Search results

Local Safeguarding Adults Board (SAB) policies, procedures, guidance and related documents on self-neglect were gathered and analysed, to map what approaches are being taken across England. This paper aims to identify areas of divergence to highlight innovations or challenges faced by SABs.

Self-neglect documents were identified by searching SAB websites. Data were extracted into a framework enabling synthesis and comparison between documents.

This paper reports on how English SAB documentation defines self-neglect, treats executive capacity, lays out pathways for self-neglect cases, advises on refusal of service input and multi-agency coordination and draws on theories or tools. Greater coherence in understanding self-neglect has developed since it was brought within safeguarding in 2014; however, variation remains regarding scope, referral pathways and threshold criteria.

This review was limited to published SAB documentation at one point in time and could not consider either the wider context of safeguarding guidance and training or implementation in practice.

This review provides an overview of how SABs are interpreting national guidance and guiding practitioners. The trends and areas of uncertainty identified offer a resource for informed research and policy-making.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first systematic survey of SAB self-neglect policies, procedures and guidance since self-neglect was included under safeguarding.

The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a mixed-methods study on the impact that COVID-19 has had on adult safeguarding. The research sought to explore the challenges and opportunities presented by COVID-19 to both frontline and non-frontline professionals working in adult safeguarding.

A mixed-methods project was undertaken comprising a literature review, survey, semi-structured interviews and a small number of freedom of information requests. This paper presents the findings predominantly from the survey and interviews.

Unsurprisingly, COVID-19 has presented a variety of challenges for professionals working in adult safeguarding. The themes that occurred most often were the day-to-day changes and challenges, relationships across sectors, information and navigating the ethical questions in safeguarding.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the findings represent the first focused qualitative mixed-method study aimed at understanding more about the impact the pandemic has had on adult safeguarding through the eyes of those professionals working in that field.

This research was conducted as part of a PhD study. The purpose of this paper is to explore the factors taken into consideration when multi-agency practitioners were considering financial harm in the context of adult protection and how this influenced their decision-making processes.

An adapted q sort methodology initially established the areas of financial harm considered to have additional factors, which led to complexity in adult protection decision making. These factors were further explored in individual interviews or focus groups.

The data identified that the decision-making process varied between thorough analysis, rationality and heuristics with evidence of cue recognition, factor weighting and causal thinking. This highlighted the relevance of Kahneman’s (2011) dual processing model in social work practice. Errors that occurred through an over reliance on System 1 thinking can be identified and rectified through the use of System 2 thinking and strengthen social work decision-making.

This paper considers the practice of multi-agency adult protection work in relation to financial harm and identifies the influences on decisions.

This paper examines the contested value of healthy life and wellbeing in a context of severe austerity, exploring how the value of “Public Health” is constructed through and with material-discursive practices and accounting representations. It seeks to explore the political and ethical implications of constructing the valuable through a shared consensus over the “facts” when addressing complex, multi-agency problems with long time horizons and outcomes that are not always easily quantifiable.

The theorisation, drawing on science and technology studies (STS) scholars and Karen Barad's (2007) agential realism, opens up the analysis to the performativity of both material and discursive practices in the period following a major re-organisation of activity. The study investigates two case authorities in England and the national regulator through interviews, observations and documentary analysis.

The paper demonstrates the deeply ethical and political entanglements of accounting representations as objectivity, consensus and collective action are constructed and resisted in practice. It goes on to demonstrate the practical challenges of constructing “alternative accounts” and “intelligent accountabilities” through times of austerity towards a shared sense of public value and suggests austerity measures make such aims both more challenging and all the more essential.

Few studies in the accounting literature have explored the full complexity of valuation practices in non-market settings, particularly in a public sector context; this paper, therefore, extends familiar conceptual vocabulary of STS inspired research to further explore how value(s), ethics and identity all play a crucial role in making things valuable.