Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0532, written 10 Dec 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 10 Dec 2014 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2014-0532 |
| Deceased | Geraldine Kilborn |
| Coroner | Andrew Tweddle |
| Coroner area | County Durham & Darlington |
| Category | State Custody related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 3 |
Text recovered by OCR from a scanned PDF. OCR is imperfect: check anything you rely on against the source PDF. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: NOMS, Equality Rights and Decency Group, National Offender Management Service, Fourth Floor, 70 Petty France, London SW1H 9EX 2. Tees, Esk, Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust, Trust Headquarters, West Park Hospital, Edward Pease Way, Darlington DL2 2TS 3. Care UK, Hawker House, 5 — 6 Napier Court, Napier Road, Reading, RG1 8BW CORONER | am Andrew Tweddle Senior Coroner, for the Coroner area of County Durham and Darlington CORONER'S LEGAL POWERS | make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. (see attached sheet) INVESTIGATION and INQUEST On 3" December 2013 | commenced an investigation into the death of Geraldine Liege Kilborn aged 37 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 5 December 2014. The Jury could not determine the Deceased's intention when she hung herself. The Jury concluded that following an ACCT review, the deceased was not appropriately located at the time of her death and that she would not have ended her life when she did, irrespective of her location. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Immediately upon entry into HMP Low Newton, the reception screen nurse deemed the deceased to be of high risk of self-harm and advocated a constant watch. Over the next 22 days prior to her death the deceased self-harmed repeatedly with many of the attempts being deemed by staff as being genuine attempts to take her own life. There were a series of ACCT reviews. For a time she was on constant observations, on normal location, in healthcare safer cell and healthcare normal cell. One ACCT review had no mental health staff input when such staff had asked to be present and somewhat incredulously, in evidence the ACCT case manager stated that he did not know that mental health care staff were available to attend on the day in question. At the time of her death mental health care staff did not work weekends and at two critical ACCT reviews, there was no mental health input into the reviews. Several mental health witnesses described tensions between mental health and wing staff, one such witness calling wing staff “dinosaurs”. Senior key members of the last two ACCT reviews were unaware of the detailed entry made in system one notes by a Consultant Psychiatrist and did not take her views into account. On one of these two key reviews, which was attended by a senior general nurse, she did not share with the other review team members the knowledge that she had of the said system one Consultant Psychiatrist entry. The Jury was critical of the Prison’s care of the deceased. CORONER’S CONCERNS During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows. — 1) There was a clear breakdown in sharing of information known to the mental health _ | 8 | COPIES and PUBLICATION | Dated....... VS AME Oe team with other members of some ACCT reviews. Evidence was given that there has been a change in service provision contracts since the death of the deceased and that mental health staff will now work weekends. Nevertheless, it is vital that in appropriate cases where a prisoner is on an ACCT and has had substantial mental health input that they both attend relevant ACCT reviews and their opinions are given sufficient weight. It is noted that mental health nurses never chair such ACCT reviews as case manager and this case has revealed that even in attendance, their views might not be given sufficient weight. (2) Witnesses confirmed that they often did not read much of the ACCT document prior to the ACCT review and relied more upon input of other attendees who might know the prisoner and upon their face to face assessment of the prisoner at the time. In this case, some ACCT review members had limited day to day experience of the deceased, whose temperament and presentation could change “like a light switch” and therefore face to face presentation could well be misleading. Thus in cases where the ACCT review was dealing with a particularly complex and challenging prisoner and where an enhanced review was called for, it would seem appropriate for further consideration to be given to the question of review panel membership generally as well as, as above, mental health input in particular. — ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe your organisation have the power to take such action. YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 4" February 2015. |, the Coroner, may extend the period. Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed. | have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to Pe Care Quality Commission who may find it useful or of interest. !am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response. The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of interest. You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. ——ees> A Tweddle LLB, H M Senior Coroner County Durham and Darlington j
3 responses published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.
Care £8 INHS| Our Reference Your Reference Direct line Main number Fax E-mail HM Senior Coroner Andrew Tweddle HM Coroners Office PO Box 282 Bishop Auckland County Durham DL14 4FY 26" January 2015 Dear Sir, RE: The inquest touching the death of Geraldine Liege Kilborn Deceased Response to Requlation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths | am writing in reply to you email dated 10"" December 2014 containing the Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths (“PFD Report”) following the conclusion of the inquest touching the death of Geraldine Liege Kilborn Deceased which was heard before you, sitting with a jury, at the Coroner's Court, Crook commencing on 3% December and concluding on 5" December 2014. In hearing evidence at Ms Kilborn’s inquest you have identified matters of concern as follows: 1. There was a clear breakdown in sharing of information known to the mental health team with other members of some ACCT reviews. Evidence was given that there has been a change in service provision contracts since the death of the deceased and that mental health staff will now work weekends. Nevertheless, it is vital that in appropriate cases where a prisoner is on an ACCT and has had substantial mental health input that they both attend relevant ACCT reviews and their opinions are given sufficient weight. It is noted that the mental health nurses never chair such ACCT reviews as case manager and this case has revealed that even in attendance, their views might not be given sufficient weight. 2. Witnesses confirmed that they often did not read much of the ACCT document prior to the ACCT review and they relied upon input of other attendees who might know the prisoner and upon their face to face assessment of the prisoner at the Care UK Connaught House, 850 The Crescent, Colchester Business Park, Cotchester, Essex CO4 908 T 01206 752552 F 08703363914 www.careuk.com time. In this case, some ACCT review members had limited day to day experience of the deceased, whose temperament and presentation could change ‘like a light switch” and therefore face to face presentation could well be misleading. Thus in cases where ACCT review was called for, it would seem appropriate for further consideration to be given to the question of review panel membership generally as well as, as above, mental health input in particular. Response: At the time of Ms Kilborn’s death, the provision for mental health services delivered by Tees Esk and Wear valley NHS Trust covered Monday to Friday 9.00am to 5.00pm with on-call provision over the weekend. You heard evidence that the on-call facility was accessed by staff, including the first weekend Ms Kilborn was at HMP Low Newton. From April 2015 the health service delivery model will change from a Prime Provider model to a 7 Lot commissioning model .The National Health Service Commissioning Board has procured seven services - GP Services including Pharmacy, Dental, Optometry, Community Care, Non-Clinical Substance Misuse, Mental Health and Support Services. The new providers are to work collaboratively in defining a community focused approach to which health care and substance misuse services will interface .The new providers will continue to work very closely with key stake holders and prison governors to map out pathways of care . Governance structures will promote an improved patient safety culture. Better communication is a requirement between all stakeholders. Daily reviews willbe undertaken by a member of the mental health team, as on any patient allocated into Healthcare with mental health issues. In addition all complex ACCT cases will be discussed at morning handover to increase staff awareness. A registered nurse with previous knowledge of the patient will be in attendance at an ACCT review. In addition Mental Health staff are given access to the case review diary to give them an opportunity to schedule or prepare for any upcoming reviews. If a mutual convenient time cannot be accommodated a written or verbal input will be supplied by the Mental Health team which will be appropriately documented on the case review notes. As head of healthcare, | attend the Governors meeting each moming and pertinent information is handed to the mental health team relating to individual patients. With regard to the sharing of information from SystmOne, medical confidentiality is ensured and information is shared with the consent of the patient. All staff are reminded of the importance of reviewing previous entries in the ACCT document. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely = . a. HMP Low newton
Ministry of Equality, Rights and Decency Group J U ST | Cc E National Offender Management Service 4th Floor, 70 Petty France, National Offender London SW1H SEX Management Service Mr Andrew Tweddle HM Coroner for Durham and Darlington HM Coroner's Office PO BOX 282 Bishop Auckland County Durham DL14 4FY Dear Mr Tweddle Thank you for your Regulation 28 report dated 10 December 2014, concerning the recent inquest into the death of Geraldine Liege Kilborn on 2 December 2013 at HMP&YOI Low Newton. This response has been formulated in consultation with the Governor of HMP&YOI Low Newton. | am aware that your report was also sent to Tees, Esk, Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust and Care UK who will be replying separately. Your letter raises two concerns, and | will address these in turn. Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 64/2011 Safer Custody describes the importance of information sharing and is very clear that healthcare staff have a duty to pass on information that involves issues of patient safety, vulnerability or immediate risk to self or others to relevant staff. This duty applies in any situation In which the prisoner's safety is compromised, even if they are unable or unwilling to give consent. This Is primarily a matter for the healthcare provider, but | can inform you that an amended arrangement has been put in place to facilitate the presence of a member of the mental health team at ACCT reviews that take place at the weekend. Effective mental health input is now ensured in all cases in which a prisoner has mental health issues: for prisoners who are located in the healthcare centre, a band 5 nurse is allocated as case manager; and for prisoners located elsewhere a member of the mental health team attends all case reviews. Briefing sessions have been introduced to facilitate the sharing of information between prison staff and the mental health team, ensuring that all staff are able to make a meaningful contribution to the decision about the level of risk. Case reviews PSI 64/2011 recognises that the ACCT process will operate more effectively if there is continuity in the attendance of staff from relevant departments/services at case reviews. Whilst not stated explicitly in the policy, it is clear from the list of mandatory actions for the review team that those present must make themselves famillar with the information contained In the ACCT document. At HMP&YOI Low Newton the same staff attend ACCT reviews wherever possible. All relevant information, including developments since the last review, is discussed at the case review. This includes any information from the SystmOne record that it is appropriate for healthcare staff to share. In complex cases the enhanced case review team involves all relevant disciplines and is chaired by @ higher level operational manager than a typical ACCT case review, usually the head of safer custody. In response to your report, all case managers and case review chairs have been reminded of the need to familiarise themselves with all relevant information, including the records of previous reviews and recent entries in the ACCT document, before conducting a case review. | hope this provides you with assurance that the matters of concern that you have identified have been fully addressed. Yours sincerely
Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust West Park Hospital Edward Pease Way Dartington DL2 2TS Direct Line: Our Ref: iii "Fax: Your Ref. iy Email; 30 January 2015 Andrew Tweddle LL.B., HM Senior Coroner for County Durham and Darlington, H.M. Coroners Office, PO Box 282, Bishop Auckland, Co. Durham, DL14 4FY. Dear Mr. Tweddle, Geraldine Liege Kliborn deceased - HMP Low Newton, Durham | thank you for your letter dated 8 December 2014, enclosing a Regulation 28 report following the inquest into the death of Ms Liege Kilborn in HMP, Low Newton. The Trust is always keen to leam lessons and take all possible steps to prevent such deaths in the future. The Trust does reflect on practices and procedures and has explored the systems in place at the time of the death of Ms Liege Kilbom -those systems have and will continue to be improved. The coronial feedback assists in that improvement process. 1. There was a breakdown In sharing of Information known to the Mental Health Team, with other members of the ACCT review. it Is vital that In an appropriate case where a prisoner Is on an ACCT and has had substantial mental health Input that members of the Mental Health Team attend the relevant ACCT reviews and their opinions are given sufficient weight. The issue you have highlighted is appreciated. It is vital that all parties involved in the care of a prisoner communicate well and have the opportunity to contribute to care planning. This is particularly relevant with prisoners who are suffering from mental health problems. Regarding availability of staff, TEWV have already made changes to the availability of the Mental Health Team staff over the weekend. Staff are on duty between 9.30 am — 12.30pm Saturday and Sunday, with a priority role to ensure that the relevant ACCT reviews are attended and that those women in crisis are offered support. The ACCT Case Manager would also have access to an on-call Mental Health Manager. This INVESTORS IN PEOPLE ensures that they would be able to provide a meaningful contribution to any ACCT review taking place, even on a weekend. We have also completed the following action to ensure proper and timely communication between prison wing staff and Mental Health Team members: the Mental Health Team Manager attends both the daily healthcare and Governor's moming meeting to ensure pertinent issues are discussed. A deputy will also attend the healthcare meeting if the MHT manager is not available e.g. on leave. Since the death of Ms Kilborn the use of multi-disciplinary meetings has increased for those prisoners with complex care and risk needs. This is a proactive approach as, through the multi-disciplinary discussion, all issues can be addressed and understood, problems can be appropriately debated and consensus decisions reached. This therefore enables the Mental Health Team to contribute appropriately to the ACCT process. 2. Witnesses confirmed that they often did not read much of the ACCT document prior to the ACCT review and relied more upon the Input of the other attendees who might know the prisoner and upon the face to face assessment of the prisoner at the time. This is a very helpful observation. We agree that both the interview and the past information are important in making any decisions about a prisoner's care plan. This relevant point was discussed at our clinical governance meeting and staff meetings within the Mental Health Team. It is also part of the ACCT training delivered to all the staff working in the Mental Health Team. Staff were reminded to read all the relevant information in the ACCT document and on System One notes. In complex cases, we endeavour to provide consistent attendance to the ACCT reviews from the Mental Health Team in the form of an identified named nurse, who is well informed about the prisoner. If that is not possible, we will ensure that the Mental Health Team member attending the ACCT review would have detailed knowledge about the prisoner's presentation and mental health difficulties. In cases where we are unable to attend we would make sure that the relevant information is shared with the ACCT team members making the necessary decisions. The Mental Health Team have access to the Safer Custody electronic diary and on a daily basis planned ACCT reviews are diarised accordingly on System One. TEWV has been awarded a new contract for the provision of mental health services into the local prisons and this will be in full service from 1 April 2015. The current arrangements for the interface with prison staff is therefore under review and we shall fully incorporate all the findings from the inquest into any new arrangements. Yours sincerely, Martin Barkley Chief Executive INVESTORS IN PEOPLE
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching State Custody related deaths, and how often a new one appears.
What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text
Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.
These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.