Lisa Taylor-Penny

Regulation 28 Response in the case of Lisa Taylor-Penny  
(on behalf of Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary) 

We note the concerns expressed by the Coroner regarding the potential for future deaths as 
outlined in Section 5 of the Coroner’s Section 28 Report dated 15th April 2026.  

As the Coroner will appreciate, this is not an Inquest in which Cheshire Constabulary were 
named an interested party and we therefore have no sight of the full bundle of evidence and 
the documents the Coroner considered in this case, save the statements provided by the 
Constabulary at the Coroners request in advance of the Inquest.  Considering this, we felt it 
may assist to provide some background information and copy policies /procedures which in 
turn will flow into our responses to the specific points raised. We hope this is found to be 
helpful in the circumstances.  

In this case, the report refers to the application of the “Right Care, Right Person” policy. It is 
that to which we respond and provide further information.  

Right Care, Right Person 

Right Care Right Person (RCRP) is a national project that commenced in January 2023 with 
coordination between the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC), the Home Office, the College 
of Policing, HM Inspectorate of Constabularies, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS), the Office 
for  Independent  Police  Complaints  (IOPC)  and  the  Department  for  Health  and  Social  Care 
(DHSC).  RCRP is a national operating model approved for police forces in England and Wales, 
which  is  locally  implemented  recognising  the  complexities  of  each  police  force  and  its 
corresponding  NHS,  Local  Authority  and  other  partnerships.  This  national  approach  was 
codified by the Home Office and Department for Health and Social Care under the National 
Partnership Agreement (“NPA”) published on 26th June 2023. 

RCRP  is  an  approach  first  developed  by  Humberside  police  to  ensure  people  who  call  the 
police  get  the  best  support  and  service  whilst  ensuring  the  most  suitable  intervention  to 
vulnerable members of the public who require specialist support.  RCRP involves partners in 
ambulance,  mental  health,  acute  hospitals,  social  services  and  other  organisations.    These 
partnerships ensure that RCRP can achieve its aim to provide the best care for the public by 
ensuring the most appropriate response to calls for service, by the professionals with the right 
skills, experience and expertise. In other words, this is about ensuring that when someone 
contacts the police, they get help from the correct and most suitable service. Police will still 
respond where we are the right service to do so but RCRP recognises these are healthcare 
scenarios where others have responsibility and the specialist skills required to assist in the 
best interests of those involved. 

Central to RCRP is the assurance that all policies and guidelines on practice: - 

1.  Give clear guidance to officers and staff who use them  
2.  Are reasonably comprehensive  
3.  Are consistent with legal obligations  
4.  Promote the best interests not just of the force but the public it serves  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Extensive advice was sought prior to implementation in respect of legal requirements placed 
on the police – including any issues surrounding duty of care - in various circumstances and 
how  this  might  vary  with  vulnerable  callers  (including  children  and  young  people).  
Consideration was also given as to whether it was lawful and appropriate to conduct police 
system checks on calls where police did not have an obvious duty to respond. This considered 
existing force operating models, Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigations 
and law.  The RCRP approach was highlighted by HMICFRS in its 2018 report and was reviewed 
by the College of Policing as best practice on 3rd April 2023.  

Cheshire Police RCRP Timeline 

Prior to the implementation of Right Care Right Person in Cheshire, Cheshire Constabulary 
received over 25,000 reports of a concern for welfare into the Force Control Centre each year.  
The introduction of RCRP, working with our partner organisations, has reduced the volume of 
some  reports  for  a  welfare  check  as  agencies  now  have  their  own  internal  escalation 
processes (including hospitals who have specific processes they should follow when someone 
leaves hospital for example), and there is a better understanding of what police will, and will 
not respond to.   This means, since RCRP was introduced in 2024 Cheshire Constabulary has 
received a lower number (22,098 in 2024) of reports of a concern for welfare.  We are on 
course to receive a similar number of reports in 2025 as 2024.   

Public Contact (known as the FCC) has around 400 members of staff. Prior to Right Care Right 
Person,  they  did  not  receive  any  detailed  training  regarding  the  legal  basis  on  when  we 
should, should not, must, can and indeed cannot accept a duty of care.  This meant that a 
report  of  a  concern  for  welfare  often  generated  an  incident  for  deployment  which  upon 
review by the  FIS or FIM identified that deployment was not  the correct approach.   Upon 
examination this was a flawed approach and highlighted that the force was assuming a duty 
of care when it was not always appropriate or necessary.  This put Police officers in situations 
where they do not have the right skills, expertise or training to help the public when in need.  
From a public perspective it meant police attending in a situation in which they were not best 
placed or able to assist, ie a healthcare scenario requiring expert practitioners.  

Cheshire Constabulary adopted the principles of Right Care, Right Person (RCRP) for reports 
of Concern for Safety (CFS) from 8th January 2024.  The change in how these incidents are 
described and categorised from ‘concern for welfare’ to ‘concern for safety’ underpins the 
move away from ‘welfare checks’ as, in general terms, the police are not under any duty to 
act at common law regarding the general welfare of the public nor ought they to do so. In 
many cases there simply wouldn’t be any police powers enabling them to do so (eg to force 
entry in the absence of the threshold being met to utilise such powers). The RCRP principles 
were adopted in phases as follows: - 

•  Phase  1  launched  on  8th  January  2024  and  focussed  on  ‘Concern  for  Safety’.  This 
introduced a toolkit regarding general concern for welfare calls that Cheshire Police 
receive from the public and partners.   

•  Phase  2  launched  on  15th  May  2024  and  focussed  on  ‘Walkout  from  Healthcare 
settings’ (a subset of Phase 1). This added greater clarity to incidents where mental 

 
 
 
 
 
 health and detention under The Mental Health Act need to be considered.  This was 
underpinned by further training and a refresh of the fundamentals of RCRP.   

•  Phase 3 was introduced in September 2024 and relates to s135 MHA warrants. This 
was also supported by further training and refresher training of all aspects of RCRP.   

The  training  at  each  stage  was  accompanied  by  personal  issue  ‘RCRP  Toolkits’  to  support 
decision making.  These physical workbooks are used by operators to follow the flow chart 
which highlights policing obligations and are designed to positively triage each case.  

The Toolkits are designed to identify the purpose and need for police to attend based on legal 
/ statutory obligations.   In short, the FCC call handler will answer a 101 or 999 call and listen 
to the caller.  They will ask questions and gather information using the toolkit flow chart as a 
list to prioritise and confirm or clarify information.  This is a rapid and dynamic assessment. 
At  any  point  when  then  call  handler  identifies  a  policing  purpose  via  the  toolkit  and  the 
questions asked they will update the incident for deployment.  This can happen very quickly 
in  calls  where  there  is  a  clear  immediate  threat  to  life.  The  call  handler  will  complete  the 
toolkit  questions  and  listen  to  what  is  being  reported.    They  will  apply  their  training  and 
professional judgement to the report, applying the RCRP question set and seeking to identify 
what is being reported, and what the police can reasonably do given the report.  An example 
of this is where a call is of a general concern for welfare such as when someone has missed 
an appointment or has elected to leave a hospital waiting area by choice.  Whilst these raise 
a general concern for the reporting person or agency, they do not reach the threshold for a 
police  response.    The  FCC  call  handler  will  add  a  digital  ‘RCRP  proforma’  to  the  Incident 
Management  Log  (“IML”)  which  captures  their  decision  which  they  show  by  ticking  the 
specific decision points they have been through.  They will then add their THRIVE rationale to 
the incident which is their decision regarding the urgency of the deployment in line with their 
training as per all other incidents.     

RCRP ensures that reports of Concern for Safety (CFS) are now always recorded in an IML on 
every  occasion  as  a  standard  approach.  This  allows  for  clear  documentation  of  decision 
making relating to CFS incident reports and assists with audit of this type of incident.   

As mentioned, RCRP has introduced a standard set of questions for all FCC operators that they 
must consider and document, which previously did not exist.  

This is supported by a policy document that explains the legal and statutory obligations, as 
well as the context and considerations that underpin Right Care Right Person implementation 
in  Cheshire.    Every  member  of  staff  in  the  FCC  received  detailed  training  in  the  law,  the 
process and the application of RCRP prior to implementation.  This included all Force Incident 
Sergeants (“FIS”), Force Incident Managers (“FIM”), FCC Supervisors and the Senior leadership 
team.  Wider engagement and training were rolled out within the force to all departments.  
The training and supporting documents have also been shared with partner agencies to assist 
their  own  training  and  approach  to  RCRP  (RCRP  Legal  and  Escalation  slides  attached  as 
Appendix  three).    The  Constabulary  also  developed,  offered  and  provided  communication 
experience  and  material  to  assist  other  agencies  in  providing  their  own  education  and 
awareness of RCRP prior to go live.    

 
 
 
 
 
 
 To support both public and professionals regarding when to call Cheshire police and to ensure 
we signpost when the police are not deploying to a request for assistance, Cheshire Police 
developed the public force website to host approved national and support service contacts.  
This  website  page  contains  links  to  NHS  111,  Crisis  Line,  The  Hub  of  Hope,  and  postcode 
specific  services  such  as  Live  Well  Cheshire  (West  and  East),  and  others.    When  a  call 
generates  a  no  deployment  decision,  the  FCC  call  handler  will  inform  the  caller  of  this  by 
reading a prewritten script which avoids any misunderstanding.  They will then direct caller 
appropriately (for example in respect of further enquiries they can make, avenues available 
to them) and can direct or send the caller to the website link verbally or by email or text. They 
may  also  indicate  that  the  caller  should  undertake  further  enquiries  and  then  call  back  if 
required.  

To be clear, the toolkit/ guide is aligned to the legal and statutory duties placed on the police 
and will lead to one of 4 end decision points.  They are:  

1.  Deploy 
2.  No Deployment 
3.  Caller insists on deployment (after no deployment decision reached) and the matter 

thus requires escalation to a supervisor for review. 
4.  Unsure about deployment and escalate to Supervisor.  

With  each  of  these  end  decision  points  there  is  an  accompanying  script  that  the  FCC  call 
handler must read to the caller to be completely clear on what action is or is not being taken.  
These statements are to ensure clarity for everyone involved in a specific incident.  They are 
also the parameters for when FCC call handler will conduct primary, or secondary intelligence 
checks.     

The documentation available is important as if a further call for service is then received it is 
treated as a new incident with the RCRP methodology applied.  Any previous reported and 
recorded incidents will be clearly visible.  Often such as in cases where a neighbour has not 
been seen, several calls may be received all expressing a general concern which on their own 
do  not  meet  the  threshold  for  a  police  response.    However,  these  will  all  be  recorded  to 
ensure that an informed decisions can be made based on all the information and intelligence 
available.   

Escalation Process 

The escalation process in RCRP is a process to trigger a second and if needed, a third review 
should the public or partner agencies call and disagree with the police decision not to deploy. 
This is commenced when a caller states they disagree with the decision not to deploy and 
escalated the incident firstly to the FCC Supervisor (second review), and then to the Force 
Incident Manager (third and final review).   

Full training in the escalation points of incidents was delivered both internally to FCC staff and 
externally to partner agencies.  This was to ensure that all involved were clear that if a FCC 
call handler is unable to make a decision regarding deployment on a reported incident, or if 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 the caller disagrees with the police decision on an incident (generally not to deploy), it will 
trigger  an  escalation  to  the  FCC  Supervisor.    This  is  triggered  by  a  simple  plain  speech 
declaration that the caller does not agree with the decision.  This ensures the public or partner 
can  trigger  an  escalation  simple  by  stating  in  plain  speech  they  disagree.    During  the 
development  of  RCRP  an  action  was  set  to  all  partner  agencies  to  train  their  staff  in  this 
escalation process.   

These  escalations  are  intentional  designed  as  the  RCRP  toolkit  and  policy  can  never  cover 
every  eventuality,  nor  does  it  prohibit  decision  makers  at  any  level  from  applying  sound 
professional judgement and choosing to deploy police resources even if RCRP toolkit indicates 
no deployment and there appears no police power to do so.  All FCC team members, FCC 
Supervisors  and  Force  Incident  Managers  (indeed  anyone  asked  to  make  a  deployment 
decision)  has  been  trained  and  empowered  that  they  can  over-ride  RCRP  and  choose  to 
deploy at any time based on a clear explanation and reason.  The training around this was 
delivered prior to go live with examples where this might occur.  This ensures those using 
RCRP  are  considering  all  the  information  and  managing  the  risks  reported.    RCRP  is  not  a 
process of simply following a list.  Where we step outside of RCRP policy, all have been trained 
and  understand  that  a  “Sherratts”  duty  will  then  apply  as  we  have  chosen  to  take 
responsibility for the incident resolution.   

An  additional  option  is  available  to  the  FIM  escalation  which  supports  police  deployment 
when there is no clear policing purpose, but mutual aid is requested by a partner agency.  This 
was anticipated to be where a crisis situation has occurred, and the partner agency is unable 
to meet their own demands.  This would be triggered by the FIM who would agree to deploy 
police  resources  and  accompanied  by  the  worded  script  read  to  the  caller.    These 
deployments  would  then  trigger  an  escalation  for  review  and  learning  at  the  appropriate 
statutory safeguarding board. 

Development of RCRP policy  

Over the full year of 2023 Cheshire Police worked with over 500 different private, public and 
third sector organisations in the development and implementation of RCRP.  A full review of 
the  legal  and  statutory  obligations  placed  upon  police  was  conducted  with  legal  advice 
obtained from Kings Counsel.  This underpins the approach, framework, application and policy 
of RCRP.  Extensive discussion and development of RCRP took place in the 12- month period 
with regular governance meetings taking place.  These meetings were held frequently and 
were  the  development  and  instructional  meetings  attended  by  representatives  from  all 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 organisations with a footprint across or within Cheshire and the UK.  This included HMICFRS, 
IOPC,  NHS,  Local  Authority  service  providers  and  other  services.    They  membership  and 
attendance followed the pattern of:  

•  Strategic Coordination Group – chaired by Assistant Chief Constable and attended by 

strategic leads (Chief Exec level) initially every 6 weeks.  

•  Tactical  Coordination  Group  –  Chaired  by  Chief  Inspector  or  Superintendent  and 

attended by tactical leads (Head of Department level) initially every 4 weeks.   

•  Operations  Working  Groups  –  Chaired  by  RCRP  project  team.    Held  regularly  and 
attended  by  TCG  attendees  and  practitioners,  initially  every  4  weeks  and  with  six 
individual working groups running at the same time focussed on different professional 
groups.   

Over 2000 hours have been invested in partnership engagement and discussion across 500 
distinct organisations that operate with the Cheshire Constabulary geographical area.  The 
attendance  records  of  who  attended  which  meetings,  and  the  meetings  themselves  is 
recorded and available for scrutiny.   

RCRP Training:  

Every member of staff in the FCC received detailed training in the law, the process, and the 
application of RCRP prior to implementation. This included all FIS, FIMS, FCC Supervisors, and 
the Senior Leadership Team.   Extensive training of how to use the RCRP flowcharts known as 
toolkits  was  undertaken  prior  to  go  live  and  delivered  to  FCC  staff  by  experienced  and 
competent trainers.    The  training  package  was  developed  to  complement  the  RCRP  policy 
written to underpin its use.  Prior to go live of RCRP staff received initial training in RCRP of a 
3-hour input in the law, the use of the toolkit, what to record and how to escalate if they were 
unsure to an FCC Supervisor.  This was followed up after go-live with further training sessions 
as Cheshire Police adopted a phased approach to implementation, to best support partners 
with their own preparations for the change in approach.   

During  go  live  and  throughout  2024  RCRP  floorwalkers  were  employed  to  support  staff  in 
making  decisions  and  answering  questions.    This  was  via  experienced  staff  who  received 
additional  training  and  were  selected  for  their  knowledge  of  law  and  procedure  and  their 
ability to consistently apply RCRP to reported incidents.  This was complemented by the FCC 
Supervisors on duty, and the RCRP project team who worked alongside staff in FCC Calls room.  
The training is as follows:  

•  A full day training on mental health to give understanding of the different sections.  
•  A full day training on RCRP which focusses on law, statutory duties and covers concern 
for safety and walkout from healthcare.  This is then tested against scenarios in which 
they must follow the toolkits to see what decision they come to.  This is followed by a 
session on callers in crisis which covers suicide ideology and recaps Article 2 ECHR.  
Included in the training is a recap on mental health completed earlier in initial FCC 
training as a call handler, Article 2 ECHR, Article 3 ECHR, Common Law and Sherretts 
duty.  
Incident creation within RCRP i.e. If it’s a crime, child neglect or a MFH 

• 

• 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 •  RCRP QA and project team presentation and plenary discussion.  

RCRP Quality Assurance 

Quality assurance is undertaken by the RCRP project and implementation team conducting 
live QA of incidents as they occur to ensure consistent application of RCRP in line with training.  
Direct feedback is given to FCC call handlers, and they can discuss decisions with the QA team 
as well as the FCC Supervisors.  At the commencement of RCRP the FCC call handlers were all 
supported by RCRP subject matter experts (SME’S) and professionals from the mental health 
charity MIND who floor walked to assist call handlers become familiar with using the toolkits.  

All FCC call handlers have their incidents reviewed by the RCRP team for quality assurance.  
Any  learning  or  development  is  undertaken  with  the  individuals  Supervisor.    If  required  a 
further development session with the RCRP team is arranged.  

To date under this process, Cheshire Police have received and created 35,092 Concern  for 
Safety incidents reported by public and partner agencies.   The RCRP QA team have to date 
quality assured 24,711 incidents which is 70.4% of all incidents reported.  From the total of 
concern  for  safety  reports  received,  as  of  June  2025,  108  (0.37%)  had  been  referred  to 
Cheshire Constabulary Professional standards department for a DSI review.  Of that number 
13  incidents  (0.04%  of  total)  have  been  referred  to  the  Independent  Office  for  Police 
Complaint (IOPC) and all have been examined and found to meet the standards expected by 
the IOPC, with 3 (0.01%) returned to Cheshire Police with opportunities for local reflective 
consideration.  This  demonstrates  the  robust  process  in  place  including  for  escalation  and 
review.  

Concerns raised by the Coroner 

The Coroner’s concern in the section 28 report dated 15th April 2026 is as follows. 

Right care right person" (RCRP) is being implemented in a very rigid manner suggesting 
that call handlers may be using it as "tramlines not guidelines". 

I am concerned that it does not leave sufficient scope for call handlers to escalate calls 
for a senior member of staff to consider exercising professional judgment. In particular, 
where other professionals who are familiar with RCRP are nevertheless indicating a 
professional view that they need police attendance to secure entry and are expressing a 
concern for life and limb. 

We note the concerns expressed by the coroner regarding the potential for future deaths 
arising from a narrow interpretation of policy when professionals report concerns about 
potential missing persons.  

Right Care Right Person (RCRP) is designed to support police call handlers in identifying 
circumstances that may engage Article 2 (Right to Life) or Article 3 (Prohibition of Inhuman 
or Degrading Treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights. These articles place 
legal obligations on all state agencies to act where there is a real and immediate risk to 
life or a serious risk of harm. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 These thresholds are clearly defined and apply only where the risk is present, continuing, 
and happening now. It is important to note that a general concern for an individual's 
welfare, while valid and taken seriously, does not meet the legal standard required to trigger 
these obligations. 

In addition, RCRP supports the identification of cases where an individual should be treated 
as missing from home, in accordance with force policy and Authorised Professional Practice 
(APP) as set by the College of Policing. This ensures that responses are aligned with 
nationally recognised standards and best practice. 

When Cheshire Constabulary receive a call from a member of the public or from an agency 
to report a missing person, the trained operative will conduct a THRIVE-SC assessment in 
which they consider, Threat, Harm, Risk, Investigation, Vulnerability, Engagement, 
Safeguarding, Scene Preservation and Crime. They risk assess based on all information 
available to them and this is a living assessment during the lifespan of an incident. The 
THRIVE-SC assessment is completed at the initial point of contact and can be repeated on 
multiple occasions as necessary throughout an incident and can lead to a change in the 
assessment of the deployment decision or grading of deployment as information develops.  
It is very important to note that whether the caller is a professional or member of the public, 
questions are asked to extract the right information but is reliant on the caller being able to 
provide information and taking steps to gather information.  

The Police have a duty to act: 

a)  where there is a real and immediate threat to life under Article 2 of the European 
Convention of Human Rights. The risk must be real and immediate and substantial 
and significant (i.e. present, continuing and happening now and the police know or 
ought to know at the time of the risk to the life of an actual victim or potential victim 
and is a high threshold.) 

b)  Where there is a real and immediate risk of significant harm amounting to ‘inhumane 
or degrading treatment or torture under Article 3 ECHR, again the risk must be real 
and immediate.  

There are several considerations around RCRP, and the relevant threshold as outlined in the 
policy. Equally part of RCRP and any missing from home process is ensuring appropriate lines 
of enquiry have been followed.  

In this case, calls were received initially at 13.36 hours and then 17.22 hours. These can be 
summarised as follows below.  

At 13:36hrs Cheshire Police received a 101 call (non-emergency number) from Care worker 
Amy SWINHILL reporting concerns over Lisa Taylor-Penny. She had attended at her address 
and there was no answer at the door. The CMHT last had a conversation with her yesterday, 
Amy believes Lisa is inside the property as RP can see her coat, bag, car on the drive and the 
table light is on. Lisa suffers with anxiety and rarely leaves the house, has poor mental health 
and had talked about suicide in the past, but nothing recently. Lisa's daughter committed 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 suicide around this time last year, so the RP as a team who deal with her everyday have 
concerns. Concerned she has done something.  Right care right person was applied, and a no 
deployment decision was made. Amy Swinhill disagreed with this decision, and the incident 
was escalated to the FCC Supervisor to review of the incident. 

At 14.40 hours the escalation to a supervisor was completed and the initial no deployment 
decision was ratified. The recorded rationale of this by the Supervisor was “Spoken to Amy. 
She has explained to me that female has bad anxiety and will not leave the house. I have 
asked if she has reason to believe female is in the property to which she has said yes as she 
does not leave the house. I have explained to her under RCRP this will not be a police 
deployment as if she believes the female needs medical assistance then this will be for 
ambulance.”  

At 17:22hrs Cheshire Police received a 999 call from social worker Rachel PRITCHARD 
reporting a concern for Lisa Taylor-Penny that she had either harmed herself or was unwell. 
She stated that Lisa Taylor-Penny was open to mental health services and frequently had 
thoughts of ending her own life but had not made any threat that day. Rachel Pritchard 
stated that the ambulance service had accepted the call and were sending an ambulance. A 
further ‘No deployment’ decision was reached and a complaint was escalated to the Force 
Incident Manager (FIM).  

It is clear from the recordings that both calls are for concern for Lisa Taylor-Penny’s welfare 
based on her mental health, but neither call indicates that Lisa had expressed any suicidal 
thoughts that day, nor was there anything indicating an immediate and present risk or threat 
to life.  

In this case, the RCRP policy was correctly applied and appropriate advice given, indeed the 
ambulance service (NWAS) agreed to take on the duty to attend and had informed Rachel 
Pritchard that they would be deploying an ambulance and provided her a reference number. 
They were the correct agency to respond. The information being passed on the call was the 
concern that Miss Taylor-Penny was either unwell or had harmed herself. This information 
did not pass the threshold for a police response because in this scenario the police are not 
the best agency to attend due to officers not being medically trained.  

Whilst the RCRP process involves individual decision making, the toolkits and procedures 
ensure consistency and sound decision making to avoid differing interpretations of policy. 
The policy reflects decisions being made based on the information provided rather than 
decisions made based on who is providing the information.  

Full training is provided to all call-handling staff to ensure this consistent application of the 
relevant policy. Call handlers are required to apply a structured set of questions designed to 
support decision-making, and where a decision cannot be reached using this framework, 
they are aware of and expected to follow the established escalation process.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The escalation process is there to ensure escalation upwards and in this case the escalation 
process was used with the outcome the same.