Ian William Deavall · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 9 Sep 2024•Greater Manchester West

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

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 raised2

  1. Risk of non-VP prisoners victimising VP prisoners
  2. Failure of emergency cell bells to remain operable and alert prison staff
    Part of recurring concern: Failure of emergency alarm responsePart of recurring concern: Unreliable call bell systems for summoning assistance

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

    Separate vulnerable and non-vulnerable prisoners across two induction wings.

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

    Separating vulnerable and non-vulnerable prisoners means the risks associated with their co-location, including bell cancellation, are no longer present.

    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

Risk of non-VP prisoners victimising VP prisoners

Wider context from the report

“(1) The response to a medical emergency will generally be time critical. (2) The risk that non-VP prisoners will victimise VP prisoners is a recognised one. (3) That prison staff became aware of the medical emergency in the Deceased’s case was more by accident than design (depending as it did on the caprice of Prisoner A). There remains a risk that future deaths could occur as it remains the case that emergency cell bells at HMP Forest Bank can be deactivated readily and altogether by other prisoners and no action to implement fail-safe measures is currently proposed. ”

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 of emergency cell bells to remain operable and alert prison staff

Wider context from the report

“(1) The response to a medical emergency will generally be time critical. (2) The risk that non-VP prisoners will victimise VP prisoners is a recognised one. (3) That prison staff became aware of the medical emergency in the Deceased’s case was more by accident than design (depending as it did on the caprice of Prisoner A). There remains a risk that future deaths could occur as it remains the case that emergency cell bells at HMP Forest Bank can be deactivated readily and altogether by other prisoners and no action to implement fail-safe measures is currently proposed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure of emergency alarm response; Unreliable call bell systems for summoning assistance.

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

Separate vulnerable and non-vulnerable prisoners across two induction wings.

Verbatim wording from the response

“HMP Forest Bank has advised that the induction is now split across two wings, which allows VPs and non-VPs to be housed separately, which means that the risks to VPs associated with co-location, including the cancelling of cell call bells by non-VPs, are no longer present.”

Source location

Response from HMPPS
Page 1 · response
Published 10 September 2024

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

Separating vulnerable and non-vulnerable prisoners means the risks associated with their co-location, including bell cancellation, are no longer present.

Verbatim wording from the response

“HMP Forest Bank has advised that the induction is now split across two wings, which allows VPs and non-VPs to be housed separately, which means that the risks to VPs associated with co-location, including the cancelling of cell call bells by non-VPs, are no longer present.”

Source location

Response from HMPPS
Page 1 · response
Published 10 September 2024

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
1/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026