PFD report

Maria Silkin · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 19 Feb 2015•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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Recipients and published 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.

Concerns raised2

  1. Delays in taking a resident to hospital when required
  2. Failure to accurately record previous falls in falls risk assessments
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate control of falls risksPart of recurring concern: Unreliable documentation of falls-risk management
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 taking a resident to hospital when required

Wider context from the report

“1. During the course of the evidence the Care Home produced a document entitled “Falls Risk Assessment”. In part of that document it was indicated that the “falls history” showed there had been no previous falls whereas I had already heard evidence which was not challenged, to the effect that she had previously fallen numerous times. 2. Because of the above, the action to take her to hospital was, in my opinion, delayed. ”

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 accurately record previous falls in falls risk assessments

Wider context from the report

“1. During the course of the evidence the Care Home produced a document entitled “Falls Risk Assessment”. In part of that document it was indicated that the “falls history” showed there had been no previous falls whereas I had already heard evidence which was not challenged, to the effect that she had previously fallen numerous times. 2. Because of the above, the action to take her to hospital was, in my opinion, delayed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of falls risks; Unreliable documentation of falls-risk management.

Open source report
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026