Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Janet Spencer

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0541, written 4 Oct 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report4 Oct 2023
Reference2023-0541
DeceasedJanet Spencer
CoronerMichael Wall
Coroner areaNottingham City and Nottinghamshire
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:  

1  Corporate Director for Adult Social Care and Public Health, Nottinghamshire 

County Council, County Hall 

1  CORONER 

I am Mr Michael Wall, HM Assistant Coroner, for the coroner area of Nottingham City and 
Nottinghamshire 

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 Coroner’s (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 10 October 2022 I commenced an investigation into the death of Janet Irene SPENCER 
aged 76. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 21 September 2023. The 
conclusion of the inquest was: Accident. 

4  CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH (relevant to this report) 

Janet had an unwitnessed fall while in the lounge area of her assisted living accommodation 
on 30 August 2022. She pressed her call buzzer and notified staff. A support worker attended 
promptly. Janet was conscious. She reported having hit her head. An ambulance was called 
and paramedics attended. Janet was transported to Kings Mill Hospital where it was identified 
that she had suffered an acute subdural haematoma. Surgical intervention was deemed not 
appropriate. Janet was placed on end-of-life care. Despite a period of a few days when she 
appeared to improve, she did not recover and remained in hospital until her death some 13 
days later. Janet died as a result of a traumatic acute subdural haematoma sustained in the 
fall, with underlying ischaemic heart disease contributing to but not directly causing her 
death.   

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. 

Janet had a recent but significant history of frequent falls, some causing serious injury. A 
care assessment commenced on 6th May 2022 and updated on 10th May 2022, identified 
that she had reablement potential but further assessment of her needs was required.  

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

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 16th May 2022 she was admitted to the assessment unit at Gladstone House, an assisted 
living facility. On 25th May she suffered a further fall, fracturing her right neck of femur. She 
was admitted to Kings Mill Hospital. On 22nd June 2022 a discharge to assess referral form 
was completed. It included limited detail of her care needs and a single-sentence reference to 
the fall on 25th May. On 14th July 2022, Janet was discharged to Nightingale Care and 
Nursing Home. On 18th July 2022 she had an unwitnessed fall there. Fortunately, she 
sustained no significant injuries on that occasion. On 26th August 2022 Janet transferred to 
Gladstone House. On 30th August 2022 she suffered the fall which ultimately led to her 
death.  

The evidence heard from staff at both care facilities was consistent in two significant 
respects: i) they were provided with very little information in advance of the transfer; and ii) 
the transfer was arranged hastily, which resulted in both facilities having limited opportunity 
to liaise with each other, or to prepare for and ensure it proceeded smoothly.  

I remain unclear as to the precise reasons for Janet’s transfer from Nightingale to Gladstone 
House on 26th August 2022 and why it appears to have been arranged with such haste. No 
updated care assessment was made prior to transfer.  

An error occurred between the care facilities which resulted in Janet not receiving two of her 
prescribed medications following her transfer to Gladstone House. While this did not cause or 
contribute to Janet’s death, the importance of care facility residents receiving the correct 
medication needs no emphasis. This error occurred in part because of flaws in the systems of 
the two care facilities, which I am satisfied have since been addressed. However, the 
evidence suggests that it was also due, in part, to the haste with which the transfer was 
arranged and the lack of coordination of it by the social care team. 

I heard evidence that the systems in respect of discharges and transfers to Gladstone House 
have since been improved. I was told that both that provider and the social care team based 
on site, do now have better systems in place and work closely together to ensure that 
sufficient information is provided in respect of any referral. However, I was also told that 
Gladstone House have no power to refuse any referral even if they consider the information 
provided by social care to be insufficient. Furthermore, the Adult and Social Care Team, Team 
Manager who gave evidence on behalf of NCC, was (through no fault of her own) unable to 
assist me with details of any changes that may have occurred more widely within the 
discharge to assess team since August 2022. I cannot therefore be satisfied that these issues 
have been adequately addressed.  

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:  
(brief summary of matters of concern) 

The systems in place in respect of discharge to assess patients do not appear to 

1. 
ensure patients are discharged or transferred between care facilities with an adequate and up 
to date risk assessment and care plan in place.  

The systems in place in respect of discharge to assess patients do not appear to 

2. 
ensure a smooth transition between care facilities, especially when transfers are arranged at 
pace. In particular, they do not appear to ensure that all involved have the information they 
require to contribute effectively to the transfer process.  

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

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Although they did not cause or contribute to Janet Spencer’s death, I am concerned that the 
issues identified above give rise to a risk of deaths occurring if they go unaddressed. 

6  ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or your 
organisation) 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 29 November 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 following Interested Persons: 

1.  Janet’s daughters 
2.  Fosse Healthcare 
3.  Jasmine Healthcare 

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: 4 October 2023 

Michael Wall 
HM Assistant Coroner 
For Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire  

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 Nottinghamshire County Council (PDF)
##MAILMERGE - Do not delete this text or change the colour from white 

This matter is being dealt with by: 

W nottinghamshire.gov.uk 

Private and Confidential 
To be opened by addressee only 

Michael Wall 
HM Assistant Coroner 
For Nottingham City and 
Nottinghamshire 

Dear Michael 

28 November 2023 

RE: 

 - Janet Irene SPENCER - Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths 

Please see below our response to the matters of concerns as set out in section 5 of the report: 

"The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows: 
(brief summary of matters of concern) 

The systems in place in respect of discharge to assess patients do not appear to ensure 
patients are discharged or transferred between care facilities with an adequate and up to 
date risk assessment and care plan in place. 

1.  Nottinghamshire County Council has a joint strategy and policy with partners in the Nottingham 

and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care System (ICS) in line with national NHS England 
Discharge to Assess (D2A) Policy and Guidance.   

2.  Under this model there are four routes out of hospital for people as follows: 

•  P0 – No additional support required on discharge at home from Adult Social Care but could    
     include District Nursing input 
•  P1- Reablement or rehabilitation at home- in Nottinghamshire this is provided by the Local  
     Authority (LA) and NHS Community Health Provider 
•  P2- Residential rehabilitation or further assessment- this is provided by the NHS. 
•  P3- Complex discharge planning, often including assessment for Funded Nursing Care or  

       NHS Continuing Healthcare – this is also an NHS provision on discharge from hospital. 

3.  The Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICS D2A policy and procedure has been agreed between 

NHS and Local Authority partners and is as follows:  

A ‘Discharge to Assess’ referral form is completed by the NHS ward staff caring for the person, 
this details their care and support needs, risk assessment and where appropriate consideration 
of Mental Capacity and Best Interests relating to further  
care/rehabilitation/reablement required for hospital discharge.  

0
2

r
p
A
d
a
e
h
r
e
t
t
e
L

e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
C

The Council is committed to protecting your privacy and ensuring all personal information is kept confidential and safe. For more details 
see our general and service specific privacy notices at: https://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/global-content/privacy 

Nottinghamshire County Council, County Hall, West Bridgford, Nottingham NG2 7QP 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 4.  The Discharge to Assess form is sent to the ‘Transfer of Care Hub’ - which is a multi-disciplinary 
Team sited within the hospital. Each referral to the Hub is discussed by the team which includes 
NHS and LA Social Care professionals, also linking with District Council and Community & 
Voluntary Sector staff as required. The Multi- Disciplinary Team make a joint decision regarding 
which pathway the person requires to ensure a safe discharge from hospital with appropriate 
care, support and reablement to promote their wellbeing and independence.  

5.  The Pathway decision and referral forms are shared with the care provider, for example for 
people leaving hospital to return home on Pathway 1 (social care supported discharge) this 
information is shared with the LA Services, and for those being supported via Pathway 1 by 
Community Health Provision- information is shared accordingly. This information pack also 
includes a discharge summary and medication list / arrangements. 

6.  In Mrs Spencer’s case she was assessed to require a Pathway 1 discharge (Social Care 

Supported Discharge), the Multi- Disciplinary Team identified that she would benefit from further 
assessment and reablement in an Assessment Flat- which in her local area are situated at 
Gladstone Court.  However, as there was not an Assessment Flat available when she was 
ready to leave hospital, interim care arrangements were made at a local Residential Care Home 
and she was discharged safely to that location, the Nightingale Care Home manager was sent 
the D2A Form information as part of the preliminary discharge planning and agreed that they 
could meet her needs, discharge went smoothly. 

7.  The transfer from Nightingale Care Home to the Assessment Flat was not satisfactory as 

highlighted in HM Coroner’s report, the Local Authority policy and guidance was not followed in 
terms of ensuring that arrangements were in place for Mrs Spencer’s medication, and  recording 
of  information regarding the care arrangements required This has been addressed via a 
Safeguarding Adults Enquiry (Sec. 42, Care Act 2014), with recommendations and action plan 
implemented (please see para.11). 

Partnership working and Service Improvements 

8.  To ensure continued quality assurance and service improvements there are weekly Multi-

Disciplinary Workshops as part of the Integrated Care System Discharge to Assess Planning 
and Service Provision. This includes a regular review of Transfer of Care Hubs and Multi-
Disciplinary Team working practices. Each month there is a focussed workshop on each 
Pathway 1-3 and then a more strategic workshop as part of this agreed work plan for the 
Integrated Care System. These workshops include senior operational and strategic 
representatives from all key partner agencies and is key to partnership working and 
collaborative culture to improving hospital discharge for people and their carers/families. 

9.  At a more operational level, the Transfer of Care Hubs hold weekly audits and reflective 

discussions of hospital discharges that have gone well or where improvements are required.  

10. Another key improvement for Hospital Discharge planning across the Integrated Care System 

been the implementation of a shared dataset which tracks people through their hospital 
admission and pathway out of hospital. This dataset and dashboard is used by NHS and LA 
partners to ensure that all people leaving hospital are supported to do so in as timely and safe a 
manner as possible.  

Nottinghamshire County Council Service Improvements 

11. The LA recognises that improvements have been required in the clear and accurate sharing of 

up-to-date information for admission to the Assessment Flats, as illustrated by Mrs Spencer’s 
situation.  To ensure that the risk of any future breakdown in communication is mitigated, a new 
process and referral / assessment form has been implemented for all people moving into 
Assessment Flat accommodation.  This process is for hospital and community admissions into 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 the service.  The assessment form outlines the person’s care and support needs, any risks and 
updated medical information including medication.  This is recorded on the Social Care 
Electronic Record and shared with the care provider at Gladstone Court which is Fosse 
Healthcare.   

12. There are also weekly meetings for the Discharge to Assessment Team Managers from the 

Local Authority where practice is reviewed, and improvements discussed and shared across the 
service.  

The systems in place in respect of discharge to assess patients do not appear to ensure a 
smooth transition between care facilities, especially when transfers are arranged at pace. In 
particular, they do not appear to ensure that all involved have the information they require 
to contribute effectively to the transfer process. 

13. The LA would expect that the process described above is followed regarding hospital discharge, 

with information shared about a person’s care and support needs prior to any transfer to a 
different care provision or arrangements (whether at home or in a 24-hour care setting). This 
includes the care requirements, risk assessment and mental capacity / best interests’ 
information.  As explained above, whilst the Local Authority has a clear process in place for 
arrangements by LA Social Care staff for people moving between care facilities, this was not 
robust followed in the case of the arrangements for Mrs Spencer and her move to Gladstone 
Court. This process has been reviewed and improved in order ensure a more robust transfer 
arrangements process for people requiring this service in the future.  

Yours sincerely 

Corporate Director – Adult Social Care and Health 
Nottinghamshire County Council

Related reports

Other reports by Michael Wall

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.