Healthcare staff missing from ACCT reviews
G4S received 2 coroners' reports about this hazard between 30 Jun 2016 and 18 Dec 2018.
They came from 2 different coroners in 2 coroner areas. A similar concern was raised again 1 time after the first warning.
No published response from G4S was found for the earlier reports.
The story, report by report
Spacing grows with the time between reports.
“some staff were working without having received any training and some either had not had sufficient training or had forgotten it or were not applying it with”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ No published response from G4S was found for this report.
- 2 years 6 months laterClosely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
“No member of the healthcare team was present at any of Mr. [name redacted] ACCT reviews.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ G4S responded, stating 1 specific action.Response (PDF) ↗
“The Head of:Healthcare.at HMP Birmingham will remind all clinical staff (including those working within BCHT) that when reviewing a patient's records for previous medical conditions that the following most be followed: ; ; "4. The clinician will check the 'summary and family history' section of System 2. The clinician will check the 'quick glance' section of System1 3, The clinician will use the 'search function' to check for the medical conditions » relevant to the. clinical intervention they”
Stated timescale: 1% February 2019
- All reports to G4S
Each row is one judged link between an earlier and a later report. Open a row to read both quotes, found word for word in the originals.
2016 → 2018John Delahaye2 years 6 months after John Betteridge · different coronerClosely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate
Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderateBoth reports highlight failures involving healthcare staff in the ACCT process, indicating inadequate healthcare participation.
John Betteridge · 30 Jun 2016
“some staff were working without having received any training and some either had not had sufficient training or had forgotten it or were not applying it with”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ John Delahaye · 18 Dec 2018
“No member of the healthcare team was present at any of Mr. [name redacted] ACCT reviews.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗
No published response from G4S was found for this report.
Stated action · timescale: 1% February 2019
“The Head of:Healthcare.at HMP Birmingham will remind all clinical staff (including those working within BCHT) that when reviewing a patient's records for previous medical conditions that the following most be followed: ; ; "4. The clinician will check the 'summary and family history' section of System 2. The clinician will check the 'quick glance' section of System1 3, The clinician will use the 'search function' to check for the medical conditions » relevant to the. clinical intervention they”
- Each report's concerns were extracted by Nemotron 3 Nano on Nebius Token Factory, each with a quote copied from the report.
- Concerns from reports to G4S at least six months apart were compared by meaning (Qwen3 embeddings) and wording (TF-IDF).
- The closest pairs were judged by Nemotron 3 Super with reasoning on. Only identical or closely related, with confidence of at least 0.70, are shown.
- Every quote was checked by code as an exact substring of the original text. Names of staff and family are redacted, and the deceased are named by report title only.
| Link | Meaning | Wording | Judge | Coroner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 → 2018 | 0.72 | 0.10 | Closely related · 0.80 | different |
Judge model: nvidia/nemotron-3-super-120b-a12b. How Nemotron did the work · Full methodology.
Next
This shows that a similar concern was raised again after an earlier report. It does not say why, and it is not a finding about any organisation or person. To report an error, see the corrections route.