Search results

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on prevention in adult safeguarding and to identify the themes that emerge, with particular reference to personalisation and the views of service users.

Primarily a brief literature review; the review began with a scope on data, literature, and best practice in relation to prevention in adult safeguarding. Using reference harvesting and expert recommendations, the project manager identified further material, achieving a final list of 52 documents.

There are many factors that may contribute to preventing abuse in the context of adult safeguarding. However, it is difficult to demonstrate that abuse has been or is being prevented with any certainty. The views of service users consulted for the review of No Secrets are that they would prefer to be empowered to make their own decisions with regard to safeguarding – and not to have all of the decisions made for them in an overly protective or risk‐averse approach to safeguarding. It is recommended that local authorities consider risk enablement for service users as a parallel process to adult safeguarding.

There are some practical suggestions for how local authorities who are tasked with co‐ordinating adult safeguarding can work to prevent abuse within different communities.

Prevention of abuse has not always been high on the adult safeguarding agenda; this article and the accompanying material now occupying the SCIE web site seek to redress this balance.

This is a discussion paper which aims to explore issues of consent and confidentiality when using life story work in clinical settings with older adults with dementia.

This is a discussion paper reviewing current research, policy, guidance from regulating bodies and government recommendations.

Life story work can be used in clinical practice without violating consent and confidentiality clauses in mental health practice when used appropriately.

This paper provides insights overcoming issues of consent and confidentiality with life story work in clinical practice, reducing the challenges reported by staff. Clinical recommendations are offered to both support and empower clinical staff, enabling the full benefits of this person‐centred tool to be utilised.

This paper aims to argue that the inflexible administration and funding silos which characterise a health and social care system focused on uniform provision is no longer working, particularly for those who require some support to live independent and fulfilled lives.

This paper details social care reform policy and the personalisation agenda, particularly self‐directed support and personal budgets. It considers the implications of these developments on personalisation, equity and integration and user‐determined standards and challenges service fragmentation and current commissioning practice.

Personalisation reforms in adult social care, which are being carried over to health services, are challenging traditional models of uniform or large‐scale care provision. Personalisation means putting people in control of their care and support and giving choices – which in turn means commissioning for local difference and personal preference, as well as bottom‐up pressure for services to integrate in a way that avoids funding or service boundary disputes and ensures individuals can choose and control their support.

It is argued that a focus on equality and fairness now needs to turn to equality of opportunity to exercise choice and control, and to the idea that everyone should expect locally appropriate, good‐quality services and support no matter where they are.

This paper aims to present a digest of the main discussion points and key findings from a recent Social Care Institute for Excellence report on risk enablement and safeguarding in the context of self‐directed support and personal budgets.

The paper explores how the personalisation agenda and adult safeguarding can work together in policy and practice and addresses some of the frontline concerns about empowerment and duty of care.

Evidence on how self‐directed support and personal budgets can be used to enable people to take positive risks while staying safe and emerging practice is examined. It suggests that person‐centred working in adult safeguarding, along with the mechanism of self‐directed support planning and outcome review, can support the individual to identify the risks they want to take and those they want to avoid in order to stay safe. It is clear that if frontline practitioners are overly occupied with protecting organisations and individuals from financial abuse, this will impact on the capacity of those practitioners exercising their duty of care at the front line. This means that practitioners are less able to engage with individuals to identify safeguarding issues and enable positive risk taking. Defensive risk management strategies or risk‐averse frontline practice may then result in individuals not being adequately supported to make choices and take control and, therefore, being put at risk. Practitioners need to be supported by local authorities to incorporate safeguarding and risk enablement in their relationship‐based, person‐centred working. Good quality, consistent and trusted relationships and good communication are particularly important for self‐directed support and personal budget schemes.

The use of “risk enablement panels” and “personalisation and safeguarding frameworks” are two ways to address some of the issues in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to summarise findings of a review of service user and carer involvement in safeguarding and recommendations for good practice.

The study involved a review of selected literature and a consultation exercise with experts in the field of adult safeguarding and telephone interviews with 13 Adult Safeguarding Leads across England and Wales.

Service users value rights, independence, choice and support. Adult Safeguarding policy sets out an expectation of service user involvement in the process and expects agencies to balance rights to self‐determination with properly managed risk. In practice, agencies tend to be risk‐averse and service users often do not feel involved in their safeguarding processes. Processes such as collaborative risk enablement, training and capacity building, working with BME groups and evaluation of involvement help. Good practice examples of involvement in Safeguarding Boards or local forums, developing new methods of user feedback and community involvement were found. Recommendations include more involvement of service users in research, more effective forms of involvement of groups who may be more excluded, shared responsibility for risk, and more training in rights legislation.

The paper offers recommendations for good practice in improving involvement in adult safeguarding, which is a requirement and an essential component of delivering good services to vulnerable adults.

Service user involvement in health and social care is now widespread, but there is little knowledge of how to involve the most vulnerable service users who are in need of protection, or how to balance risk and empowerment. This paper addresses the dilemmas facing Adult Protection staff, summarises the experience of practitioners based on the first decade of adult safeguarding work and sets out guidance for improving practice.

The purpose of this paper is to present the case for examining the concept of positive risk taking (PRT) in the context of adult protection. The paper argues there is a need for empirical research to understand the application of and attitudes to PRT to explore whether the concept has moved beyond a principle to make an identifiable difference to service users.

By investigating evidence from policy, literature and professional opinion, this paper presents the ethical tensions for professional practice in adult protection between respecting a service user’s freedom to make choices to enhance their independence while preserving safety for service users and society. This is considered in the context of risk in health and social care and the recent changes in society resulting from COVID-19.

Inherent tensions are apparent in the evidence in health and social care between attitudes propounding safety first and those arguing for the benefits of risk taking. This indicates not only a need for a paradigm shift in attitudes but also a research agenda that promotes empirical studies of the implications of PRT from service user and professional perspectives.

This paper draws attention to the relatively limited research into both professionals’ and service user’s perspectives and experiences of PRT in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to outline an approach being taken, to improve opportunities and increase levels of physical activity amongst residents in care homes in Scotland, which has the potential to make a significant difference to the quality of lives. The approach is designed to raise awareness about the importance of physical activity, increase skills, knowledge and capacity amongst the workforce.

The paper describes the reasons for promoting physical activity in care homes. It describes the challenge to this, associated issues and introduces you to a resource pack which offers solutions to care homes through a self-improvement process. It provides a case study which exemplifies how the ideas can be applied on a day-to-day basis.

The paper provides insights into the challenges in the care home sector to promoting physical activity and offers some ways round these. It describes two strategies within the new resource pack to support care home residents to make person centred physical activity choices.

This paper suggests that to promote physical activity in a care home the choices and needs of an individual must be the starting point. It requires partnership working and good leadership where staff have the permission to work in a new way. It suggests that risk enablement is key and the benefits of physical activity outweigh the risks even with frail older people.

This paper promotes a new resource pack for care homes in Scotland for promoting an active life based on a self-improvement process.

For health and social care services to become truly person-centred requires a fundamentally positive mindset from professionals and care workers, and a willingness to take some risks. The purpose of this paper is to explore how this will apply to delivering dementia services, where almost all of the initial impressions are of deficits, disability and disadvantage.

The co-authors combine their knowledge and experience of supporting and developing staff working in dementia services. The concept of positive risk-taking is explored within the legislative framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Safeguarding and the Care Act 2014.

Practitioners face a range of challenges when it comes to supporting people living with dementia to take risks through exercising personal choices and making their own decisions. However, the concept of positive risk-taking applies equally to people living with dementia who have or who lack mental capacity in relation to their decision making.

This paper places positive risk-taking within a context of strengths-based, values-based and relationship-based working. Practical tips are offered for putting positive risk-taking into practice.

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.