Sean Anthony Heeney · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 14 Jul 2023•Northamptonshire

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

Recipients and published 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 maintain a first-floor medical-emergency extrication plan for residents unable or unwilling to leave
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable emergency evacuation arrangements for people requiring assisted removal

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. HM Prison and Probation Service

    Consult local emergency services to prepare a recorded plan for evacuating medically incapacitated or unwilling people from Bridgewood House.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. HM Prison and Probation Service

    Approved Premises staff will not undertake medical-emergency extrication; local emergency services are responsible for this evacuation work.

    Redirects 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

Failure to maintain a first-floor medical-emergency extrication plan for residents unable or unwilling to leave

Wider context from the report

“The evidence suggested a lack of a clear or settled plan amongst the EMAS personnel and police officers as to how Mr Heeney was to be extricated. This caused a delay in removing Mr Heeney to hospital. Whilst I recognise that any extrication is unlikely to be something done by the Approved Premises staff on their own or at all, I am concerned that Bridgewood House did not and still does not have a plan on how to extricate from the first-floor of the building a person who is unable and/or unwilling to leave in the case of a medical emergency. In this respect, I note the following: 1. The layout of the building and the restrictions which that creates was and remains a known issue: a former manager of Bridgewood House described how it did not take “any residents with mobility issues, because of the stairs”. 2. HMPPS have identified a requirement for Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans. I was referred to the ‘Approved Premises Safe Working Practice Document’ for Bridgewood House which provides: “Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEP) must be put in place for any building user who would encounter a problem and need assistance in exiting the building in an emergency. Staff must be aware of individual residents and colleagues who are on PEEP. Separate PEEP forms are for both staff and residents.” 3. HMPPS have properly identified that individuals recently released from prison have a heightened risk of accidental overdose as they may have lost tolerance to drugs which they had previously used. This is reflected in the induction paperwork provided to residents at Approved Premises. 4. It is to be anticipated that residents within Approved Premises may be more reluctant to cooperate with emergency service personnel, in particular the police. This may make extrication more difficult. 5. It is to be anticipated that residents who have overdosed may be administered Naloxone. This is reflected in HMPPS’ roll-out of Naloxone to all Approved Premises since Mr Heeney’s death. As witnesses explained, a known side-effect of Naloxone is increased agitation. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable emergency evacuation arrangements for people requiring assisted removal.

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

Consult local emergency services to prepare a recorded plan for evacuating medically incapacitated or unwilling people from Bridgewood House.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response, please be assured that Bridgewood House Approved Premises is consulting with the local emergency services on the preparation of a plan to deal with evacuation from the building in a medical emergency. As you helpfully identified the extrication itself is something that would not be undertaken by the Approved Premises staff but it is accepted that a clearly recorded understanding between the agencies involved in such a procedure should ensure a successful evacuation should a similar situation arise in the future.”

Source location

Response from HM Prison and Probation Service
Page 1 · response
Published 21 July 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

Approved Premises staff will not undertake medical-emergency extrication; local emergency services are responsible for this evacuation work.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response, please be assured that Bridgewood House Approved Premises is consulting with the local emergency services on the preparation of a plan to deal with evacuation from the building in a medical emergency. As you helpfully identified the extrication itself is something that would not be undertaken by the Approved Premises staff but it is accepted that a clearly recorded understanding between the agencies involved in such a procedure should ensure a successful evacuation should a similar situation arise in the future.”

Source location

Response from HM Prison and Probation Service
Page 1 · response
Published 21 July 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