Kevin Morgan

PFD Report All Responded Ref: 2017-0165
Date of Report 22 May 2017
Coroner Thomas Osborne
Coroner Area Milton Keynes
Response Deadline est. 26 October 2017
All 1 response received · Deadline: 26 Oct 2017
Response Status
Responses 1 of 1
56-Day Deadline 26 Oct 2017
All responses received
About PFD responses

Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Coroners Concerns
_ (1)That social services and the housing team were aware of the problems experienced by Kevin Morgan and there was no effective follow up.

(2) That a safeguarding alert was completed by Kevin Morgan's Mother and, despite her serious concerns, the response was to arrange a visit where Kevin Morgan refused to engage_ (3) That the case was reviewed by senior managers on at least two occasions and no further action was taken.

(4) The police were never requested to conduct a concern for safety visit despite such a visit being recognised as appropriate.

(5) It was accepted by the Adult Social Care Access Team that a meeting of senior professionals should have been called t0 consider the case and prepare a plan: (6) Following the death of Kevin Morgan there was no Serious Incident Review conducted by social services and it was not referred for a safeguarding review so that lessons have not been learned from this incident. Without such a review a similar incident could occur in the future_ cepy May Entry yet
Responses
Milton Keynes Safeguarding Board
4 Apr 2018
Response received
View full response
Dear Mr Osborne

Re: Regulation 28 report to prevent further deaths

I am the Independent Chair of Milton Keynes Safeguarding Board and am writing following your correspondence of 22nd May 2017 with , Milton Keynes Council Chief Executive in relation to Kevin George Morgan. Thank you for returning my call as I always (as a totally independent chair) prefer (wherever possible) to deal directly with senior public sector leaders across the Milton Keynes system, whatever their role.

It is nearly 12 months since you wrote to , and the response should have come much sooner. I will be considering why it took so long as part of the actions I have decided to take, but believe it to be a consequence of a major restructure, major staff shortages and a lack of rigour in the tracking systems that were in place until relatively recently. Whatever the cause it should not have taken so long however and I apologise for the delay.

wrote back to you on 12th July 2017 indicating that in response to the Regulation 28 report a referral was made to the Milton Keynes Safeguarding Board for a Safeguarding Adults Review (SAR) to be conducted under Section 44 of the Care Act 2014. That referral was made and the process of considering the case began. I received a recommendation from the Adults Case Review Panel recently but delayed making a decision until I had thoroughly examined all of the facts, taken advice and weighed it up carefully.

My decision is that the case does not meet the criteria for a Safeguarding Adult Review, but as I share many of the concerns you expressed in your Regulation 28 report, I have commissioned another more flexible but no less rigorous form of review called a learning review in order to establish what can be learnt from the case to improve practice and reduce the likelihood of similar cases occurring. I am happy to send you my full decision should you wish to see it, but have set out below the decision and the commission for a learning review for your information.

My decision is as follows: The case does not meet the criteria for conducting a Safeguarding Adult Review as set out in the Care Act 2014 S44 (1) and S44 (2). The rationale for this conclusion is set out in the section below.

I have decided however that a multi-agency learning review, chaired by a relevant professional from one of the agencies who has no links to the case, should be undertaken, and that the review should involve:

MKSB, Saxon Court, 502 Avebury Boulevard, Milton Keynes MK9 3HS Email: mkscb@milton-keynes.gov.uk/ tel: 01908 254373

 Mr M’s mother and other family members of her choice (through the opportunity to meet and speak to the review chair and a review group member)  A practitioner event involving all relevant practitioners in the NHS, the Council, the Police and the Voluntary sector  An analysis of agency case reports  In depth consideration of the areas for concern 1-6 in the Regulation 28 report and any other areas identified by Mr M’s family, identified in agency reports or identified at the learning event,  A Signs of Safety approach to the learning process (what went well, what did not go so well, what does that tell us, what will we do as a result)  A short report making recommendations for practice improvements to the MKSB Board (copied to the MKC Chief Executive) and suggesting effective ways to disseminate the learning to the multi-agency workforce  A meeting with Mr M’s mother should she wish, to hear what has been learnt and what will change as a result of the review. The terms of reference for the learning review should be drafted by the panel and signed off by me.

The review should be undertaken as swiftly as possible given that information about the case has already been collated. I anticipate receiving the report at the September 2018 Board meeting.

I will be reporting to the Chief Executive and to Mr M’s mother on the conclusion of the review process.

I am of course very happy to discuss further my decision should you feel the need to do so.

I understand that there are a number of other cases that you have expressed concerns about. I discussed this with the MK Safeguarding Board Members and we are delighted you are happy to accept our invitation for you to meet with the Board to discuss areas of common concern, and how we could more effectively address those concerns in the future. We will, I am sure, find it extremely constructive to meet with you.
Action Should Be Taken
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and believe you as the Chief Executive of Milton Keynes Council have the power t0 take such action:
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
On 29th July 2016 commenced an investigation into the death of Kevin George Morgan, aged
53. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 19th 2017 . The conclusion of the inquest was "Open
Circumstances of the Death
Mr Morgan suffered from insulin controlled type 1 diabetes that was poorly controlled. He was not registered with a GP and had not been in contact with family for several weeks. Family called Police who attended the flat. On looking through the letterbox Mr Morgan could be seen deceased lying on the floor in the hallway. was forced, ambulance attended and death confimed, there were no suspicious circumstances: His body was heavily decomposed. At the time of his death it was known that he suffered from diabetes, that he had accumulated rent arrears, that his telephone had been disconnected, that he was without gas and electricity, that he was not claiming benefits and he suffered from mental health problems_
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

Directors must ensure senior managers regularly inspect children's social services case files
Laming Inquiry
No open learning culture Care safeguarding systems
Standard form for derogations from guidance
Scottish Hospitals Inquiry
No open learning culture
Documentation of technical adviser advice
Scottish Hospitals Inquiry
No open learning culture
Training on normalcy bias
Cranston Inquiry
No open learning culture
Non-mortuary staff accompanied in mortuary
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems
Regular CCTV review with swipe card data
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems
Local authorities examine contractual arrangements
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems
Deceased treated with same dignity as patients
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems
Deceased included in safeguarding training and policy
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems
Chief Nurse responsibility for deceased safeguarding
Fuller Inquiry
Care safeguarding systems

Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.