PFD report

George Hulme · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 8 Jan 2015•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
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 to adequately induct and familiarise agency staff with residents and identification methods
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide adequate and accessible staff inductionPart of recurring concern: Inadequate competence assurance and induction for agency staff
  2. Lack of resident identification information and cards for agency staff
  3. Failure to retrieve the correct resident file
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 adequately induct and familiarise agency staff with residents and identification methods

Wider context from the report

“2) Agency members of staff are supposed to have an induction and tour of the home upon their first visit. This did not take place adequately to sufficiently familiarise the staff with the residents or any method of correctly identifying residents. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide adequate and accessible staff induction; Inadequate competence assurance and induction for agency 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 resident identification information and cards for agency staff

Wider context from the report

“1) Agency members of staff on duty did not have any information to assist with the identification of residents. Whilst a system of key cards was supposed to operate within the home, the agency staff on duty had no such card to identify residents. ”

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 retrieve the correct resident file

Wider context from the report

“3) An incorrect file was retrieved resulting in a potentially inappropriate treatment of an unconscious resident. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records.

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 clearly mark residents’ rooms for identification

Wider context from the report

“4) The residents’ rooms are not clearly marked internally or externally to denote who resides in the room giving rise to confusion over identification in the event of emergency treatment being required by an unconscious resident attended to by staff or medical practitioners not familiar with their identity. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report
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
0/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.