Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths · 2015-0013

“DCC and Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust”

Dated 16 Jan 2015, from the coroner for Derby and Derbyshire. Sent to 3 organisations or people.

A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.

Read the full report on judiciary.uk

How this works

The 56-day response deadline

Deadline passed

Replies were due by 13 Mar 2015. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.

Organisations that receive a report must reply to the coroner within 56 days, saying what they will do or why they will do nothing. We show whether a response is published on judiciary.uk.

  1. Report dated16 Jan 2015
  2. Deadline13 Mar 2015
  3. Published on judiciary.uk16 Jan 2015
  4. Today23 Oct 2026

Watch this report

We’ll email you when a response is published on judiciary.uk, or when the 56 days to reply end with none published there yet. Free, and you can stop with one click.

Next we ask your name, then send a link to confirm and create your free account. Already have an account? Sign in

Responses from each recipient

Responses from each recipient
Sent toResponse
Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustResponse publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in January 2015.
Derbyshire County CouncilDeadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 13 Mar 2015. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
NHS EnglandResponse publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in January 2015.

Some responses were published as scans, so their text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.

The coroner’s concerns

This report was published as a scan, so its text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.

— DCC and Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. 1, The CMHT from the evidence I heard did not understand that the DCC Recovery Team is not following the Care Programme approach, neither are lead professionals from the DCC Recovery Team acting as care co- ordinators for the purposes of the Care Programme Approach . I heard evidence that the Psychiatrist from the CMHT understood that the social worker from the DCC Recovery Team was Louise Henry’s Care coordinator for CPA purposes and was following the Care Programme Approach. I also heard evidence that when the services of the DCC Recovery Team and CMHT ceased to be an Integrated service the understanding of the psychiatrist had been that the DCC Recovery Team workers would be following the CPA. I heard evidence from DCC Recovery Team that this was not the case and that they were not following the CPA or acting as the care co-ordinator for the purposes of CPA but instead worked to the Self Directed Support framework. It is important that the CMHT understand the roles and responsibilities of the Lead professional from the DCC Recovery Team and that they are not following the Care Programme approach or acting as the care co- ordinator. It is of concern that workers from the CMHT and DCC Recovery Team who often are involved in providing multi agency mental health services and joint working to patients misunderstand each others roles, responsibilities and processes, The care co-ordinator is a key role in the management of a patient with mental health difficulties and it is important that there is no ambiguity in respect of who is acting in this capacity. 2. That both the CMHT and the Recovery Team of DCC ensure that when discharging patients all necessary processes and procedures indicated in policies are followed by the lead professional and / or care co-ordinator and that discharge letters sent to GPs and to patients identify risk relapse triggers and indicators to ensure re-assessment if there are signs of deterioration in mental health and speedy referral back to secondary mental health services if required. My concern is that the processes and procedures indicated on discharge for Louise Henry were not followed and the confusion as to roles and responsibilities risks this re-occuring. 3. There is a misunderstanding in respect of the Recovery Team from DCC and the Recovery Team within the CMHT and potential for confusion between professionals and service users due to there being 2 services operating under the title “Recovery Team” operated by different agencies namely DCC and the CMHT. NHS England 4. That GPs do not appreciate the use that can be made of the Special Patient Note facility and Right Care plan facility on the EMIS system operated by GPs. I heard evidence that key information relating to patients and in particular mental health patients can be updated on to the Special Patient Note facility and the Right Care Plan facility by GPs and used to record risk relapse triggers and indicators for patient’s with mental health difficulties and risk of suicide/ self harm. This enables Out of Hours Services such as those operated by Derbyshire HealthCare United to access key risk information when they are called out of hours when the GP and the full GP records with this key information is not available. There appears to be action that can be taken by NHS England through the Clinical Commissioning Groups to educate GPs as to this facility.

An extract. Read the full report, including the circumstances of the death, on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.

Source
judiciary.uk, Prevention of Future Deaths reports, 2015-0013
Added to Minute Book
8 Oct 2026
Reuse
We show short extracts and link to the original. We don’t host the full report.

Something wrong, such as a date or who it was sent to? Report a mistake

Is this report about someone close to you? You can ask us to remove names from our pages.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, judiciary.uk. Open Government Licence v3.0

Ask about this report

AI

Summaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.

Sign in to use