Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the signs of safety and wellbeing practice framework offers a practical and logical reinforcement for the Making Safeguarding Personal programme within the practice context of the Care Act. The new practice framework orientates safeguarding practice to be person led and person centred while reinforcing an outcomes focus.

The principal social worker co-led the design and pilot programme where the new practice framework was developed and trialled.

A practice framework that houses the policy and practice updates needed to deliver the Care Act and Making Safeguarding Personal agenda is logical and necessary for the practitioners. An outcomes focus is encouraged because safeguarding practice is goal orientated and outcome focused.

A debate about how practice frameworks can help achieve the Making Safeguarding Personal approach and deliver on the Care Act principles is offered. This is a new and important debate for adult social care; a debate well-established across children’s services.

A debate about how practice frameworks can help achieve the Making Safeguarding Personal approach and deliver on the Care Act principles is offered. This is a new and important debate for adult social care; a debate well-established across children’s services.

The paper reports on the findings of a survey of 115 (76 per cent) of English local authorities in 2016 which compared progress on the implementation of the Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) approach in local authorities through their Adult Social Care departments and in relation to their area Safeguarding Adults Boards (SABs) and partner organisations. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the survey in relation to personalised social care and its impact on organisations, their staff and service users, and conclude with wider implications and recommendations for further work.

A series of guided interviews were conducted with safeguarding leads from a sample comprising of 115 (76 per cent) of English local authorities during May and June 2016. The sample was randomly picked and balanced to give a fair representation of the different types of councils. The interviews were conducted by a team of five people. All interviewers had in-depth experience of adult safeguarding and were currently practicing independent chairs of SABs. The interviewers followed a prepared schedule consisting of a mixture of open and closed questions. All interviews were held over the phone and averaged one-hour duration.

The results pointed to the impression that the majority of local authorities had completed the first step of introducing MSP, i.e. they had trained their workers and modified their systems. Most local authorities were moving into the next phase of embedding user-focussed work into their practice and culture, and were at various points along that journey. However, most had still to engage partner organisations beyond a mere acceptance of MSP as “a good thing”.

The research has wide ranging implications for organisations and their workers in the field of adult safeguarding based on its findings. Its limitations are that only organisational leaders and managers were interviewed, although reference is extensively made to initiatives that engage service users. The authors acknowledged the possible bias of interviewees when judging the performance of their own service and attempted to moderate their views in the final report.

The report references many practical implications to improve the practice of adult safeguarding in an attempt to make it more person-centred. Examples of good practice are given and recommendations are made to organisations.

It is recognised that there are many people who may be at risk of harm through their environmental, personal, age or disability-related situations. In improving the way that services respond to their needs, they will be made to feel safer and their lives enhanced.

This original research follows up previous research in the preceding year. It is the widest ranging in its coverage of 76 per cent of English local authorities. Its value is that it measures progress towards full implementation of MSP; reports information and views from safeguarding leaders; and makes 20 recommendations to improve the implementation of MSP within local authorities, SABs and their partners.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the pilot Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) project that ran in three London boroughs in England in 2014-2015. The project aimed to help local authority social work practitioners better engage with adults at risk at the beginning, middle and end of safeguarding work and to develop a more outcomes focused approach to safeguarding.

Three adult social care teams volunteered to take part in the MSP pilot for four months, November 2014-February 2015. They were closely supported through telephone conferencing, bespoke training and individual mentoring. Evaluative data were collected from the participating teams about their work and the MSP change processes to assist in further implementation.

The findings suggested that staff felt that the open discussions with adults at risk that were encouraged by the MSP initiative enabled safeguarding to be more effective and provided a better basis of support for adults at risk. The support from the project team was appreciated. Staff reported their own increased confidence as a result of involving adults at risk in decisions about their situations and risks of harm. They also reported their increased awareness of cross-cutting subjects related to adult safeguarding, such as domestic abuse and working with coercive and controlling behaviours. Permission to exercise greater professional discretion to make responses more considered, rather than the need to adhere to time-limited imperatives, was received positively. Staff felt that this enhanced discussions about resolution and recovery with adults at risk although it required greater expertise, more extensive managerial support, and more time. These were available in the pilot.

The MSP pilot was confined to three teams and took place over four months. The numerical data reported in this paper are provided for illustrative purposes and are not statistically significant. As with other evaluations of implementation, the data provided need to be set in the local contexts of population profiles, care settings and the reporting source. The pilot also took place during the early implementation of the Care Act 2014 which affected the context of practice and training. The views of adults at risk were not collected. There is a risk of bias in that participants may have wished to convey positive views of MSP to their colleagues.

The paper indicates a need for the roll out of MSP philosophy and MSP approaches to be communicated with other agencies supporting adults at risk and for project support of some form to continue. It will be important to see if the overall enthusiasm, support and motivation reported by the pilot teams when taking a MSP approach in practice extend beyond a pilot period during which the staff received substantial support from a dedicated Professional Standards Safeguarding Team. Many of those staff participating in the pilot perceived the MSP approach as a return to core social work principles and welcomed putting these into practice.

The paper provides details of one pilot in which the feasibility of the MSP approach was tested by supporting three frontline teams working in different contexts. The pilot suggests that the level and type of support offered to the pilot teams were effective in a variety of practice settings. It draws attention to the need for the MSP concept and approach to be shared with other agencies and for implementation support to continue beyond initial pilot period.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) programme undertaken in 2013/2014 and summarises the learning and messages from this phase of work. This informed both the subsequent mainstreaming of the programme to all councils, and national policy on safeguarding adults in England.

Following the “test bed” phase in 2012/2013, MSP pilots were developed in 53 councils. They adopted a new outcomes focused and person led approach to adult safeguarding practice. Supported by the Local Government Association and partners, these councils changed their safeguarding practice and how adults were involved in safeguarding processes. Adults’ wishes were identified at the early stages of investigation, and reviewed during and at the end of the safeguarding process. In total, 43 councils provided impact statements on work undertaken, mainly between December 2013 and February 2014.

Key findings from the impact statements evidenced that adopting a personalised approach made safeguarding more effective and provided opportunities for developing social work practice. A range of challenges were encountered and overcome. The experiences of the MSP pilot sites informed the Care Act guidance issued in October 2014.

The MSP programme has stimulated an innovative culture change in safeguarding adults’ practice. It provides a means for Safeguarding Adults Boards to ascertain the effectiveness of local services in achieving the desired outcomes of vulnerable adults at risk of abuse or harm. Practitioners, managers and others will have an interest in this major change.

The purpose of this paper is to summarise the Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) programme in 2014/2015.

Review of Council contacts in relation to MSP 2014/2015.

Councils participated at varying levels in the MSP programme during 2014/2015.

An independent evaluation of the 2014/2015 Making Safeguarding work has been commissioned and will be published later in 2015.

MSP requires cultural, practice, workforce and technical changes. A range of challenges have been identified in taking forward the changes, which Councils are responding to in different ways.

A person-centred outcome-focused approach to safeguarding adults can benefit people who are at risk of or experience harm or abuse.

MSP is a LGA-commissioned programme.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain what efforts Adult Safeguarding Leads (ASLs), generic advocates, and Independent Mental Capacity Advocates are making to involve service users in decisions about protective measures, and to investigate whether the Adult Safeguarding service is delivering outcomes, which are valued by its users.

Semi-structured interviews with a sample of key stakeholders.

ASLs are making efforts to involve service users in the complex and demanding process of safeguarding. These efforts, however, are shaped by their understandings of the difference between “residential” and “community” settings.

The study is based in a single County Council, albeit in a large county, and involves a limited number of service users.

Clarification is needed of what it may mean to adopt a person-centred approach to adult safeguarding, and the responsibilities of ASLs when individuals with capacity to make decisions about this aspect of their lives are unwilling to engage with the safeguarding process.

The findings improve the understanding of how ASLs understand their responsibilities towards the users of their services and endeavour to involve them in the adult safeguarding process. Based on this understanding, those with responsibility for managing Adult Safeguarding services should be better able to support improvements in professional practice.

The purpose of this paper is to set out the similarities and differences between the legal frameworks for safeguarding children and adults. It presents the case for developing a Transitional Safeguarding approach to create an integrated paradigm for safeguarding young people that better meets their developmental needs and better reflects the nature of harms young people face.

This paper draws on the key principles of the Children Act 1989 and the Care Act 2014 and discusses their similarities and differences. It then introduces two approaches to safeguarding: Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP); and transitional safeguarding; that can inform safeguarding work with young people. Other legal frameworks that influence safeguarding practices, such as the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Human Rights Act 1998, are also discussed.

Safeguarding practice still operates within a child/adult binary; neither safeguarding system adequately meets the needs of young people. Transitional Safeguarding advocates an approach to working with young people that is relational, developmental and contextual. MSP focuses on the wishes of the person at risk from abuse or neglect and their desired outcomes. This is also central to a Transitional Safeguarding approach, which is participative, evidence informed and promotes equalities, diversity and inclusion.

Building a case for developing MSP for young people means that local partnerships could create the type of service that best meets local needs, whilst ensuring their services are participative and responsive to the specific safeguarding needs of individual young people.

This paper promotes applying the principles of MSP to safeguarding practice with young people. It argues that the differences between the children and adult legislative frameworks are not so great that they would inhibit this approach to safeguarding young people.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the impact in one local authority of Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) upon the recording of outcomes in safeguarding interventions. To determine to what extent person centred outcomes were in evidence.

Analysis of data provided by the local authority across adult safeguarding teams informed by a critical theory approach.

There is a need for cultural and system change to fully embed MSP principles within local authority safeguarding. This case study identified that practitioner recording was inconsistent with the need for greater recognition of person centred approaches within adult safeguarding. Views of the service user are constructed and moderated by the assessing professional and the user voice is seldom evident in recording of safeguarding interventions.

This study was wholly reliant upon the data provided rather than primary investigations with practitioners and service users. The focus on recorded data permitted variance and recorded data were open to worker interpretation. MSP. The starting premise of the methodology by adopting a critical perspective sought to elevate the perspective of marginalised service user groups. This may have unduly framed the practitioner provider from a deficit position.

The need to ensure MSP approaches are embedded fully in all aspects of local authority safeguarding. There is a need for recording to greater reflect principles of empowerment with the wishes of service users, their narratives and actual words providing greater weight to assessment.

The power shifts apparent in the principles supporting The Care Act needed to be embedded in safeguarding to support marginalised adults.

MSP is a relatively new development for safeguarding adults and the evidence base is building. This paper focuses on the recorded outputs of safeguarding interventions which complements work already produced which has focused on system and strategic changes.

The purpose of this paper is to share the experience of a Local Authority in their attempt to embed a personalised approach to Safeguarding. In 2013, Rochdale Adult Care took part in a three-month Making Safeguarding Personal improvement work pilot to facilitate a shift in emphasis from process to a commitment to improve outcomes for individuals at risk of harm.

New safeguarding referrals to an established Safeguarding Team were used to capture “outcomes” from the start of an enquiry. A work plan was developed, which included the creation of a pro forma to help frame a conversation between professional and individual. This facilitated recording and collating to help devise a menu of outcomes for reporting to the Local Safeguarding Adult Board. The pilot also helped to formalise and standardise “outcomes” practice and introduced an “outcome focussed” interview at the start and end of the safeguarding to identify and measure outcomes with the individual.

By involving workers throughout the pilot, they were able to identify their own practice improvements, understand the benefits to individuals who were reported to be more engaged with the safeguarding enquiry and suggest changes to processes that were a departure from the regimented requirements of “No Secrets” (Department of Health (DH), 2000).

This approach has enabled a group of social workers to now act as champions to embed MSP throughout the adult care service following a local restructure.

This paper aims to contextualise and summarise the Making Safeguarding Personal programme and to place this in the context of early developments in research-based evidence.

A programme of sector led improvement in local council adult safeguarding arrangements was carried out in four English local councils by the Local Government Association and other stakeholders. Support was provided to four local council test bed sites to assist them to test and adapt different approaches to adult safeguarding that placed emphasis on outcomes and on approaches to mediation to assist vulnerable adults to improve their circumstances.

Key findings from the test bed sites are that it may be possible to consider the outcomes of safeguarding interventions from “user” perspectives and that it appears that practitioners may welcome support with taking forward methods of mediation and work with family networks. These activities reflect an interest in developing practice responses and measures of effectiveness.

Councils will need to develop measures of the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements and sector led improvements can contribute to these from a “bottom up” perspective. Practitioners often welcome opportunities to reflect on and to invest in responses to cases of alleged and proven abuse and neglect.