Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2020

Mildred Horrex

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2020-0126, written 8 Jun 2020. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report8 Jun 2020
Reference2020-0126
DeceasedMildred Horrex
CoronerPenelope Schofield
Coroner areaWest Sussex
CategoryCare Home Health related deaths · Other related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

The Manager 
Pelham House (Cedarcare (SE) Ltd 

Cuckfield 
West Sussex 
RH17 

1 

CORONER 

I am PENELOPE SCHOFIELD, senior coroner, for the coroner area of WEST SUSSEX 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I 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. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 22nd January 2018  I commenced an investigation into the death of Mildred Horrex, 
aged 85 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 3rd October 
2018. The conclusion of the inquest was that Mildred Horrex died an “Accidential death”. 

At the conclusion of the Inquest indicated that I was minded to make a Regulation 28 
report. 

Regretably whilst the indication to make a Regulation 28 report was made in October 
2018 it appears to have been missed and was not issued until June 2020 for which I 
apologise. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

On 30th December 2017 Mrs Horrex, who was left sleeping in a chair in her room at 
Pelham House, suffered an unwitnessed fall in which she suffered a fracture to her C1 
and C2 vertebrae in her neck. She was taken to hospital but sadly did not recover from 
her injuries and she died on 18th January 2018. 

5 

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.  During the course of the Inquest it was clear that overall the record keeping in 

respect of Mildred was poor. There was insufficient  information taken about 
Mildred by the home before her admission to Pelham House, the information 
that was taken was at times inaccurate and this lead to an inadequare fall risk 
assessment being insufficient.  

2.  Whilst the drugs chart showed that Mildred was taking her medication regularly 
the amount of medication that was found after her death showed that this could 
not be the case.  We were told that monthly drugs audits were apparently 
carried out but they did not pick up the decrepancies in the recording on the 
drugs charts and the amount of medication held. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe your 
organisation has the power to take such action.  

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 4th August 2020. I, 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. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested 
Persons:- 

The family of Mildred Horrex 

I 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. 

9 

 Date   8th June 2020 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Penelope Schofield, Senior Coroner 

3

Responses

1 response 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.

Response from Pelham House (PDF)
Action Plan: Regulation 28 Report to prevent Future Deaths MH 

Point 1 Matter of Concern 
During the course of the Inquest it was clear that overall the record keeping in respect of Mildred was poor. There was insufficient 
information taken about Mildred by the home before her admission to Pelham House, the information that was taken was at times 
inaccurate and this lead to an inadequate fall risk assessment being insufficient.  

Response 
Prior to admission the family had a meeting with the manager of the home and the deputy manager, they themselves provided all 
the information to us everything they believed relevant, my deputy questioned them about falls history and they said mum is NOT 
a high risk of falling having only one fall whilst in her own home, all information was provided by themselves, the risk assessment 
was sufficient at the time it was extremely difficult to explain the workings of the system  in a court room with individuals that have 
never used a care plan system before I believe this is why the coroner made the comment about record keeping, ( the paramedic 
in the court room understood perfectly well as he was familiar with the system) the system we used took the information provided 
by the family and generated a falls score, MH had not fallen in Pelham prior to her death and this meant that a falls referral would 
not be necessary, this is done after two falls or more and the information the family provided by the family did not warrant a 
referral, we are a Residential home not a nursing home and GPs do referrals or care homes.    
Point 2 Matter of Concern 
Whilst the drugs chart showed that Mildred was taking her medication regularly the amount of medication that was found after her 
death showed that this could not be the case.  We were told that monthly drugs audits were apparently carried out but they did 
not pick up the discrepancies in the recording on the drugs charts and the amount of medication held. 
Response 
At the time of this incident visual medication spot checks were carried out by the Deputy Manager along with daily audits and 
monthly summaries. Assessing the competency of Senior staff administering medication is ongoing with a Senior member of staff 
that is a trained medical assessor and promotes in house training. Policies and procedures covering medication in the Home are 
well documented and accessible by all staff. Questionnaires on medication relating to the policies and procedures are used in the 
home as refresher tools for all care staff and all staff have training twice a year and an online course. 

Pelham house response of actions taken. 
POINT 1  Pelham house restructured the whole pre-assessment process the paper work was updated and now reflects all 
aspects of an individual’s ADL as well as the existing questions ( this was already in place just with some more information areas 

 
 
 
 to highlight and family members are now signing the pre-assessment forms to agree to what has been documented)  family 
members continue to sit with management and go through the individuals life and health history the family still continue to assist 
with the care planning with the individual present so we can get a good understanding of need, we also now have recorded calls 
something that would have been very beneficial at the time of MH arrival and passing, we also have a new care plan system that 
is recognised by CQC and this is working very well and has all information risk assessments and an audit trail, it allows a 
gateway should relatives with to log in and see what’s happening on a daily basis, Pelham house also employs an external 
auditor who comes to audit monthly and sooner where needed and is always available for advice all care plans and risk 
assessments are reviewed monthly and where needed if a change has occurred, and relatives have care plan reviews that are 
now signed, All staff have a log in to all policy & procedure on our external site there is a clear and concise falls procedure and all 
staff and new staff are required to read and act accordingly should a fall happen, ( this was also in place at the time of the fall ) 
we already work closely with the falls teams and occupational health. 

POINT 2 medication  
Medication is audited monthly  
CCG / Kamsons pharmacy myself and the GP have worked together to ensure safe practices are ongoing,  
Home manager Audits internally alongside the deputy manager and there is a visible summery at the end of the audit to highlight 
any potential concerns. 
External auditor also audits medication and administration when he visits. 
There is ongoing support from the CCG and Kamsons pharmacy  
After a request from myself GPs now provide patient summaries for all residents that are currently in Pelham house and coming 
in to Pelham house.

Related reports

Other reports by Penelope Schofield

See all →

More reports categorised “Care Home Health related deaths”

See all →

Track Care Home Health related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Care Home Health 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.