Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2018
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2018-0140, written 8 May 2018. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 8 May 2018 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2018-0140 |
| Deceased | Stephen Tidey |
| Coroner | Anna Loxton |
| Coroner area | Surrey |
| Category | State Custody related deaths · Police related deaths · Suicide (from 2015) |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 2 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
IN THE SURREY CORONER’S COURT
IN THE MATTER OF:
__________________________________________________________
The Inquest Touching the Death of Stephen Ian William Tidey
A Regulation 28 Report – Action to Prevent Future Deaths
__________________________________________________________
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
Ms Fiona Edwards, Chief Executive, Surrey & Borders Partnership
NHS Foundation Trust, 18 Mole Business Park, Leatherhead,
Surrey KT22 7AD
Ms Joanna Killian, Chief Executive, Surrey County Council,
Contact Centre, Room 269-298, County Hall, Penrhyn Road,
Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Mr Nick Ephgrave, Chief Constable, Surrey Police, PO Box 101,
Guildford, Surrey GU1 9PE
1 CORONER
Ms Anna Loxton, HM Assistant Coroner for Surrey
2 CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 5 to The Coroners
and Justice Act 2009.
3
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
The inquest into the death of Stephen Ian William Tidey was opened on
6th January 2017. It was resumed and concluded on 13th April 2018.
I found the medical cause of death to be:
1a. External Neck Compression
1b. Hanging
I determined that Mr Tidey took his own life, in part, because it was not
managed despite the fact that the risk of him doing so was recognised by
the Criminal Justice Liaison and Diversion Service and by Police officers
who completed Adult at Risk referral forms.
RT4563
1
4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
Stephen Tidey was found hanging deceased from a tree outside a cabin in
which he had been residing at Woodsmoke, Farley Heath, Guildford. He
had self-inflicted wounds to both wrists and a note was found on his
body stating that he intended to end his life to spare his family further
suffering.
5 CORONER’S CONCERNS
Mr Tidey was arrested on 3rd February 2016 and, whilst in police custody,
a 24/39 Adult at Risk or Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (“MASH”) form
was completed by police officers giving a Red RAG status with high risk
of suicide indicated if his relationship with his partner and specifically
his daughter were to fail, and if he lost his job, which were contingent
events.
He was assessed by a member of the Criminal Liaison and Diversion
Service (CLDS) on the same day and was initially assessed by them as
being at risk of self-harm. The member of the CLDS subsequently
telephoned the Home Treatment Team to discuss referring him to the
service. Mr Tidey was then re-assessed by the same member of the CLDS
who stated he appeared calmer and was no immediate risk to himself. No
notes were recorded on the Police or Mental Health Service computer
system to record how this assessment of reduced risk of self-harm had
been reached.
During the following months, no contact was made by mental health
services with Mr Tidey, and he did not seek their assistance.
On 26th October 2016 he attended Guildford Police Station to be charged
with the offences and was assessed by Police and a member of the CLDS
as being at low risk of harm to self.
On Friday 16th December 2016, Police were made aware that Mr Tidey
had lost his job as a consequence of being charged with the offences and
therefore that one of the contingent events highlighted in the MASH
referral of 3.2.2016 as placing Mr Tidey at higher risk of self-harm had
materialised. They therefore completed a further MASH referral form
and this was emailed to the MASH hub at 15.40 and forwarded on to
Waverley CMHRS at 16.41.
On Monday 19th December 2016 at 11.30am, Waverley CMHRS
forwarded the MASH report to Guildford CMHRS, but then emailed
again at 11.36am to state they noted Waverley CMHRS should actually
follow up Mr Tidey. However, for reasons, which cannot be ascertained,
no further action was taken. It is not possible to ascertain who the duty
RT4563
2
worker was who received the referral by email.
, Community Services Manager for South West
Community Mental Health Recovery Service, stated in evidence that had
he received Mr Tidey’s MASH referral on 16th December 2016, he would
have taken action the same day, initially via a telephone triage
assessment and then via the options available of HTT referral; EDT
Mental Health Act Assessment, crisis planning with safe havens or
CMHRS non-crisis support, as appropriate.
Evidence was given that there were no safeguards in place to check
referrals were being acted upon, and that this remains the case.
Mr Tidey was found deceased on 22nd December 2016, the day before he
was due to attend Court for sentencing.
The MATTERS OF CONCERN are:
- How MASH reports are processed by the MASH team upon
receipt;
- Whether there is an effective system in place to ensure that MASH
reports are followed up by the appropriate Community Mental
Health Team (where necessary); and
- Whether there is an effective system in place to deal appropriately
with MASH referrals received outside normal weekday office
hours, and that those completing the MASH referral forms (e.g.
Police officers) know where these should be send outside normal
working hours when a high risk is identified
Consideration should be given to whether any steps can be taken to
address the above concerns.
6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
believe that the people listed in paragraph one above have the power to
take such action.
7 YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of its date; I
may extend that period on request.
Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be
taken, setting out the timetable for such action. Otherwise you must
explain why no action is proposed.
RT4563
3
8 COPIES
I have sent a copy of this report to the following:
1. See names in paragraph 1 above
2.
3. The Chief Coroner
In addition to this report, I am 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 at the time of your response, about the release or
the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.
Signed:
ANNA LOXTON
DATED this 8th day of May 2018
RT4563
4
2 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.
INS) Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Nursing Directorate Trust HQ 18 Mole Business Park Randalls Road Leatherhead Surrey KT22 7AD Tel: 01372 216008 xX 01372 203360 Email: Dear Ms Loxton Stephen lan William Tidey (deceased) Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths (PFD) am writing further to the PFD report that you sent to Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation ‘Trust (the Trust) in relation to Mr Stephen Tidey, who sadly died on 22™ December 2016.-Thank you for taking the time to investigate his death so thoroughly and for bringing the matters of concern you have to our attention. In response to your concerns, the Trust has actioned the following: 4. We have met with our Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) colleagues from Surrey County Council to discuss this case and the learning that can be taken from it. 2. Since Mr Tidey’s death, we have already implemented a standardised log across all of our Community Mental Health Recovery Service (CMHRS) teams, which must be used to record all of the 39/24 forms (now referred to as Single Combined Assessment of Risk Form (SCARF)) that are received by the CMHRS. The log must record the date the SCARF is received, the name to whom the SCARF relates and what action has been taken in response. | have received assurances that these logs are now being completed by the CMHRS teams. 3. However, we have also devised a new checking system between the MASH and the CMHRS teams. In the future, when the Trust’s practitioner within the MASH receives a SCARF -form which indicates a high risk to an individual and which the practitioner considers requires urgent action by the CMHRS team, a phone call will be made by the . MASH practitioner to the relevant CMHRS to check that the SCARF has been received and to notify the CMHRS that action is required urgently. _. "We discussed whether a phone call could be made by the Trust’s MASH practitioner to the « GMHRS every time a SCARF form is sent from the MASH to the CMHRS, however due to the volume of SCARF forms received and processed this was not considered to be a workable solution. 4, |t should be borne in mind that the MASH was originally designed as an initial point of contact for reporting concerns about the safety of children, young people and adults. It is not a crisis response service, and that is reflected in the MASH’s operational hours (Monday — Friday, 9am — 5pm). We have therefore written to Surrey Police, who complete the SCARF forms, to remind them of the purpose of the MASH and to reiterate its operational hours. We have advised Surrey Police that, should they become aware of an urgent concern about the safety of a child, young person or adult outside of, or near to the closing of, the MASH'’s operational hours, it would not likely be appropriate for the police to document these concerns on a SCARF form and send it to the MASH. This is because the SCARF form will not be looked at by the SABP MASH practitioners until the following working day, and therefore no urgent action will be taken. In the case of urgent concerns that arise either outside of, or near to the closing of, the MASH's operational hours, we have advised Surrey Police to contact either: e Surrey County Council's Emergency Duty Team (EDT), which provides an emergency social work service for urgent situations which arise out of normal office -- hours and which cannot be left with an appropriate degree of safety until the next normal working day. The-EDT operates Monday to Friday from 5pm to 9am, 24 hours at weekends and over all bank holiday periods. ° The Trust's Crisis Mental Health Helpline, which provides advice-and assistance in -relation to persons who are in a mental health crisis. The Crisis Line operates Monday to Friday from 5pm'to 9am, 24 hours at weekends and over all bank holiday periods. a : : of ° The Trust’s Safe Havens, which provide out of hours.help and support to people and their carers who are experiencing a mental health crisis or emotional distress. There are five Safe Havens open in town centre locations across Surrey and north east Hampshire, and we have provided the police with the details of all of these. 5. We have set up an automated email reply, which is sent from the Mental Health/Drug & ~~’ Alcohol inbox within the MASH. This automated email details the MASH’s operational hours and advises of the out of hours services that are available. The automated email is sent in response to any email that is received outside of the MASH’s operational hours, so that ~ anybody sending a SCARF form to the MASH Mental Health/Drug & Alcohol inbox will be aware that the SCARF form will not be processed until the next working day, and will know where to seek urgent advice or assistance if required. . 6. The Trust will soon be introducing a Single Point of Access (SPA), which will be phased in from October 2018. The SPA will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days per week and will be contactable for advice or to discuss concerns about a person who has a mental health — need. We:have advised Surrey Police that they will, in due course, be’able:to contact the SPA if they need to obtain any urgent, out of hours advice. : ‘ - On behalf-of the Trust, | would like to offer our'sincére ‘condolences to Mr Tidey’s relatives for their ‘ loss‘and ‘hope that our actions outlined above assures you and them that we-have learnt-and continue to‘learn from his death. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Chief Medical Officer, should you require any further information. me a 7 Yours sincerely, Jonathan Warren Acting Chief Executive
Our Ref: NE/AJ Hr een Court SURREY ‘oroner’s Cour Station Approach POLICE Woking With you, making GU227AP Surrey safer www.surrey.police.uk Nick Ephgrave QPM Chief Constable 4" July 2018 Dear Ms Loxton, | write in response to your letter dated the 9" of May 2018 regarding the Inquest touching the death of Stephen lan William TIDEY and the Regulation 28 Report — Action to Prevent Future Deaths. In this report you posed 3 questions which | will respond to in turn. Qi. How Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) reports are processed by the MASH team upon receipt? Police Officers submit a risk assessment form called a Single Combined Assessment of Risk Form (SCARF) to the Police MASH where it is triaged. A triage will include: e Checking the content of the referral itself to ensure it reflects factual information rather than opinions or assumptions. e Review the content of the referral to assess whether there are any unidentified risks or vulnerabilities. Staff are trained to assess risk and will consider primary, secondary and tertiary risks. If identified, these are referred immediately back to the original officer for appropriate action. e Checking for hidden crime/s. If crimes are identified, the officer will be notified and requested to record and further investigate. This will not delay the sharing of the SCARF which will be shared in the usual way e If the referral is related to Domestic Abuse (DA), the DASH (Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment assessment) section of the SCARF is completed by the officer. This will be reviewed as part of the SCARF as described above. The DASH section is however removed from the SCARF before sharing as this remains confidential but significant information which may impact on risk will be written into the main section of the SCARF for partners to be aware. The outcome of DA related referrals will also be shared e Checking whether there are any warnings on our Surrey Police records management system for those involved. © Checking for previous SCARF referrals. An escalation process exists whereby, if a 4" referral is received into MASH within a 90 day period, the risk of the 4" referral is automatically increased by one level and shared, highlighting the frequency of referrals. This will prompt partners to consider underlying concerns and appropriate support or intervention. Surrey CRIMESTOPPERS 800 555 111 Surrey Police, PO Box 101, Guildford, GU1 9PE e Noting of officers initial risk assessment level and consideration throughout the triage process as to its appropriateness. MASH staff have the ability to increase or decrease the risk rating as a result of their triage but, if changed, a rationale must be included as to why. e Check Early Help Management (Surrey County Council Children’s Services system) to confirm if child subject of referral is known/open to them. If they are currently working with the child, then the referral is shared directly with the team involved. This process is not in place for Adults so all adult referrals are sent to the MASH Adult Social Care. e Review and assign one of four Police MASH Risk level/Level of Need.These are defined as; o Red (level 4) High Risk — requiring Specialist intervention — these are dealt with within 4 working hours. o Amber (level 3) Medium Risk — requiring Targeted and Timely Intervention — dealt with within 24 working hours. o Green (level 2) Standard Risk — requiring Early Help — dealt with within 72 hours. © Blue (level 1) No/Minimal risk — Not shared — no set target as not requiring Local Authority intervention or support. e Bring to the attention of MASH Detective Sergeant anything that may need escalating or requires fast time action, for example where a MASH officer considers a child or adult to still be at risk of harm Once triaged, the SCARF referral is shared electronically via secure email. This process is the same irrelevant of risk as the mail boxes are monitored throughout the working day. All adult referrals are shared directly — with MASH Adult — Social Care Childrens referrals are shared either directly with Social Care teams already working with the children (as above) and the remainder to MASH Childrens Social Care Referrals relating to Missing Children or those who’s parents/carers are involved in a domestic dispute where police have been called are also shared with Education and Health The Niche report is updated with a record of triage and sharing and an individual staff ‘tracker’ is completed with action taken for future audit trail and statistical requirements. Q2. Whether there is an effective system in place to ensure that MASH reports are followed up by appropriate Community Mental Health Team (where necessary) Once a referral is made from Surrey Police to a partner agency via the MASH there is no current means for Surrey Police to ensure it is being acted upon and this would be outside of the existing agreement between Surrey Police and Surrey County Council. A partners response to a referral is not monitored by Surrey Police and unfortunately we are unable to respond in detail to this question. Surrey Police therefore respectfully request that this question is passed onto the SABP and Adult Social Care for their response. Q3. Whether there is an effective system in place to deal appropriately with MASH referrals received outside normal weekday office hours, and that those completing the MASH referral forms (e.g. Police officers) know where these should be sent outside normal working hours when a high risk is identified The Police MASH is in operation seven days a week (08:00 — 17:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 — 16:00 Saturday and Sunday). There is only ever approximately one day’s worth of backlog and this is risk assessed at the start of each working day. Red risk graded SCARFS (refer to risk grading and timescales in Q1) submitted after the end of business on any given day are prioritised at the start of the next working day and the timescales outlined above are adhered to. Procedures are in place that allows Police Officers, outside of normal working hours, to refer directly to the Emergency Duty Team (EDT) when a high risk situation is identified. This can include, for example, where a child needs urgent accommodation or coordination for contact with an Approved Mental Health Practitioner (AMPH) in the case of a vulnerable adult with urgent mental health needs. These out of office hours referrals are made by the officer directly by telephone but will always be followed up with a detailed SCARF referral Please let me know if | can be of any further assistance. Yours sincerely flepore
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.