. The process/system for escalation to get medical input was unclear. In the current case, it was accepted with the benefit of hindsight that when a frail elderly person on blood thinners suffers a fall, a medical assessment should probably be done. However, after the morning visit, it was Mr Hay himself who made the decision (despite having suffered a fall and having a diagnosis of dementia) without input from his family. At the time of the evening visit, the care team contacted the son for a decision rather than simply assessing the situation and making a decision. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable escalation policy for care concerns.

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 of the care team to assess situations and make care decisions

Wider context from the report

“2. The process/system for escalation to get medical input was unclear. In the current case, it was accepted with the benefit of hindsight that when a frail elderly person on blood thinners suffers a fall, a medical assessment should probably be done. However, after the morning visit, it was Mr Hay himself who made the decision (despite having suffered a fall and having a diagnosis of dementia) without input from his family. At the time of the evening visit, the care team contacted the son for a decision rather than simply assessing the situation and making a decision. ”

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

Unclear process for notifying the responsible person about missing or spent medication

Wider context from the report

“3. The process/system by which missing or spent medication is actioned was unclear. In the current case, Mr Hay’s son was responsible for ordering medication. However, the system by which the care team would notify him was unclear. ”

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 complete and clinically review care-plan risk assessments

Wider context from the report

“1. The Risk Assessment in the Care Plan is neither completed nor reviewed with nursing or medical input, but includes, amongst other things, actions to be taken when a person is on blood thinners. In the present case, the only scenario covered was in relation to a person who has “heavy bleeding”. The obligation to complete the risk assessment and determine actions falls upon the care team, none of whom have any medical training, aside from basic first aid. ”

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

Insufficient coverage of blood-thinner-related scenarios in care-plan risk assessments

Wider context from the report

“1. The Risk Assessment in the Care Plan is neither completed nor reviewed with nursing or medical input, but includes, amongst other things, actions to be taken when a person is on blood thinners. In the present case, the only scenario covered was in relation to a person who has “heavy bleeding”. The obligation to complete the risk assessment and determine actions falls upon the care team, none of whom have any medical training, aside from basic first aid. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable objective criteria for safety risk assessment.

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

Make contact management a key focus of future monitoring visits at the Care Bureau and wider provider services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Furthermore, West Northamptonshire Council has engaged with the Adult Quality Team, who have been made aware of your concerns. They have confirmed that contact management will be a key focus during future monitoring visits at the Care Bureau, as well as across wider provider services.”

Source location

Response from West Northamptonshire Council
Page 1 · response
Published 13 April 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

Add the insufficient-medication protocol to existing Care Plans as they undergo periodic review.

Verbatim wording from the response

“10. Written Protocol: we are updating our Care Plans to include a specific and clearly worded protocol for insufficient medication. This will make explicit the obligation to notify both the office and the responsible person (whether the service user, a family member, or another party) when medication is low or unavailable, together with a clear escalation path if medication runs out. We have implemented this for new Care Plans in May 2026 and will add this to existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 6 · response
Published 13 April 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 standard anticoagulant risk assessment to require emergency calls after falls or head blows and disclosure of anticoagulant use.

Verbatim wording from the response

“1. Updated Anticoagulant Risk: we have updated our standard anticoagulant risk assessment across all our services. The updated version now explicitly lists a fall or any blow to the head as a trigger requiring carers to call 999 and to inform emergency services that the service user is on anticoagulant medication.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 3 · response
Published 13 April 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

Send field care staff a written reminder to request medication seven days before supplies run out and report unavailable or low medication to the office.

Verbatim wording from the response

“9. Reminder to Field Staff: a written reminder has been sent to all field care staff requiring them to request additional medication at least seven days before a service user’s supply runs out and to notify the office if medication is unavailable or running low at any visit.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 6 · response
Published 13 April 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 an Emergency Action Plan in new Care Plans, signposting fall-response actions and emergency-service escalation for service users and families.

Verbatim wording from the response

“5. Emergency Action Plan: we are updating our Care Plans to include a clear Emergency Action Plan which will signpost to service users and their families the actions carers will take in certain circumstances. To ensure we continue to deliver person-centred care, this before-the-fact clarity is important. It has always been TCB’s policy that input from emergency must be sought in the case of falls, but it is clear that this was inconsistently applied in JH’s case. Our new falls risk (see above) makes it clear that advice from either 111 (unwitnessed falls) or 999 (witnessed falls) must be sought. Service users (with capacity) and their family (where relevant) can then factor that advice into their own decision making. We have implemented this for new Care Plans in May 2026 and will add this to existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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 standard falls risk assessment to distinguish witnessed and unwitnessed falls and require anticoagulant checks and emergency notification.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. Updated Falls Risk: we have updated our standard falls risk across all our services. The updated version distinguishes between witnessed falls (requiring a 999 call) and unwitnessed falls (requiring a 111 call), and in both cases requires carers to check whether the service user is on anticoagulant medication and to inform the relevant emergency service.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 3 · response
Published 13 April 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 anticoagulant users’ Care Plans and Carer App notes to ensure anticoagulant risks are appropriately highlighted.

Verbatim wording from the response

“3. Review of Relevant Service Users: we have reviewed the Care Plans and Carer App notes for all service users who use anticoagulants to ensure that the Anticoagulant Risk is appropriately highlighted.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 3 · response
Published 13 April 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

Present the case as a lessons-learned study to Registered Managers and require dissemination to care and office staff in their branches.

Verbatim wording from the response

“8. Lessons Learned: JH’s case will be presented as a lessons learned case study to all Registered Managers at our next Registered Managers’ meeting, with a specific focus on the tension between person-centred care and escalation obligations. The Registered Managers will then share the case study with both care and office staff in their respective branches.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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 written insufficient-medication protocol in new Care Plans, requiring notification of the office and responsible person and defining escalation when medication runs out.

Verbatim wording from the response

“10. Written Protocol: we are updating our Care Plans to include a specific and clearly worded protocol for insufficient medication. This will make explicit the obligation to notify both the office and the responsible person (whether the service user, a family member, or another party) when medication is low or unavailable, together with a clear escalation path if medication runs out. We have implemented this for new Care Plans in May 2026 and will add this to existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 6 · response
Published 13 April 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

Implemented measures are considered sufficient to address the concerns and reduce the likelihood of similar issues arising.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Taking all of the above into account, West Northamptonshire Council is satisfied that appropriate measures have been implemented to address the concerns and reduce the likelihood of similar issues arising in the future.”

Source location

Response from West Northamptonshire Council
Page 1 · response
Published 13 April 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 or nursing assessments are outside the provider’s role because it delivers personal care rather than medical or nursing services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“On the question of medical or nursing input: TCB is a homecare provider regulated by the CQC. JH’s care was delivered by our Northampton service, which is only authorised to provide personal care. TCB does not provide medical or nursing services and we do not represent ourselves as doing so. Like all providers of this type, our staff are not medically trained, and it is not our role to provide medical or nursing assessments. Our risk assessments are based on information provided by the commissioning authority, the service user themselves, next of kin and other relevant persons. In this case, our assessment correctly recorded JH’s medical conditions – including his anticoagulant medication, his heart condition, and his dementia diagnosis – and these were reflected in the risk”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 2 · response
Published 13 April 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

Responsibility for completing the risk assessment rested with experienced supervisors, not the care team delivering care.

Verbatim wording from the response

““The Risk Assessment in the Care Plan is neither completed nor reviewed with nursing or medical input, but includes, amongst other things, actions to be taken when a person is on blood thinners. In the present case, the only scenario covered was in relation to a person who has “heavy bleeding”. The obligation to complete the risk assessment and determine actions falls upon the care team, none of whom have any medical training, aside from basic first aid.””

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 2 · response
Published 13 April 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.6

  1. 1

    Implement powers-of-attorney questions in new assessments from June 2026.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  2. 2

    Modify the Anticoagulant competency code to optimise matching carers with appropriate experience to service users.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  3. 3

    Check and update powers-of-attorney details in existing Care Plans during periodic review.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  4. 4

    Review the Manual Handling training module with external trainers and confirm that it covers appropriate actions after falls.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  5. 5

    Add the Emergency Action Plan to existing Care Plans as they undergo periodic review.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 April 2026.
  6. 6

    Update assessment documentation to include questions about health and financial lasting powers of attorney.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 April 2026.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.2

  1. 1

    Carers cannot force service users with decision-making capacity to accept emergency assistance or override their informed refusal.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
  2. 2

    Existing Manual Handling training already appropriately covered actions required when service users fall, so further training changes were unnecessary.

    Stated by The Care Bureau LimitedExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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 powers-of-attorney questions in new assessments from June 2026.

Verbatim wording from the response

“6. Powers of Attorney: we have reviewed and updated our assessment documentation to include questions regarding both health and financial lasting powers of attorney. We will be implementing this for new Assessments in June 2026 and will also check power of attorney details in existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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

Modify the Anticoagulant competency code to optimise matching carers with appropriate experience to service users.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4. Systems Update: our system uses competency codes to help match carers with appropriate experience to service users. We modified the “Anticoagulant” code to further optimise matching.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 3 · response
Published 13 April 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

Check and update powers-of-attorney details in existing Care Plans during periodic review.

Verbatim wording from the response

“6. Powers of Attorney: we have reviewed and updated our assessment documentation to include questions regarding both health and financial lasting powers of attorney. We will be implementing this for new Assessments in June 2026 and will also check power of attorney details in existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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 the Manual Handling training module with external trainers and confirm that it covers appropriate actions after falls.

Verbatim wording from the response

“7. Training: we have reviewed our Manual Handling training module with our external trainers and confirmed that it does already and appropriately cover actions in the event of falls.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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

Add the Emergency Action Plan to existing Care Plans as they undergo periodic review.

Verbatim wording from the response

“5. Emergency Action Plan: we are updating our Care Plans to include a clear Emergency Action Plan which will signpost to service users and their families the actions carers will take in certain circumstances. To ensure we continue to deliver person-centred care, this before-the-fact clarity is important. It has always been TCB’s policy that input from emergency must be sought in the case of falls, but it is clear that this was inconsistently applied in JH’s case. Our new falls risk (see above) makes it clear that advice from either 111 (unwitnessed falls) or 999 (witnessed falls) must be sought. Service users (with capacity) and their family (where relevant) can then factor that advice into their own decision making. We have implemented this for new Care Plans in May 2026 and will add this to existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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 assessment documentation to include questions about health and financial lasting powers of attorney.

Verbatim wording from the response

“6. Powers of Attorney: we have reviewed and updated our assessment documentation to include questions regarding both health and financial lasting powers of attorney. We will be implementing this for new Assessments in June 2026 and will also check power of attorney details in existing Care Plans as they are periodically reviewed.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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

Carers cannot force service users with decision-making capacity to accept emergency assistance or override their informed refusal.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Person centred care and the promotion of personal autonomy are at the heart of the regulatory framework for domiciliary care providers. Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 ('Person-centred care') requires that care and treatment must meet the needs and preferences of the service user, and Regulation 11 adds that “[care] and treatment of service users must only be provided with the consent of the relevant person” provided they have capacity.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 4 · response
Published 13 April 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

Existing Manual Handling training already appropriately covered actions required when service users fall, so further training changes were unnecessary.

Verbatim wording from the response

“7. Training: we have reviewed our Manual Handling training module with our external trainers and confirmed that it does already and appropriately cover actions in the event of falls.”

Source location

Response from The Care Bureau
Page 5 · response
Published 13 April 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
3/3

Data last updated 7 September 2026