PFD report

John Ashley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 16 Mar 2020•West Sussex

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
9

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
11

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 raised9

  1. Failure to update Care and Treatment Plans when mental health deteriorates
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable care-planning processes
  2. Failure of the Liaison Mental Health Team to use patients’ Care and Support Plans and Central Risk Assessments
  3. Failure of weekly professional team meetings to review mental health deterioration and medication non-compliance
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide timely continuing mental health reviews and follow-upPart of recurring concern: Failure to recognise and respond to deteriorating mental health in service users
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.6

  1. Action

    Appoint two substantive Consultant Psychiatrists and support them with an Associate Specialist.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  2. Action

    Continue monitoring compliance with care plans, risk assessments and supervision through performance reporting and audits.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  3. Action

    Revise care plan formats and processes to improve care standards.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.6

  1. Position

    The team-wide duty system is considered safer and sufficient than assigning leave cover to one individual practitioner.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustExisting 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

Failure to update Care and Treatment Plans when mental health deteriorates

Wider context from the report

“1. Mr Ashley’s Care and Treatment Plan was not updated when his mental health deteriorated. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable care-planning processes.

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 Liaison Mental Health Team to use patients’ Care and Support Plans and Central Risk Assessments

Wider context from the report

“7. The Inquest heard evidence that the Liasion Mental Health Team at the Hosptial did not make use of patient’s Care and Support Plans or Central Risk Assessment. ”

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 weekly professional team meetings to review mental health deterioration and medication non-compliance

Wider context from the report

“4. Mr Ashley had not been seen by a Psychiatrist for over a year and there was no evidence that the deterioration of his mental health (and his non compliance with his medication) had been reviewed by the professionals weekly team meetings. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely continuing mental health reviews and follow-up; Failure to recognise and respond to deteriorating mental health in service users.

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

Lack of a system to notify Lead Practitioners of actionable CareNotes entries

Wider context from the report

“3. There was no system in place for Lead Practitioners to be notified of an important entry in a patient’s CareNotes where action was required. ”

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

Lack of a clear procedure for Care Coordinators to update GPs about changed treatment plans

Wider context from the report

“8. There was no clear procedure for GPs to be updated by Care Coordinators with details of a patient’s current treatment plan if it had been changed. This was particularly important where there was no regular assessments by a Psychiatrist who would in the normal course of events be providing such updates. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable communication of patient-care information between clinical staff.

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

Lack of practitioner cover and formal handover arrangements for Lead Practitioner caseloads during leave

Wider context from the report

“6. Save for the duty scheme there appears to be no procedure in place for another practitioner to cover a Lead Practitioner’s case load or any formal handover when they are on leave. Therefore there was no single person who has up todate knowledge of a patient who may be in need or whose mental health was deteriorating. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Insufficient staffing cover for mental health services during absences; Unreliable handover of care information and responsibility.

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

Inconsistent policy requirements for timing of Risk Assessment reviews

Wider context from the report

“5. The Inquest identified that there was a discrepancy in the Trust’s own Policies as to when a Risk Assessment should be reviewed. ”

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 provide regular Psychiatrist review

Wider context from the report

“4. Mr Ashley had not been seen by a Psychiatrist for over a year and there was no evidence that the deterioration of his mental health (and his non compliance with his medication) had been reviewed by the professionals weekly team meetings. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely continuing mental health reviews and follow-up.

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 record and compile key patient information in CareNotes

Wider context from the report

“2. Staff were not recording interactions with Mr Ashley in the CareNotes system and often emails were not copied into these notes. Therefore there was a lack of compilation of key information relating to Mr Ashley. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Electronic patient records failing to make relevant clinical information available and actionable.

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

Appoint two substantive Consultant Psychiatrists and support them with an Associate Specialist.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Mr Ashley did have a medical review/telephone consultation with a Consultant Locum Consultant Psychiatrist on 30 October 2018 when there was a concern about his health. I regret that Mr Ashley was not seen by a Psychiatrist as regularly as he should have been i.e annually, however I can report that the Trust has successfully appointed two substantive Consultant Psychiatrists for Worthing this year, and they joined the team in March. They are supported by an Associate Specialist. This will enable us to facilitate medical reviews in a timely manner and negate the need for a waiting list. The medical caseload is currently being reviewed with a view to ensuring that every patient has an annual medical review as required.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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 monitoring compliance with care plans, risk assessments and supervision through performance reporting and audits.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust monitors performance in each of these areas and there are individual performance dashboards for each team within the Carenotes system that allow clinicians to monitor their own performance when they log onto the system. Team Leaders and other managers also have access to team/service based reports through our "Report Manager" performance system and these provide an audit function and allow managers to have an overview of team performance.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Revise care plan formats and processes to improve care standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust is continuing to monitor compliance with care plans, risk assessments and supervision and since autumn last year, we have revised our care plan and risk assessment formats/processes, updated our policies and training programme to improve standards of care.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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 medical caseload to ensure patients receive annual medical reviews as required.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Mr Ashley did have a medical review/telephone consultation with a Consultant Locum Consultant Psychiatrist on 30 October 2018 when there was a concern about his health. I regret that Mr Ashley was not seen by a Psychiatrist as regularly as he should have been i.e annually, however I can report that the Trust has successfully appointed two substantive Consultant Psychiatrists for Worthing this year, and they joined the team in March. They are supported by an Associate Specialist. This will enable us to facilitate medical reviews in a timely manner and negate the need for a waiting list. The medical caseload is currently being reviewed with a view to ensuring that every patient has an annual medical review as required.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Complete ratification and publication of the revised clinical risk assessment and safety planning policy.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust accepts that the current Clinical Risk Assessment and Safety Planning/ Risk Management Policy and Procedure policy is unclear as it has two potential review dates when the risk assessment should be updated. The current policy is under review and this has been addressed as part of that. The new policy is in the final stages of ratification and will be available for staff very shortly.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Incorporate leave handover arrangements, particularly for vulnerable patients, into staff risk assessment training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I acknowledge that in this case, it was a specific concern that a Lead Practitioner when returning from leave should be aware of important developments regarding his/her patient. It is the responsibility of a Lead Practitioner and other members of staff returning from leave, to review their caseload and establish if there were any concerns during their absence and I understand that Mr Ashley's Lead Practitioner did make himself aware of events when he returned from leave (he addressed this in his addendum report at the Inquest). Nevertheless, I wish to reassure you, that I agree that it is important that there should be a handover following a leave of absence, particularly in the case of the most vulnerable patients and staff are actively encouraged to ensure that this takes place and this will become part and parcel of staff risk assessment training.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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 team-wide duty system is considered safer and sufficient than assigning leave cover to one individual practitioner.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This concern was addressed in my letter of 20 December 2019 wherein I sought to convey that Mr Ashley was treated as part of a team, and that a plan was in place (as part of his overall care plan), to ensure that there was adequate support when his Lead Practitioner was not available. Prior to going on leave, I understand that Mr Ashley's Lead Practitioner visited to discuss cover arrangements and his crisis/contingency plan. It is apparent that Mr Ashley understood the arrangements as he attended his planned appointments at the Wellbeing Café and Clozaril Clinic, and he accessed the duty system and the Mental Health Liaison Team for further support.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Not all email correspondence is routinely uploaded; recording the substance of relevant contact is considered sufficient.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is standard practice for all interactions with patients to be recorded on the Carenotes system and these records are available and accessible to clinicians in all parts of our service to review. In the case of Mr Ashley, it was evident that our acute and community services used his health records to share information, make clinical decisions and review his care. However, I understand that you had specific concerns that email correspondence from Mr Ashley's sister, was not uploaded to his record. I would advise that it is not customary practice to upload all email correspondence. However, the Trust would expect a record and detail of ████████ contact to be recorded on the system.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Although Carenotes lacks automatic alerts, existing information-sharing processes are considered sufficient for required clinical communication.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I acknowledge that our Carenotes system does not have an automatic function to alert Lead Practitioners and/or the clinical care team when another clinician has accessed a patient's records or recorded clinical activity. However, I would like to reassure you we have processes and procedures in place to allow clinicians to share information when”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Whether to discuss a patient at weekly MDT meetings is left to clinical judgment because experienced staff may review care without MDT discussion.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In respect of your concern that Mr Ashley's condition was not discussed in the multidisciplinary (MDT) meetings, I would like to reassure you that MDT meetings occur weekly and Lead Practitioners and other colleagues are invited to present cases where they require advice and support, or cases which require a multidisciplinary approach. The decision as to whether a case should be discussed at a MDT meeting, is a matter of clinical judgment, and in Mr Ashley's case, his Lead Practitioner and others involved in his care, did not consider this support was necessary and his care was reviewed by the experienced staff who were directly involved in his care. My understanding is that it is not common practice for every patient to be discussed at a MDT meeting.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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 practice of sending GPs clinical letters, care plans and relevant assessment information is considered sufficient for treatment-plan updates.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Mr Ashley should have had a medical review on an annual basis and I wish to assure you that it is our practice to send a clinical letter to the GP as well as a copy to the patient. It is also Trust practice to send a copy of the care plan and information about changes to medication or physical health assessments undertaken by our service. I am informed that the GP practice received copies of Trust letters from the last medical review and copies of the assessments undertaken by the Mental Health Liaison Team and these contained details of the perceived risk and action plan agreed with the patient.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 6 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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 MHLT's own assessment format, including risk and action-plan sections, is considered sufficient instead of using the patient's other care plans.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I understand that ████████ was critical of the assessment undertaken by the MHLT and considered that they should have considered the care plans. I would like to explain that the MHLT has its own assessment format and this includes a risk assessment and action plan section and it is designed in this way for ease of sharing information with primary care. At the Inquest, I am informed that the MHLT Team Leader gave evidence as”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 5 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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.5

  1. 1

    Adopt Triangle of Care self-assessment tools and develop local action plans to improve carer engagement.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  2. 2

    Clarify out-of-office automatic replies so people know how to obtain help when practitioners are absent.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  3. 3

    Provide a Carer’s Pack and carer-led training to support family involvement and access to relevant services.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  4. 4

    Recruit a Lead Clinician to deliver face-to-face risk assessment training for clinical staff.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.
  5. 5

    Introduce a universal risk assessment capturing risk events chronologically and improving record keeping.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 April 2020.

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

  1. 1

    Although the risk assessment was not updated in the records, the patient's risks were continually assessed.

    Stated by Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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

Adopt Triangle of Care self-assessment tools and develop local action plans to improve carer engagement.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We also have bespoke Carers Training provided by paid Carer Leads, and local teams have adopted their "Triangle of Care self-assessment tools" and developed action plans to improve carer engagement.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Clarify out-of-office automatic replies so people know how to obtain help when practitioners are absent.

Verbatim wording from the response

“At the inquest, staff explained that they use an out of office assistant (automatic reply) to advise patients, carers or other health professionals of their absence and how to seek help if required. I understand that the Lead Practitioner used this system whilst he was on annual leave and ████████ was directed to contact a duty worker. However, ████████ was under the impression that the Trust had a system for monitoring emails of the Lead Practitioner who was on leave when she sent her emails which isn’t the case but we will ensure out of office automatic replies are clear in how someone will seek help when the practitioner is on leave.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Provide a Carer’s Pack and carer-led training to support family involvement and access to relevant services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust recognises the importance and value of carer involvement, and this is acknowledged in the Serious Incident Report, specifically the role ████████ played in caring for her brother. We continue to emphasise the need to actively seek consent from patients to allow carers and family to participate in their treatment and care. As a result of this recommendation and learning from similar incidents and inquests, the Trust now provides a Carer's Pack specifically designed to involve families and carers. The pack provides information about a carer's entitlement to a carer’s assessment and the relevant local services they can access for support. I am enclosing a copy of the pack with this letter for your information.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Recruit a Lead Clinician to deliver face-to-face risk assessment training for clinical staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have invested in the recruitment of a Lead Clinician, and they are responsible for delivering face-to-face risk assessment training, and to date has provided training to over 950 clinical staff. The training utilises national and local learning from serious incidents pertinent to the clinician's work environment and has been consistently well evaluated.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Introduce a universal risk assessment capturing risk events chronologically and improving record keeping.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust is continuing to monitor compliance with care plans, risk assessments and supervision and since autumn last year, we have revised our care plan and risk assessment formats/processes, updated our policies and training programme to improve standards of care.”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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

Although the risk assessment was not updated in the records, the patient's risks were continually assessed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I regret that the risk assessment was not updated in the records as it should have been in Mr Ashley's case, however his risks were continually assessed and I understand that this was accepted by the Coroner's expert, ████████”

Source location

2020-0071-Sussex-Partnership-NHS-Foundation-Trust_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 8 April 2020

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