Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Peter Seaby

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0076, written 27 Feb 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report27 Feb 2023
Reference2023-0076
DeceasedPeter Seaby
CoronerJacqueline Lake
Coroner areaNorfolk
CategoryCare Home Health 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 

NOTE:  This form is to be used after an inquest. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

The Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home 
2a Dereham Road, Matishall 
Dereham, NR20 3AA 

The Priory Group (Owner) 

1 

CORONER 

I am JACQUELINE LAKE HM Senior Coroner for the coroner area of NORFOLK 

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 06 July 2022 I commenced an investigation into the death of Peter Gary SEABY aged 63. 
The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 24 February 2023. 

The medical cause of death was: 

1a) 
1b) 
1c) 
2) 

Aspiration Pneumonia 

Down's Syndrome, Cirrhosis of the Liver, Cerebral Infarction. 

The conclusion of the inquest was: 
Mr Seaby died of aspiration pneumonia. Inadequate preparation of his lunchtime meal and 
inadequate supervision at his lunchtime meal possibly contributed to his death 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 
Peter Seaby was a resident at The Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home. Mr Seaby was assessed 
by a Speech and Language Therapist [“SALT”].  A SALT Care Plan was in place with regard to 
his nutrition which included specific requirements that he be given only soft, moist and 
mashed food, with two specific exceptions and that he was to be supervised throughout 
meals on a one-to-one basis with a ten minute gap between food and drink and for ten 
minutes afterwards.  The Care Plan stated it was “essential” the Plan was adhered to and 
specifically provided that if the requirements were not adhered to, Mr Seaby was at risk of 
aspiration and asphyxiation “which are potentially life threatening”.  Evidence was heard that 
Mr Seaby was not always given food which complied with the Care Plan and he was not 

Regulation 28 – After Inquest 
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 

 always provided with supervision in compliance with his Care Plan. On 21 May 2018, Mr 
Seaby’s food at lunchtime was not prepared in accordance with the SALT Care Plan.  Mr 
Seaby was not provided with the required one to one supervision during the lunchtime meal. 
During lunch Mr Seaby coughed while eating and brought some food back up.  He cleared his 
throat and then appeared fine and finished the rest of his meal.  At afternoon snack Mr Seaby 
brought up large amounts of phlegm and then coughed up anything he ate or drank.  Mr 
Seaby was taken to see the General Practitioner by a member of staff who had not been with 
Mr Seaby during that day. No copy of Mr Seaby’s Daily Record was shown to the General 
Practitioner.  Mr Seaby was given a working diagnosis of gastric reflux and his medication was 
changed.  At teatime, Mr Seaby coughed/vomited his medication and yoghurt and drink.  Mr 
Seaby vomited phlegm on two more occasions.  The 111 service was called at 20.53 hours. 
The out of hours Doctor was spoken to at 22.45 hours following which emergency services 
were contacted and Mr Seaby was taken to Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital where 
he died on 22 May 2018. Following post mortem examination a slice of carrot was found in 
Mr Seaby’s throat. 

5 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

During the course of the investigation my inquiries revealed matters giving rise to concern. In 
my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken.  In the 
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. 

Many steps have been taken in the period following Mr Seaby’s death. However there remain 
areas of concern 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows: 

1.  Evidence was heard at the inquest of the “informal approach” taken with regard to 
arrangements as to who would provide supervision of residents, including on a one 
to one basis and who would cook and prepare their meals, including those residents 
who were subject to a specific SALT dietary plan. Evidence was also heard of steps 
which have been put in place since Mr Seaby’s death to provide written staff rotas 
for such matters, prepared by Team Leaders and Deputy Managers. However, despite 
these steps being taken, evidence was also heard at the inquest from staff, who 
continue to provide care at Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home, referring to providing 
care on an “informal basis” and that this “works”. 
It was not clear from the evidence that the staffing levels at Oaks and Woodcroft 
Care Home are sufficient to provide care for residents, including those requiring one 
to one supervision and supervision out of the Home and to cover individual activities 

2. 

3.  Mr Seaby died in 2018 and this is the second inquest into Mr Seaby’s death. There 
has still been no internal review carried out following Mr Seaby’s death which was 
unexpected.  No Manager was present throughout the inquest and when some 
elements of evidence were put in dealing with Regulation 28 matters there was some 
surprise at some of the points raised and evidence heard during the course of the 
inquest. 
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. 

Regulation 28 – After Inquest 
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 

 7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by April 24, 2023.  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. 
COPIES and PUBLICATION 

8 

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

 represented by Hodge Jones & Allen, solicitor, Serjeants Inn, 

counsel 
NCC represented 
CQC represented 

I have also sent it to 

Healthwatch Norfolk 

who may find it useful or of interest. 

I am also under a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner and all interested 
persons who in my opinion should receive it. 

I may also send a copy of your response to any person who I believe may find it useful or of 
interest. 

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 

Dated: 27/02/2023 

Jacqueline LAKE 
Senior Coroner for Norfolk 
County Hall 
Martineau Lane 
Norwich 
NR1 2DH 

Regulation 28 – After Inquest 
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

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 Priory (PDF)
Chief Executive Officer 
Priory 

Monday 24 April 2023 

Ms Jacqueline Lake 
Senior Coroner for Norfolk 
County Hall 
Martineau Lane 
Norwich, NR1 2DH 

Private and Confidential 

Dear Ms Lake, 

Peter Gary Seaby - Response to Regulation 28 Report 

I write to you in response to the Regulation 28 Report dated Monday 27 February 2023. The report was 
issued  following  the  Inquest  touching  the  death  of  Mr  Peter  Seaby.  You  have  raised  two  matters  of 
concern that  directly  relate to  The Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home and a further matter of concern 
relating to an aspect of governance within Priory Adult Care. 

The responses to the matters of concern are as follows below.  Please note that each concern has been 
raised and discussed directly with the management team at the home in order for them to reflect on the 
issues and take appropriate remedial actions.  

1.  The provision of care 

You have raised a concern that staff operate an informal approach in respect of the delivery of 
care to residents at the home.   

  Priory  Adult  Care’s  Director  of  Quality  outlined  in 

  Inquest 
You  will  note  that 
statement the enhancements that have been put in place at The Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home. The 
enhancements include:  
  Having in place person centred support plans, handovers and one-page resident profiles.  
  Arrangements to promptly report and review each incident and ‘near-miss’ incident. 
  Systems to identify areas of improvement and lessons learned in response to incidents and ‘near-

miss’ incidents. 

  An  overarching  policy:  OP47  Supporting  Service  Users  with  Swallowing  Difficulties  (Dysphagia) 
which is supplemented by a summary of the policy and ‘flash’ cards made available to staff at the 
home.  

  Detailed individual resident swallowing / choking risk assessments.  
  Systems to ensure robust handovers between outgoing and incoming shifts. 
  Arrangements to ensure that residents are escorted to appointments with experienced staff who 

know the particular resident.   

  A process for inducting and training colleagues with reference to the International Dysphagia Diet 

Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework.  

  Competency assessments to be completed by staff to ensure that they can articulate the resident’s 

support needs and observation levels. 

  An  internal  training  team  of  experts  to  deliver  emergency  first  aid  at  work  training  to  colleagues 
across Priory Adult Care. This has helped to ensure that staff consider the risk of choking and the 
practical measures that can be put in place to reduce the risk.  

  The introduction of ‘Nourish’, a bespoke electronic care records system enabling colleagues at the 
home to have quick and easy access to resident profiles and support plans.  Nourish also assists 
the management team to check that effective support plans are in place.  

Registered Office: Priory, Fifth Floor, 80 Hammersmith Road, London, W14 8UD 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 There is an experienced and knowledgeable management team in place at The Oaks and Woodcroft 
Care Home. The team are supported by an effective central divisional management and compliance 
team who maintain a detailed oversight of the home and resident safety and welfare. Our view is that 
the home continues to operate safely and the residents are well cared for and supported. 

We were however disappointed to learn that a witness, a current member of staff, gave evidence of 
care being delivered to residents in an ‘informal’ manner, despite the significant measures that we have 
in place at the home, some of which are listed above. 

 meant 
Since the Inquest we have offered support to the staff member and explored with her what 
by the term  ‘informal’. We have  asked her to identify  the areas of day-to-day practice that 
 feels 
would benefit from being made more precise. More widely, the staff team as a whole have been given 
feedback, as part of the debrief process, on the outcome and learning from the Inquest and have been 
asked for their views on resident care and what, if any, improvements need to be made. This exercise 
has resulted in some additional improvements having been made in terms of the process for allocation 
of roles, staff understanding their roles and responsibilities particularly at mealtimes and the process 
for staff handovers has been strengthened. We will continue to consult with, listen to and respond to 
staff at the home using, for example, the supervision process, staff meetings and colleague engagement 
surveys and continue to develop the service where improvement opportunities are identified.  

2.  Staffing levels 

Our operational management team, together with the home management team, regularly review staffing 
levels at each of our homes, for example prior to the admission of a new resident and in response to 
the deterioration of a resident’s health. The operational management team have taken this opportunity 
to review staffing numbers again in response to your report, by consulting with the home management 
team,  seeking  feedback  from  colleagues  at  the  home  and  reviewing  resident  support  plans  and 
considering resident needs. We are satisfied that staffing levels at The Oaks and Woodcroft Care Home 
are satisfactory, that staff are being effectively allocated to care for residents and that staffing numbers 
are sufficient to ensure that residents are safe and well looked after.  

On a practical level, meal times are now undertaken in two sittings to enable closer supervision of each 
resident whilst eating and drinking. 

We are aware however that it is impossible to take into account all eventualities for example, where a 
resident falls ill and needs to be escorted to hospital (leaving staffing numbers unexpectedly depleted 
at the home) or where staff themselves are unwell and unable to attend work. By way of reassurance, 
our home managers are at liberty to contact their managers and seek authorisation to arrange for the 
attendance of ad-hoc bank and agency staff in the event that staffing numbers fall below requirement. 
Similarly, the on-call management system in place means that out of hours, a manager can attend the 
home and assist should it be difficult to secure the attendance of ad-hoc bank and agency staff. There 
is a low threshold for putting in place an additional member of staff in the event of there being any issues 
that may give rise to concern.  

3. 

Internal review 

Our operational management team have now had an opportunity to meet with our legal representatives 
following the Inquest and this meeting highlighted several salient points that were raised, not least the 
requirement for a review to be undertaken of this matter as you have outlined.  

In respect of taking this review forward, our operational management team are to now closely consider 
the findings of your Inquest and other information made available about the tragic incident involving Mr 
Seaby. The review will assist the operational management team to draw out any salient themes and 
trends that still exist despite the overarching improvements made and the passage of time. A detailed 
action plan will be created and any significant learning points will be shared with colleagues at the home 
and also be shared more widely across Priory services as appropriate.  

In respect of ensuring that there are proportionate reviews and investigations undertaken in response 
to serious incidents, I hope that you will be reassured to learn that: 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   The introduction of the Datix incident reporting system in Autumn 2019 has helped management 

colleagues to better monitor and respond to incidents and near misses. 

  All serious incidents are ‘reported up’. Where necessary a meeting is held the next working day 
after a serious incident is identified with discussion held in respect of communication with family, 
staff support and investigation arrangements. 

  Priory  are  recruiting  an  additional  Investigations  Officer  to  assist  in  undertaking  reviews  and 

investigations. 

  Priory are in the process of adopting the Patient Safety Incident response Framework (PSIRF). This 
will  assist  Priory  to  better  examine  incident  themes  and  trends  and  respond  proportionately  to 
incidents  to  achieve  the  most  learning. We  anticipate  that  PSIRF  will  be  fully  embedded  across 
Priory Adult Care by Autumn 2023.   

I trust that the actions outlined above will provide the assurances you seek in respect of this matter. 

Yours sincerely, 

________________ 

Chief Executive Officer 
Priory  

3

Related reports

Other reports by Jacqueline Lake

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.