PFD report

Ruth Jones · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 11 Feb 2021•Manchester South

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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
6

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 raised3

  1. Lack of guidance for managing falls risk during resident isolation
  2. Failure to support effective communication and understanding of the health baseline of vulnerable frail elderly patients during hospital presentation and assessment
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate support for vulnerable patients during healthcare assessment and decisions
  3. Insufficient staffing capacity for continuous observation of residents at risk of falls during self-isolation
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to reliably supervise and monitor residents in care accommodationPart of recurring concern: Insufficient care-home staffing capacity for residents’ required care
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.4

  1. Action

    Undertake an unannounced targeted inspection of The Beeches covering falls risk management, hospital transfers and infection prevention and control.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 February 2021.
  2. Action

    Highlight links to RESTORE2 and British Geriatrics Society guidance more explicitly in care-home admissions guidance.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 February 2021.
  3. Action

    Include a link to Falls and Fractures guidance in the care-home admissions guidance.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 February 2021.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    The provider and registered manager, not CQC, are responsible for deciding how to address identified care risks and implement improvements.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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

Lack of guidance for managing falls risk during resident isolation

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard that Mrs Jones was frail and at risk of falls. The home had a falls risk plan in place that was based around her being observed during the day in communal areas. The home was not staffed to provide one to one observations for residents required to self-isolate. As a result when Covid 19 was suspected by the GP, and the home were directed to isolate her she could not be observed by staff as would generally be the case in the day. The home took some steps with sensors to ensure they were aware if she stood up whilst in her room but could not provide continuous observation. It was unclear how homes were being advised to safely manage residents at risk of falls where isolation was required. The home were unaware of any guidance that they should follow to manage the risk. ”

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 support effective communication and understanding of the health baseline of vulnerable frail elderly patients during hospital presentation and assessment

Wider context from the report

“2. When Mrs Jones had to go to hospital she was sent alone and her family could not go with her due to Covid 19 restrictions. The inquest heard that Mrs Jones was frail and vulnerable. The inquest was told that the unsupported presentation/assessment of vulnerable, frail and elderly patients such as Mrs Jones presented significant problems to clinicians in terms of effective communication and understanding their health baseline to support appropriate and timely clinical decision making. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate support for vulnerable patients during healthcare assessment 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

Insufficient staffing capacity for continuous observation of residents at risk of falls during self-isolation

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard that Mrs Jones was frail and at risk of falls. The home had a falls risk plan in place that was based around her being observed during the day in communal areas. The home was not staffed to provide one to one observations for residents required to self-isolate. As a result when Covid 19 was suspected by the GP, and the home were directed to isolate her she could not be observed by staff as would generally be the case in the day. The home took some steps with sensors to ensure they were aware if she stood up whilst in her room but could not provide continuous observation. It was unclear how homes were being advised to safely manage residents at risk of falls where isolation was required. The home were unaware of any guidance that they should follow to manage the risk. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably supervise and monitor residents in care accommodation; Insufficient care-home staffing capacity for residents’ required 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

Undertake an unannounced targeted inspection of The Beeches covering falls risk management, hospital transfers and infection prevention and control.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Upon receipt of the concerns raises as part of the Regulation 28 report issued to CQC by the coroner an unannounced targeted inspection of The Beeches was undertaken. This was completed to ensure that the circumstances of Mrs Jones death did not raise any ongoing risk to people currently living at the home.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

Highlight links to RESTORE2 and British Geriatrics Society guidance more explicitly in care-home admissions guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You may also wish to note that guidance in April 2020, Coronavirus (COVID-19): admissions and care of people in care homes², contained a link to RESTORE2³, a physical deterioration and escalation tool for care and nursing homes, as well as guidance on managing COVID-19 and care homes, published by the British Geriatrics Society⁴. These sources provide clear guidance on the importance of providing a concise escalation history to health professionals to support their professional decision making, and advance care planning. Reference is also made in the guidance to Enhanced Health in Care Homes⁵, a new, proactive model of care, centred on the needs of the individual.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-Dept.-of-Health-Social-Care-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

Include a link to Falls and Fractures guidance in the care-home admissions guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Extensive guidance is available on best practice on safely managing residents at risk of falls. Specifically, the guidance, Falls and Fractures: applying All Our Health⁷ (which includes links to NICE standards), should continue to be followed at all times, including during the COVID-19 outbreak. This guidance was last updated in January 2020.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-Dept.-of-Health-Social-Care-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

Seek clarification from Public Health England and NHS England and NHS Improvement on adjustments needed to Falls and Fractures guidance for self-isolating care-home residents.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Extensive guidance is available on best practice on safely managing residents at risk of falls. Specifically, the guidance, Falls and Fractures: applying All Our Health⁷ (which includes links to NICE standards), should continue to be followed at all times, including during the COVID-19 outbreak. This guidance was last updated in January 2020.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-Dept.-of-Health-Social-Care-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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 provider and registered manager, not CQC, are responsible for deciding how to address identified care risks and implement improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In accordance with CQC’s regulatory remit, we highlight breaches of the Regulations to a provider and where appropriate ask them what they are going to do to make improvements. We do not tell them what they should do. That is for the provider and/or registered manager (both being registered persons for CQC purposes) to decide.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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 individualised care plans and additional welfare checks were considered sufficient to mitigate Mrs Jones’s fall risk while unwell.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have reviewed Mrs Jones’ care records, and in this case, we believe that the service had taken all reasonable steps to mitigate the risk of falls for Mrs Jones. There were care plans in place to manage the risk of falls for Mrs Jones and these were relevant whether she was in communal areas or in her bedroom. Reference to times when Mrs. Jones was unwell were made and indicated that staff should make additional checks of Mrs Jones’ welfare at those times. In our view, the registered manager had assessed Mrs Jones on an individual basis and despite her not being funded for one to one care had assessed risk and put measures in place to support Mrs Jones whilst she was unwell.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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 existing red bag scheme and hospital passport were considered sufficient to address risks during Mrs Jones’s transfer to hospital.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Beeches participated in the red bag scheme. This is a national scheme that assists care home residents admitted to hospital to be discharged quicker. The bags contain key paperwork (hospital passport), medication and personal items like glasses, slippers and dentures. The hospital passport contained relevant information about the individual’s current needs, a brief medical history, as well as important contact details and other relevant information about a person’s preferences. These are handed to ambulance”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

Care homes are statutorily responsible for assessing and mitigating residents’ health and safety risks, including risks associated with falls.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014⁶, care homes have a statutory duty to ensure safe care and treatment for service users. This includes assessing the risks to the health and the safety of service users in a manner that is reasonably practicable to mitigate any such risks.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-Dept.-of-Health-Social-Care-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

    Continue monitoring The Beeches and liaising with the local authority to review ongoing risks and feedback.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 February 2021.
  2. 2

    Continue reviewing regulated services’ safety systems and processes through inspection, challenging unsafe care and taking enforcement action where appropriate.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 February 2021.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    Careful hospital visiting policies and visitor limits remain appropriate while coronavirus is circulating, with limited discretion for healthcare organisations.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareExisting 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

Continue monitoring The Beeches and liaising with the local authority to review ongoing risks and feedback.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In order to ensure that this risk is minimised to the lowest possible level and to ensure service users are not placed at risk at The Beeches, we are continually monitoring the service and liaising with the local authority to review any ongoing risks and feedback.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 6 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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 reviewing regulated services’ safety systems and processes through inspection, challenging unsafe care and taking enforcement action where appropriate.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In summary, the requirement is placed on registered persons to ensure that they are delivering care in a safe and effective way and doing all that is practicable to mitigate any risks. CQC will continue to review through inspection the systems and processes being operated by those services it regulates. CQC will challenge and, if appropriate, take enforcement action against a registered person where it finds that care is being provided in an unsafe way.”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-CQC-Redacted
Page 6 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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

Careful hospital visiting policies and visitor limits remain appropriate while coronavirus is circulating, with limited discretion for healthcare organisations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“On 16 March 2021, NHS England and NHS Improvement revised its guidance on how NHS organisations may choose to facilitate visiting across healthcare inpatient, outpatient and diagnostic service settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Careful visiting policies remain appropriate while coronavirus continues to be in general circulation, and the”

Source location

2021-0038-Response-from-Dept.-of-Health-Social-Care-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 15 February 2021

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
2/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026