PFD report

MICHAEL TERENCE HARMAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 25 Nov 2014•Norfolk

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
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
5

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 raised4

  1. Failure of handover notes to request checks of tenant cleanliness after a soiling incident
  2. Failure to identify when a tenant is no longer suitable for independent living despite indicators of deterioration and maximum support
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to recognise and act on deterioration in vulnerable adults’ living circumstances and support needs
  3. Failure to arrange an additional review of a tenant’s condition when deterioration indicators arise
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.2

  1. Action

    Draw up and roll out local guidance for reporting incidents, following up service users, making onward referrals, and undertaking scheduled and unscheduled reviews.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 25 November 2014.
  2. Action

    Complete a schedule for auditing understanding and compliance with the new local guidance.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 25 November 2014.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    Personal care delivery and assessment were the responsibility of regulated care providers and Norfolk County Council adult care services.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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 handover notes to request checks of tenant cleanliness after a soiling incident

Wider context from the report

“(4) Handover notes between Co-Ordinator and Cover Co-Ordinator deal with whether a tenant is likely to be at home when the intercom call is made. No note was made requesting a check to be made to ensure Mr Harman had cleaned himself up. ”

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 identify when a tenant is no longer suitable for independent living despite indicators of deterioration and maximum support

Wider context from the report

“(2) There were several indicators that Mr Harman’s condition had possibly deteriorated to a point where he was no longer suitable for independent living, such as his flat being unusually untidy, his relapse in respect of drinking alcohol, his having soiled himself, his physical problems (he had recently been diagnosed with cellulitis). He was also receiving the maximum amount of support which could be offered. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to recognise and act on deterioration in vulnerable adults’ living circumstances and support needs.

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 arrange an additional review of a tenant’s condition when deterioration indicators arise

Wider context from the report

“(3) Reviews of a tenant such as Mr Harman are annual, unless the tenant requests a review. No thought had been given to anyone else carrying out a review of Mr Harman’s condition particularly in the light of the above factors ”

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 check that a tenant has cleaned himself after being found in a soiled condition

Wider context from the report

“(1) After being found in a soiled condition, no check was made on Mr Harman to ensure he had cleaned himself as he said he would do. ”

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

Draw up and roll out local guidance for reporting incidents, following up service users, making onward referrals, and undertaking scheduled and unscheduled reviews.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Draw up and roll out local guidance protocols for: (1) Reporting of accidents, incidents and near misses. (2) Follow up with a service user when an”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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 a schedule for auditing understanding and compliance with the new local guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“accident, incident or near miss has been reported (3) Making onward referrals (4) When to undertake scheduled and unscheduled reviews | | | Audit schedule developed to check understanding and compliance with new local guidance. | Team Manager | End of January | To be completed”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 4 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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

Personal care delivery and assessment were the responsibility of regulated care providers and Norfolk County Council adult care services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Provision of personal care in the community is regulated by the Care Quality Commission and is employed to support people to remain in their own homes for as long as possible. This provision depends on the person’s needs and preferences and can include several visits a day from care workers. With the exception of people who are able and willing to pay for and organise their own care, the majority of care at home is managed through local authority adult care services. This includes the assessment of individuals requiring care, against the Fair Access to Care Services eligibility criteria before the local authority commissions a ‘package of care’ for that person. The time frame from first contact with the local authority to receiving care is variable but not immediate.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 2 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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 sheltered support service could not provide personal care because that activity is regulated and the service was not CQC-registered.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Section 4: Clarification: At the inquest evidence was given that Centra Support Coordinator ████████ made a referral to Norfolk Swift Response and requested that the service attend Mr Harman on 18th July 2014 to support him to manage his personal care. Norfolk Swift Response declined to attend because Mr Harman’s difficult situation was regarded as due to his use of alcohol rather than the result of an ongoing personal care need. ████████ was not able to directly support Mr Harman with his personal care as this activity was actively regulated by the Care Quality Commission. The sheltered support service is not regulated by the CQC and so support with this activity is prohibited. ████████ made contact with Mr Harman’s family to let them know about his difficulties.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 2 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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 immediate crisis resulted from alcohol abuse and a recurring pattern, so an ongoing need for home-care referral was not immediately evident.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The report does not appear to fully recognise that Mr Harman found himself in a very difficult situation on the 18th July as a direct result of alcohol abuse and that this had been a previous pattern of behaviour. As such, an ongoing need requiring a referral for care at home may not have been immediately evident.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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

Care at home required Mr Harman’s consent, and the available evidence indicated that he had previously declined such a service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Section 5 (3): Clarification: Centra’s support service is service user led and therefore the review process requires the tenant to engage with a review. In this situation, an immediate review ‘of’ Mr Harman and his situation would have resulted in a referral to Norfolk First Response for immediate support, along with a referral to Norfolk Adult Care Services to request an assessment for care at home. It is likely that a planned review ‘with’ Mr Harman would have resulted in the same recommendation. It is important to note that being assessed for and receiving care at home would require Mr Harman’s consent. Evidence given at the inquest indicated that Mr Harman had previously declined a care at home service. Again, evidence was given at the inquest indicating that the immediate need was in fact referred to Norfolk First Response by Centra staff.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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.3

  1. 1

    Complete a full review of welfare checks and the warden call response process, and present recommendations to the Regional Business Manager.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 25 November 2014.
  2. 2

    Complete a full internal review of working practices in the service and present recommendations to the Regional Business Manager.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 25 November 2014.
  3. 3

    Discuss welfare-check and warden-call review outcomes with the Service Commissioner to consider alternative welfare-check methods.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 25 November 2014.

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

  1. 1

    Mr Harman had emergency access through the warden call system but did not use it.

    Stated by Centra Care and SupportDisputes 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

Complete a full review of welfare checks and the warden call response process, and present recommendations to the Regional Business Manager.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Full review of welfare checks and warden call response process. | Locality Business Manager | Nov/Dec | Completed - Review has been carried out and recommendations presented to the Regional Business Manager.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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 a full internal review of working practices in the service and present recommendations to the Regional Business Manager.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Action | Who | When | Update Full internal review of working practices in the service to be carried out. | Locality Business Manager | Nov/Dec | Completed - Review has been carried out and recommendations presented to the Regional Business Manager.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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

Discuss welfare-check and warden-call review outcomes with the Service Commissioner to consider alternative welfare-check methods.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Discuss outcome of welfare check and warden call review with Service Commissioner. | | January | In progress - discussion is ongoing with the Service Commissioner from Norfolk County Council to consider alternative ways of carrying out welfare checks so that support coordinators can focus more on support related tasks and face to face contact.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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

Mr Harman had emergency access through the warden call system but did not use it.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• The report does not appear to fully recognise that Mr Harman had access to the warden call system for emergency assistance but did not make use of it.”

Source location

2014-0514-Response-by-Centra-Support1
Page 3 · response
Published 25 November 2014

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