PFD report

Mr Dean Bradley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 28 May 2025•Teesside and Hartlepool

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
7

Named on the report

Responses found
6

Of 7 recipients

Stated actions
10

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 raised2

  1. Failure to provide adequate safeguarding for intoxicated people before mental health assessment
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pending
  2. Insufficient resources for safeguarding people with mental health illnesses whilst intoxicated
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.9

  1. Action

    Undertake specific alcohol and drug use assessments in all cases to inform mental health, substance-use care, treatment and support planning.

    Stated by NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 30 May 2025.
  2. Action

    Provide 24/7 crisis assessment and dedicated crisis response and home treatment services for people in mental health crisis.

    Stated by NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care BoardStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 May 2025.
  3. Action

    Make a plan to complete assessment at the earliest opportunity when intoxication prevents immediate participation, taking presentation and immediate risks into account.

    Stated by NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 30 May 2025.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.9

  1. Position

    Intoxication is not a blanket barrier to initial mental-health assessment; risk is assessed case by case, including alcohol and drug use.

    Stated by NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care BoardDisputes 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 provide adequate safeguarding for intoxicated people before mental health assessment

Wider context from the report

“2) I heard evidence that a person who was suicidal, suffering with mental health concerns and was intoxicated could not be adequately safeguarded until he was sufficiently sober to allow a mental health assessment. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pending.

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

Insufficient resources for safeguarding people with mental health illnesses whilst intoxicated

Wider context from the report

“1) Current resources for safeguarding those with mental health illnesses whilst intoxicated may be placing people at risk. ”

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

Undertake specific alcohol and drug use assessments in all cases to inform mental health, substance-use care, treatment and support planning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We understand that police officers considered contacting the crisis team but did not do so, based on their experience that services may not assess a person until they are sufficiently sober. While clinical judgement will always factor in a person's level of intoxication, this is not a barrier to initial engagement. Referrals are received regularly for individuals with varying levels of intoxication, and risk is assessed on a case-by-case basis. There is no blanket rule preventing assessment while a person is intoxicated. The crisis service will undertake specific alcohol and drug use assessments in all cases in order to inform care, treatment and ongoing support planning an individual may require, in relation to both their mental health and any coexisting substance use.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Provide 24/7 crisis assessment and dedicated crisis response and home treatment services for people in mental health crisis.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In Teesside, the NENC ICB commissions a 24/7 mental health crisis assessment suite based on the Roseberry Park Hospital site in Middlesbrough, alongside a dedicated mental health crisis response and home treatment team. These services are in place to provide timely assessment, support and intervention to individuals in crisis. We note the reference in the report to the crisis team, however, as they were not contacted by the police in Mr Bradley's case, we are unable to comment on what response might have been elicited. However, the ICB would expect the crisis team to respond to such a request and that an assessment would have been attempted. Similarly, had the individual presented to the crisis assessment suite accompanied by police, an assessment would have commenced.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

Make a plan to complete assessment at the earliest opportunity when intoxication prevents immediate participation, taking presentation and immediate risks into account.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In circumstances where an individual is unable to participate in an assessment due to their level of intoxication, the clinical team will make a plan to complete the assessment at the earliest opportunity, taking into account the person's presentation and any immediate risks. If the individual is presenting as violent or aggressive, a request may be made to the police to remain present during the assessment, to ensure the safety of all involved.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

Recirculate the Section 136 Policy and share the inquest concerns with relevant Adult Social Care staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I will take this opportunity to recirculate the Section 136 Policy to relevant staff within Adult Social Care in Hartlepool Borough Council, and to make them aware of the concerns identified through Mr Bradley’s inquest.”

Source location

Response from Hartlepool Council
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Share the report’s learning and reiterate relevant best practice with police and Crisis Teams.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Organisational Learning The Trust host regular Multi-Agency Mental Health Legislation Operational Groups where partner agencies and organisations, including the police, meet to discuss operational issues and to try to resolve issues that may have arisen and to identify areas of best practice. We have shared learning with the police via the Multi-Agency Mental Health Legislation Operational Group on the 11 July 2025. This enabled us to ensure that the police are aware of the Report and the issues of concern that you have raised and to identify and re-iterate best practice in this, or any similar, scenarios. This report has also been shared with Crisis Teams.”

Source location

Response from Tees Esk and Wear Valley NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 30 May 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

Recirculate the Section 136 Policy to relevant Adult Social Care staff and communicate the concerns identified through the inquest.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Council will take this opportunity to recirculate the Section 136 Policy to relevant staff within Adult Social Care in Redcar & Cleveland Adult Social Care and to make them aware of the concerns identified through Mr Bradley’s inquest. We will commence this process immediately.”

Source location

Response from Redcar Borough Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

Commit £26 million in capital investment to support people experiencing mental health crisis, including new mental health crisis centres.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are also committing £26 million in capital investment to support people in mental health crisis, including opening new mental health crisis centres, which aim to provide accessible and responsive care for individuals in mental health crisis. This builds on the hundreds of alternative crisis services, including crisis cafes, sanctuaries and crisis houses, put in place in recent years, that provide supportive environments outside of traditional clinical settings, and 33 new or improved health-based places of safety.”

Source location

2025-0248 Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Recirculate the Section 136 policy to relevant Adult Social Care staff and raise awareness of concerns identified through the inquest.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I will also recirculate the Section 136 Policy to relevant staff within Adult Social Care in Stockton Borough Council and raise awareness of the concerns identified through Mr Bradley’s inquest.”

Source location

Response from Stockton-on-Tees Council
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Bring TEWV’s Section 136 policy to the Mental Health Legislation Operational Group to consider the need for further Cleveland Police education and awareness.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Representatives from Stockton Borough Council sit on a Mental Health Legislation Operational Group. It is proposed that TEWV’s policy on Section 136 is brought to this group to consider whether there is a need for further education and awareness within Cleveland Police regarding the use of Section 136 powers to safeguard an individual requiring mental health assessment.”

Source location

Response from Stockton-on-Tees Council
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Intoxication is not a blanket barrier to initial mental-health assessment; risk is assessed case by case, including alcohol and drug use.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We understand that police officers considered contacting the crisis team but did not do so, based on their experience that services may not assess a person until they are sufficiently sober. While clinical judgement will always factor in a person's level of intoxication, this is not a barrier to initial engagement. Referrals are received regularly for individuals with varying levels of intoxication, and risk is assessed on a case-by-case basis. There is no blanket rule preventing assessment while a person is intoxicated. The crisis service will undertake specific alcohol and drug use assessments in all cases in order to inform care, treatment and ongoing support planning an individual may require, in relation to both their mental health and any coexisting substance use.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

Existing crisis assessment and response services are considered sufficient, so no specific holding facility for intoxicated people is planned.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In Teesside, the NENC ICB commissions a 24/7 mental health crisis assessment suite based on the Roseberry Park Hospital site in Middlesbrough, alongside a dedicated mental health crisis response and home treatment team. These services are in place to provide timely assessment, support and intervention to individuals in crisis. We note the reference in the report to the crisis team, however, as they were not contacted by the police in Mr Bradley's case, we are unable to comment on what response might have been elicited. However, the ICB would expect the crisis team to respond to such a request and that an assessment would have been attempted. Similarly, had the individual presented to the crisis assessment suite accompanied by police, an assessment would have commenced.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

The Section 136 assessment suite remains the appropriate place of safety for intoxicated people without immediate physical health risks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following that discussion I can confirm that, while there is not a ‘Crisis Café’ provided within the Tees area, such a provision would not have been appropriate for an individual presenting as Mr Bradley did. The appropriate place for him to have been supported at the time of the incident in 2021 was the assessment suite at Roseberry Park which is designated as a place of safety under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act, and this remains the case at the present time. This service is provided by Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust and their policy relating to Section 136 (which is available on their website and is attached for reference) clearly identifies that this provision is appropriate for an individual who is intoxicated but not presenting with immediate physical health risks.”

Source location

Response from Hartlepool Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

Existing health-based places of safety enable police to safeguard and assess intoxicated people under Section 136 where no suspected physical risk.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Within TEWV we provide health-based places of safety (HBPOS) across the Trust including in Middlesbrough, and we did so at the time of this incident. These are used by the police to bring people they have concerns about under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983 to enable assessment by appropriately trained Mental Health Professionals. This would be the case even if the person is intoxicated or under the influence of substances but with no suspected physical risk.”

Source location

Response from Tees Esk and Wear Valley NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

A Crisis Café would not have been appropriate for an intoxicated, suicidal person requiring mental health assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following that discussion there was an agreed view that, while there is not a ‘Crisis Café’ provided within the Tees area, such a provision would not have been appropriate for an individual presenting as Mr Bradley did. The appropriate place for him to have been supported at the time of the incident in 2021 was the Crisis Assessment Suite at Roseberry Park which is designated as a place of safety for Police to use under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act, and this remains the case at the present time. This service is provided by Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust and their policy relating to Section 136 clearly identifies that this provision is appropriate for an individual who is intoxicated but not presenting with immediate physical health risks.”

Source location

Response from Redcar Borough Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

The existing Crisis Assessment Suite remains the appropriate place of safety for intoxicated individuals requiring mental health assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following that discussion there was an agreed view that, while there is not a ‘Crisis Café’ provided within the Tees area, such a provision would not have been appropriate for an individual presenting as Mr Bradley did. The appropriate place for him to have been supported at the time of the incident in 2021 was the Crisis Assessment Suite at Roseberry Park which is designated as a place of safety for Police to use under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act, and this remains the case at the present time. This service is provided by Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust and their policy relating to Section 136 clearly identifies that this provision is appropriate for an individual who is intoxicated but not presenting with immediate physical health risks.”

Source location

Response from Redcar Borough Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

The NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care Board will respond directly to the concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I have noted the contents of your report, and the matters of concern raised. In response, I have liaised with the NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care Board (NENC ICB) who will be responding to you directly.”

Source location

2025-0248 Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

Police officers, rather than expanded services, should safeguard qualifying people by using Section 136 detention and taking them to the assessment suite.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is noted that the evidence heard during the Inquest was that an intoxicated person could not be adequately safeguarded until they were sufficiently sober to allow a mental health assessment leading to the conclusion of there being a gap in services available. In our view, the most appropriate approach to dealing with Mr Bradley at his time of crisis would have been for the Police Officers to detain him under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act and take him to a place of safety. Section 136 of the Mental Health Act is a critical legal framework that enables Police Officers to act in situations where individuals may be at risk due to mental health issues. This power allows the detention of individuals appearing to have a mental disorder who are in a public place.”

Source location

Response from Stockton-on-Tees Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

The designated assessment suite is considered an effective existing service when police use it for intoxicated people presenting with mental health concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The assessment suite is in Roseberry Park Hospital, Tees, Esk and Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust (TEWV) run this hospital. This is the designated place of safety for those under the influence of drugs or alcohol and presenting with mental health concerns. Under the S136 power, the individual can be held for up to 24 hours, extendable by an additional 12 hours if necessary for assessment. During this time, mental health professionals assess an individual to determine their needs and whether further treatment is required. The region does not have ‘crisis cafes’ or ‘Calming Centres,’ but the assessment suite is deemed to be a service that works well when used by the Police.”

Source location

Response from Stockton-on-Tees Council
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 2025

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.1

  1. 1

    Work closely with mental health providers and partners, including police, to keep crisis services responsive and improve crisis-care pathways.

    Stated by NHS North East and Cumbria Integrated Care BoardStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 30 May 2025.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.2

  1. 1

    A Crisis Café would not have been appropriate for an intoxicated person presenting with suicidal and mental health concerns.

    Stated by Hartlepool Borough CouncilDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
  2. 2

    A crisis café or calming centre would likely have been unsuitable because of suicidal intent, paranoid ideation, and the person’s ability to leave.

    Stated by Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys 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

Work closely with mental health providers and partners, including police, to keep crisis services responsive and improve crisis-care pathways.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The crisis assessment suite and the crisis team have been in place in Teesside for many years and were available and fully operational at the time of Mr Bradley's tragic death. Cleveland Police were involved in the development of the crisis assessment suite from its inception, and we value their ongoing collaboration. However, as the mental health services were not contacted during the events leading to Mr Bradley's death, we are unable to determine whether their involvement might have altered the outcome.”

Source location

Response from Integrated Care Board (NHS North East and North Cumbria)
Page 2 · response
Published 30 May 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

A Crisis Café would not have been appropriate for an intoxicated person presenting with suicidal and mental health concerns.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following that discussion I can confirm that, while there is not a ‘Crisis Café’ provided within the Tees area, such a provision would not have been appropriate for an individual presenting as Mr Bradley did. The appropriate place for him to have been supported at the time of the incident in 2021 was the assessment suite at Roseberry Park which is designated as a place of safety under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act, and this remains the case at the present time. This service is provided by Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust and their policy relating to Section 136 (which is available on their website and is attached for reference) clearly identifies that this provision is appropriate for an individual who is intoxicated but not presenting with immediate physical health risks.”

Source location

Response from Hartlepool Council
Page 1 · response
Published 30 May 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

A crisis café or calming centre would likely have been unsuitable because of suicidal intent, paranoid ideation, and the person’s ability to leave.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Even if a Crisis Café or Calming Centre had been available, given the person’s expressions of suicidal intent and potential paranoid ideation and the fact that a person can just leave these premises, it would be unlikely that it would have been appropriate to take him to such a provision.”

Source location

Response from Tees Esk and Wear Valley NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 30 May 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
6/7

Data last updated 7 September 2026