PFD report

Marion Jones · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Aug 2025•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
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
6

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.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised3

  1. Failure to ensure bed rails are in place when required
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable bedrail safety controls
  2. Failure to conduct timely bed-rail assessments
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable bedrail safety controls
  3. Lack of nursing staff knowledge about bed-rail assessment and requirements
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

    Launch a bed-rails e-learning module covering policies and procedures for colleagues conducting bed-rail assessments.

    Stated by Care UKStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 August 2025.
  2. Action

    Add an admission-checklist completeness question to monthly Go Audits to enable management auditing against required completion timeframes.

    Stated by Care UKStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2025.
  3. Action

    Revise the admission checklist to specify timely post-admission assessment of bed rails and other fall-prevention equipment, with clearer completion prompts and reasons for omissions.

    Stated by Care UKStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 August 2025.

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

  1. Position

    Previous incidents involved crash mats or low-rise beds; there were no reported falls without bed rails or alternative protective measures.

    Stated by Care UKDisputes 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

Failure to ensure bed rails are in place when required

Wider context from the report

“1. No pre-admission assessment for bed rails was recorded by the staff member responsible from Riverside, and this does not appear to have taken place. This is in circumstances where bed rails were already in place at Willow Wood and where there were obvious and recorded difficulties with regard to movement in and about bed, in addition to physical activity more generally. Given the circumstances, a pre-admission assessment for bed rails should have taken place and / or been recorded. 2. The inquest heard that family members raised their concerns on admission of Marion Jones to Riverside when they saw there were no bed rails. They were assured that an assessment would take place. This did not happen: it should have done. 3. The manager of the care home agreed that in all the circumstances, including the concerns of the family, such an assessment should have taken place. 4. A registered general nurse involved in care for Marion Jones, and who found her after she had fallen, gave evidence that an assessment for bed rails should have taken place 48-72 hours after admission. The manager of the care home gave evidence that such an assessment should take place as promptly as possible, and that 48-72 hours did not meet this requirement. There is did not appear to appreciate the time within which such an assessment should be conducted. 5. Another registered general nurse involved in the care of Marion Jones gave evidence that she was not sure in what period of time an assessment for bed rails should take place. 6. Therefore, nursing staff responsible for the care of Marion Jones did not know what the appropriate approach was to assessment for bed rails. The awareness of nursing staff at Riverside with regard to assessment for and / or the requirement for bed rails was not apparent 7. The inquest heard that there have been previous incidents where bed rails have not been in place. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable bedrail safety controls.

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 conduct timely bed-rail assessments

Wider context from the report

“1. No pre-admission assessment for bed rails was recorded by the staff member responsible from Riverside, and this does not appear to have taken place. This is in circumstances where bed rails were already in place at Willow Wood and where there were obvious and recorded difficulties with regard to movement in and about bed, in addition to physical activity more generally. Given the circumstances, a pre-admission assessment for bed rails should have taken place and / or been recorded. 2. The inquest heard that family members raised their concerns on admission of Marion Jones to Riverside when they saw there were no bed rails. They were assured that an assessment would take place. This did not happen: it should have done. 3. The manager of the care home agreed that in all the circumstances, including the concerns of the family, such an assessment should have taken place. 4. A registered general nurse involved in care for Marion Jones, and who found her after she had fallen, gave evidence that an assessment for bed rails should have taken place 48-72 hours after admission. The manager of the care home gave evidence that such an assessment should take place as promptly as possible, and that 48-72 hours did not meet this requirement. There is did not appear to appreciate the time within which such an assessment should be conducted. 5. Another registered general nurse involved in the care of Marion Jones gave evidence that she was not sure in what period of time an assessment for bed rails should take place. 6. Therefore, nursing staff responsible for the care of Marion Jones did not know what the appropriate approach was to assessment for bed rails. The awareness of nursing staff at Riverside with regard to assessment for and / or the requirement for bed rails was not apparent 7. The inquest heard that there have been previous incidents where bed rails have not been in place. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable bedrail safety controls.

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 nursing staff knowledge about bed-rail assessment and requirements

Wider context from the report

“1. No pre-admission assessment for bed rails was recorded by the staff member responsible from Riverside, and this does not appear to have taken place. This is in circumstances where bed rails were already in place at Willow Wood and where there were obvious and recorded difficulties with regard to movement in and about bed, in addition to physical activity more generally. Given the circumstances, a pre-admission assessment for bed rails should have taken place and / or been recorded. 2. The inquest heard that family members raised their concerns on admission of Marion Jones to Riverside when they saw there were no bed rails. They were assured that an assessment would take place. This did not happen: it should have done. 3. The manager of the care home agreed that in all the circumstances, including the concerns of the family, such an assessment should have taken place. 4. A registered general nurse involved in care for Marion Jones, and who found her after she had fallen, gave evidence that an assessment for bed rails should have taken place 48-72 hours after admission. The manager of the care home gave evidence that such an assessment should take place as promptly as possible, and that 48-72 hours did not meet this requirement. There is did not appear to appreciate the time within which such an assessment should be conducted. 5. Another registered general nurse involved in the care of Marion Jones gave evidence that she was not sure in what period of time an assessment for bed rails should take place. 6. Therefore, nursing staff responsible for the care of Marion Jones did not know what the appropriate approach was to assessment for bed rails. The awareness of nursing staff at Riverside with regard to assessment for and / or the requirement for bed rails was not apparent 7. The inquest heard that there have been previous incidents where bed rails have not been in place. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Launch a bed-rails e-learning module covering policies and procedures for colleagues conducting bed-rail assessments.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As previously outlined, we have made changes to our pre-admission pro-forma and admission checklist that will ensure that colleagues consider bed rails assessments before and after admission. In addition to these changes, we are launching a Bed Rails eLearning module which will improve the knowledge of colleagues assessing residents in relation to our policies and procedures regarding bed rails assessments. This eLearning module will be live on our e-learning platform from 13 October 2025.”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 3 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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

Add an admission-checklist completeness question to monthly Go Audits to enable management auditing against required completion timeframes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Also, we have amended our documentation on our “Go Audits” tool. These are audits completed on a monthly basis by our Deputy Home Managers. They look at the individual assessments that form part of a resident’s care plan, for example: MUST Assessment, MFRA Assessment, Choking Risk Assessment, etc. The Audit ensures that all necessary parts of a care plan have been completed, all necessary information has been included, and the information is up-to-date. We have now added an additional question that covers the completeness of the Admission Checklist within the required timeframes. These amendments will go live this month and will allow management to audit compliance with the implemented changes.”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 3 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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 the admission checklist to specify timely post-admission assessment of bed rails and other fall-prevention equipment, with clearer completion prompts and reasons for omissions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“B. Admission check-list form”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 2 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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

Update the pre-admission assessment proforma to prompt bed-rail assessment, record relevant falls and equipment history, and require Home Manager completion checks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is Care UK policy where residents are assessed or present as being at risk of falling out of bed, the use of bed rails should be considered. In Marion’s case, the pre-admission assessment did not identify a risk of falling out of bed that would have triggered the bed rails assessment. However, Marion had bed rails in her previous placement and upon admission her family raised concerns regarding bed rails. In those circumstances, Danielle agreed that a bed rail assessment should have taken place. In order to prevent this happening again in the future, we have made the following changes outlined below:”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 2 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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

Publish the updated pre-admission assessment and admission checklist on the intranet and circulate them internally with a link from 7 October 2025.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The updated pre-admission assessment and admission checklist will be live on our intranet “mycareuk” from 7 October 2025 and an email from our internal communications platform “iCommunicate” will be circulated with a link to these forms on the same day.”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 3 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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

Update Care and Clinical Meeting Notes to require checks against completed risk assessments and timely completion of admission checklists.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Finally, we have updated our Care & Clinical Meeting Notes form to include that checks should be made as per completed risk assessments, and that the admission checklist should be fully completed within the required timeframes.”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 3 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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

Previous incidents involved crash mats or low-rise beds; there were no reported falls without bed rails or alternative protective measures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your final concern was regarding evidence given during the inquest that there have been previous incidents where bed rails have not been in place. I discussed this concern with the Home Manager and the Regional Director for Riverside care home. Danielle explained that during the inquest she gave evidence that previous incidents had occurred where bed rails were not in place. However, she explained to me that she was referring to incidents where residents had rolled out of bed without bed rails in place, but a low-rise bed with a crash mat was in place or a resident prevent injury. She has reassured me that she was not referring to any previous incident where a resident with no bed rails had fallen out of bed with no fall out (crash) mat.”

Source location

Response from Care UK
Page 4 · response
Published 13 August 2025

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