Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths · 2023-0300

“(brief summary of matters of concern) 1”

Dated 15 Jun 2023, from the coroner for County Durham and Darlington. Sent to 1 organisation or person.

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

All responses 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; a reply may have been sent and not yet published.

  1. Report dated15 Jun 2023
  2. Deadline10 Aug 2023
  3. Published on judiciary.uk6 Sep 2023
  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

The coroner’s concerns

(brief summary of matters of concern) 1. The nationally set time from initial contact with the Crisis Team to some form of assessment is 4 hours. I heard evidence that achievement of this target in every case is not realised. It is of concern that timely assessment and treatment of person undergoing mental health crisis should be assessed as speedily as possible and within the set time period. Regulation 28 – After Inquest Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 2. The Triage Tool was explained in evidence to be essential in ensuring the patient received the correct treatment/service and is to be undertaken every time a patient contacts the Crisis Team. I was informed there was an aspiration to achieve completion of the Triage Tool every time, but it is not being completed on every occasion. It is of concern that such a key document which identifies risk, care and other matters is not completed on every occasion as it is mandated to be done. 3. In relation to making safeguarding referrals for children, the evidence I heard was in this particular case a referral should have been made and was not. I was told training had been undertaken to make all staff aware of what action to take. However, I was told in the majority of occasions it was believed a referral would be made. It is of concern in terms of protecting children that I was not satisfied that a referral was made in all situations that warranted such a referral. 4. I was told in evidence that a Safety Plan which is complied with input from the patient, their families and practitioners did not exist in Mr STOUT's case. I was told it is crucial document for identifying risks and ways to mitigate them. I was also told work was commenced by your organisation in December 2020 to ensure full and complete compliance with this requirement, but I was not reassured there was such compliance with the completion of Safety Plans in all cases at this time.

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, 2023-0300
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