Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Ian Darwin

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0291, written 15 Aug 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report15 Aug 2023
Reference2023-0291
DeceasedIan Darwin
CoronerJeremy Chipperfield
Coroner areaCounty Durham and Darlington
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

The report

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

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (2) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1. 

2. 

,  

Chief Executive 
Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS 
Foundation Trust 
West Park Hospital  
Edward Pease Way 
Darlington 
DL2 2TS 

And copied to Interested persons and to 

3.  CQC 

National Director of Patient Safety 
NHS England 
Wellington House,  
133-135 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 
8UG 

And : 

1 

CORONER 

I am Jeremy Chipperfield, senior coroner for the coroner area of County Durham and 
Darlington 

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.  

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/contents/made 

3 

INVESTIGATION 

On 7th March 2023 I commenced an investigation into the death of Ian Darwin, 42. The 
investigation has not yet concluded and the inquest has not yet been heard.  

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Death was caused by multiple injuries, Ian Darwin being found below 

, Durham. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  –  

Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (“TEWV”) routinely fails, 
to employ, in a timely way, nationally recognised process and procedure 
designed to prevent avoidable death.  In permitting delay of “serious 
incident” investigations, TEWV may: (i)  permit lethal hazard to persist for 
longer than necessary;  and (ii) compromise the quality  of such 
investigations and hence their value in preventing avoidable deaths. 

The above-mentioned inquest has not been heard; there has been no finding that the 
present death was attributable to acts or omissions in care.  

Although arising in the present investigation, the matter of concern is general and has 
arisen in the context of other investigations. Despite past assurances  that the material 
circumstances have been addressed, the facts of the present case demonstrate that 
they continue to exist. I am aware that on 19th July 2023, Assistant Coroner Janine 
Richards notified you of the same concern arising from matters revealed by another 
investigation. 

TEWV identified Ian Darwin’s death as a “serious incident” (“SI”) for the purposes of The 
Serious Incident Framework1 (“the Framework”). The SI investigation (“SII”) process- 
defined in the Framework- was the means employed by TEWV to investigate this SI. 

The Framework defines SIs as “events where the potential for learning is so great, or the 
consequences to patients… so significant that they warrant particular attention to ensure 
these incidents… are investigated thoroughly… and trigger actions that will prevent them 
from happening again”. SIs “include acts or omissions in care that result in… avoidable 
death…”. Further, the “occurrence of a serious incident demonstrates weaknesses in 
a system or process that need to be addressed to prevent future incidents leading 
to avoidable death or serious harm”. SI investigations are the means “to ensure that 
weaknesses in a system are identified, to understand what went wrong … and what can 
be done to prevent similar incidents happening again”. 

Discussing one of the seven key principles of the SI Investigation- that they be Timely 
and Responsive- the Framework requires that SIs “must be reported without delay and 
no longer than 2 working days after the incident is identified”. One of “two key 
operational changes” introduced in the 2015 update was a single timeframe of 60 
working days (from date of initial report) for completion of investigation reports. At an 
“early meeting” the investigator must “set out a realistic and achievable timescales and 
outcomes”. 

The present case: 

•  Death occurred on 06.03.23; 
• 

I am  informed that an investigator was initially appointed in around mid-June 
2023; 

•  By late June, TEWV were “unable to say” when the investigation would be 

complete; 

•  The investigation is now expected to be complete in the week commencing 

1 Serious Incident Framework,  NHS England, first published in 2010 (last updated in 2015) 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 21.08.23 and its report to be finalised 18.09.23 

The general situation: 

•  TEWV SI death investigations, at all levels of seriousness, are routinely (if not 
invariably) significantly delayed and I understand there is no expectation of 
immediate, or any timetable for eventual rectification; 
In some other cases delay is significantly longer than in the present; 

• 
•  Such delays affect cases of all levels of seriousness. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion urgent action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you 
have 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 11 October 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. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the Interested Persons. I 
have also sent it to NHS England and the CQC, who may find it useful or of interest. 

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 

15th August 2023                                                 

3

Responses

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.

Response from Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
11 October 2023 

Mr Chipperfield  
HM Senior Coroner for County Durham and Darlington  

Office of the Chief Executive 
West Park Hospital 
Edward Pease Way 
Darlington 
Co Durham 
DL2 2TS 

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 

Dear Mr Chipperfield, 

Re: Report to Prevent Further Deaths issued on 15 August 2023 in relation  
to Mr Ian Darwin  

I am writing to you in response to your direction in the prevention of future deaths notice 
served to Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS FT on 15 August 2023 regarding the death of Mr 
Ian Darwin to provide in writing further information on what the Trust is doing to ensure 
Serious Incident reviews are completed within a timely manner as well as an update on the 
estimated time of arrival for each outstanding review.  

Just a short note at this stage to 
acknowledge receipt of your 
I am responding in the same format and with similar information to that in the response letter 
letter dated XXXX  2017 bringing 
sent last month, I hope this consistency will be helpful in enabling you and your team to see 
to my attention concerns raised 
the clear evidence of the progress we are making towards providing timely serious incident 
by your above named constituent 
reviews. I have continued to have direct oversight of how we are performing as I am 
in respect of XXXXXXX 
concerned that we improve our position as soon as possible. Our Board share this concern 
and therefore I have asked the Chief Nurse to keep our Quality Assurance Committee and 
our Board fully briefed.  

Whilst we are continuing to improve, we are paying particular attention to ensuring that 
families have good information to help them understand what a serious incident review is 
and how they can be involved.  

I have asked for an investigation 
to be carried out into the 
concerns raised by XXXXX 
following which I will send a 
detailed reply to you. 

We have good evidence that the recovery plan is meeting the improvement trajectory which 
we also report to our regulators and NHS England.  

With kind regards 

I hope the following summary is a helpful reminder of the action we have taken: 

Yours sincerely 

1.  We have contracted in additional expert capacity in incident reviews to actively 
address the reviews that are delayed, this is a group of incidents that happened 
before February 2023. Some of these reviews are now being concluded and are 
going through the internal quality assurance checks before we share them with the 
families, submit to the ICS and to your office. The attached document gives the detail 
of this.  

2.  We have increased our internal capacity to review incidents by engaging our leaders 
in completing incident reviews in order that we can review incoming incidents and 
avoid further delays developing. We intend to continue to use some of this capacity 
and expertise in the future which is part of our plan to avoid delays in the future.  
Date 
3.  We have reviewed all incidents to ensure we have met Duty of Candour, that families 
have received notification of a review and have a named contact person and that we 
have a clear term of reference for each review.  

Colin Martin 
Chief Executive 

4.  We commissioned an external company who specialise in incident management to 

review our incident data and establish if incidents are being properly categorised and 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 therefore responded to. We recognised that with a delay there was a risk we were 
missing issues and we wanted to be proactive.  

5.  We have adapted processes to facilitate much earlier identification of the type of 
review required (concise or full) – this now takes place at the daily patient safety 
huddle, and we follow the national, soon to be PSIRF, guidance for this. It is 
anticipated that we will increase the number of concise reviews, where appropriate, 
in line with this national guidance.  

6.  We have also adapted our processes to ensure they identify immediate / early 

learning for each incident and that we take immediate improvement action where 
appropriate. We have examples of Trust wide patient safety briefings we have 
developed following immediate learning.  

7.  We have in place weekly sitrep / report out meetings to ensure we are sighted on the 
progress of each review and can provide any additional support to reviewers that 
may be needed. We will be monitoring our performance against the trajectory we 
have developed, and this is being reported to executive directors on a weekly and 
monthly basis.  

8.  We are reporting to our regulators and regional leaders via the mandated Quality 

Board our progress.  

9.  We have modified our documentation, reviewed our report templates and are utilising 

standard operating procedures to support efficient working and flow.  

10. To ensure timely presentation and review of reports we are introducing more 

flexibility to our Serious Incident Review Panels and as we have allocated a lot of 
reviews over a short period, we are planning ahead the capacity to ensure we can be 
efficient in our internal quality assurance in order that this does not delay the release 
of reviews to families once completed.  

11. We will continue to expand our range of subject matter expert categories to lead 

specific types of reviews and we are currently contracting with an external provider 
who are a professional incident review company. Again, this is an opportunity to 
avoid delays in the future.  

We have previously  shared a list of the serious incident reviews that we believe will be 
required by you and  have indicated the dates that we expect the internal quality assurance 
process to be taking place. You can reasonably expect to receive most finalised serious 
incident reports within 2 weeks of the internal review however some will take longer than two 
weeks depending on, and this is difficult to predict, when the final report is available for 
review.  

From November 2023 we anticipate being able to allocate an SI review within the month the 
incident occurs. This is significant improvement.  
I hope this information meets your direction. 

Yours Sincerely  

Chief Executive
Response from Teesesk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
Tarncroft 
Lanchester Road Hospital 
Lanchester Road 
Durham 
DH1 5RD 

11 September 2023 

Private & Confidential 
Mr Chipperfield 
HM Senior Coroner for County Durham and Darlington 

Dear Mr Chipperfield 

Re: Report to Prevent Further Deaths issued on 15 August 2023 in relation  

to Mr Ian Darwin  

I am writing to you in response to your direction in the prevention of future deaths notice served 
to Tees,  Esk  and  Wear Valleys NHS  FT  on  15 August  2023 regarding  the  death  of  Mr  Ian 
Darwin to provide in writing further information on what the Trust is doing to ensure Serious 
Incident reviews are completed within a timely manner as well as an update on the estimated 
time of arrival for each outstanding review.  

I am responding in the same format and with similar information to that in the response letter 
sent last month, I hope this consistency will be helpful in enabling you and your team to see 
the clear evidence of the progress we are making towards providing timely serious incident 
reviews. I have continued to have direct oversight of how we are performing as I am concerned 
that we improve our position as soon as possible. Our CEO and our Board share this concern 
and therefore I am keeping our Quality Assurance Committee and our Board fully briefed. 

Whilst we are continuing to improve, we are paying particular attention to ensuring that families 
have good  information to help them  understand  what  a  serious incident  review  is  and  how 
they can be involved. 

We have good evidence that the recovery plan is meeting the improvement trajectory which 
we also report to our regulators and NHS England. 

I hope the following summary is a helpful reminder of the action we have taken: 

1)  We have contracted in additional expert capacity in incident reviews to actively address 
the reviews that are delayed, this is a group of incidents that happened before February 
2023.  Some  of  these  reviews  are  now  being  concluded  and  are  going  through  the 
internal quality assurance checks before we share them with the families, submit to 
the ICS and to your office. The attached document gives the detail of this. 

2)  We have increased our internal capacity to review incidents by engaging our leaders 
in completing incident reviews in order that we can review incoming incidents and avoid 
further  delays  developing.    We  intend  to  continue  to  use  some  of  this  capacity  and 
expertise in the future which is part of our plan to avoid delays in the future. 

3)  We have reviewed all incidents to ensure we have met Duty of Candour, that families 
have received notification of a review and have a named contact person and that we 
have a clear term of reference for each review. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Trust headquarters  
West Park Hospital, Edward Pease Way, Darlington, DL2 2TS 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4)  We  commissioned  an  external  company  who  specialise  in  incident  management  to 
review our incident data and establish if incidents are being properly categorised and 
therefore  responded  to.  We  recognised  that  with  a  delay  there  was  a  risk  we  were 
missing issues and we wanted to be proactive.  

5)  We have adapted processes to facilitate much earlier identification of the type of review 
required (concise or full) – this now takes place at the daily patient safety huddle, and 
we follow the national, soon to be PSIRF, guidance for this. It is anticipated that we will 
increase the number of concise reviews, where appropriate, in line with this national 
guidance. 

6)  We have also adapted our processes to ensure they identify immediate / early learning 
for each incident and that we take immediate improvement action where appropriate. 
We have examples of Trust wide patient safety briefings we have developed following 
immediate learning. 

7)  We have in place weekly sitrep / report out meetings to ensure we are sighted on the 
progress of each review and can provide any additional support to reviewers that may 
be  needed.  We  will  be  monitoring  our  performance  against  the  trajectory  we  have 
developed, and this is being reported to executive directors on a weekly and monthly 
basis. 

8)  We are reporting to our regulators and regional leaders via the mandated Quality Board 

our progress. 

9)  We have modified our documentation, reviewed our report templates and are utilising 

standard operating procedures to support efficient working and flow. 

10) To ensure timely presentation and review of reports we are introducing more flexibility 
to our Serious Incident Review Panels and as we have allocated a lot of reviews over 
a short period we are planning ahead the capacity to ensure we can be efficient in our 
internal quality assurance in order that this does not delay the release of reviews to 
families once completed. 

11) We  will  continue  to  expand  our  range  of  subject  matter  expert  categories  to  lead 
specific  types  of  reviews  and  we  are  currently  contracting  with  an  external  provider 
who are a professional incident review company. Again, this is an opportunity to avoid 
delays in the future. 

I have taken the opportunity to share a list of the serious incident reviews that we believe will 
be required by you and I have indicated the dates that we expect the internal quality assurance 
process  to  be  taking  place.  You  can  reasonably  expect  to  receive  most  finalised  serious 
incident reports within 2 weeks of the internal review however some will take longer than two 
weeks depending on, and this is difficult to predict, when the final report is available for review. 

From November 2023 we anticipate being able to allocate an SI review within the month the 
incident occurs. This is significant improvement. 

I hope this information meets your direction.  

Yours sincerely, 

Chief Nurse 

Enc. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Trust headquarters  
West Park Hospital, Edward Pease Way, Darlington, DL2 2TS

Related reports

Other reports by Jeremy Chipperfield

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) 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.