Search results

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.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the role of housing in adult safeguarding under the Care Act (2014) in England.

The paper provides a summary of the implications for housing organisations and their staff of adult safeguarding under the Care Act. The implications, underpinned by the six safeguarding principles, are explained within a summary of the legal and practice framework for safeguarding in England.

The paper draws upon research by Imogen Parry (2014). It argues that past failings in adult safeguarding in England have placed it high on the housing agenda and that housing has a key role to play in adult safeguarding.

Housing organisations need to be proactive partners in local multi-agency arrangements for adult safeguarding. Staff and contractors need to receive training in line with their role to raise awareness of their safeguarding responsibilities.

The value of the paper is to increase and maintain awareness of the need for housing engagement in the adult safeguarding agenda.

This paper aims to set out to share the reflections of safeguarding adult board managers as they worked through what is likely to be just the first wave of the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic.

The paper draws on the experience of small number of safeguarding adult board managers who have provided reflections from practice.

This paper illustrates just some of the responses developed by safeguarding adult board managers and their boards to continue to deliver the work of safeguarding those at risk of abuse and harm in the face of unprecedented impact of the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic on a key aspect of the safeguarding adult system in England.

The reflections reported here are not intended to offer a representative commentary on the experiences of those who oversee and manage safeguarding adults’ boards. It is intention to provide a flavour of some of the challenges and dilemmas faced and some of the creative solutions to address them used by one group of adult safeguarding practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and share learning about safeguarding children under Covid-19 drawn from a series of webinars held by the Association of Safeguarding Partners (www.theASP.org.uk). The learning is relevant for health, police, local authority and other relevant safeguarding agencies and includes sharing information about both the challenges and opportunities presented during the Covid-19 pandemic. By creating a webinar lead community of learning, lessons can be drawn that will help safeguard children during the remaining of the pandemic and during the release of lockdown as it emerges.

This paper summarises themes from discussions within three webinars run by The Association of Safeguarding Partners (TASP) (www.theASP.org.uk). Each webinar was attended by between 60 and 80 participants, sessions involving presentations and discussions on topics such as “managing safeguarding reviews at a distance”, “the impact on early years’ provision” and “how work with families and children has changed with remote working methods”. With the participants’ consent, webinars were recorded, and these can be viewed on www.theasp.co.uk. Webinars were supported by an on-line programme: “meeting sphere” capturing comments in a “chat” facility and providing capacity for participants to collectively code comments into themes.

Findings from the webinars note concerns about continuing and undetected abuse of children within and outside of the home; about the changing nature of criminal exploitation; and about the strains created by social distancing on children in families experiencing problems with poor mental health, drug and alcohol misuse and domestic abuse. Findings include some important lessons, including the discovery of innovative ways of working, the rapid collation of data across partnerships and about different methods of engaging with children, young people and families. Findings include suggestions about the impact of changes on the future safeguarding of children.

There is little published discussion of the implications of Covid-19 on practitioners working on safeguarding children. While some research is emerging, there have been few opportunities for practitioners to listen to emerging practice ideas under Covid-19 or to discuss in an informal context how to address the new and emerging problems in safeguarding children. This think piece contains original material from webinars held with safeguarding children practitioners and is valuable for those working to safeguard children during and post Covid-19.

In 2014, the Health Service Executive (HSE) in Ireland published its Safeguarding National Policy and Procedures (HSE, 2014). Under this policy, all agencies providing services through the social care directorate must ensure a robust culture of safeguarding is in place. Concurrent to this has been a move in social policy, practice and research to include the voice of the service user, both in terms of planning and reviewing services. (e.g. HIQA, 2012; Flanagan, 2020) This article examines whether service users with intellectual disabilities want to be involved in safeguarding plans and, if so, how that can be supported. Using focus groups service users demonstrated their knowledge of safeguarding as a concept, how they felt about the issues raised, and, crucially what they felt they would like to see happen next in addressing a safeguarding incident or concern. The focus groups took place in a large organisation providing residential services, day services, independent living supports and clinical supports. Engaging service users in planning and responding to safeguarding concerns is a fundamental principle of human rights legislation, both nationally and internationally. This study aims to highlight that it is both possible and desirable to engage fully with service users using a range of simple communication tools. For this to be implemented as routine practice in services providing support for people with intellectual disabilities, authentic leadership is required. Services will need to devote time, human resources and will need champions to get on board with the necessary culture shift.

Qualitative research examined peoples’ “lived experiences” and knowledge of safeguarding. Focus groups were used with thematic analysis highlighting common themes throughout, as guided by Braun and Clarke (2006). There were two objectives: Objective 1: measuring participant’s understanding of the safeguarding process. Objective 2: compare the potential differences between safeguarding plans devised by the participants in the focus groups, versus plans devised by trained designated officers responsible for safeguarding within the service.

Four principal themes emerged – 1. participants understanding of safeguarding; 2. restorative justice; 3. consent; and 4. high levels of emotional intelligence and compassion. Participants demonstrated that they could and did want to be involved in safeguarding planning and showed little variation in the plans compared to those completed by trained staff.

The study was completed with a small sample size in a single service in one area. It may not represent the lived experiences and knowledge of safeguarding in other services and indeed other countries. The video may have led to some priming; for instance, the Gardai in the footage being called may have resulted in the participants stating that contacting Gardai should be part of the plan. After the video was shown, there was a heightened awareness of safeguarding. This may indicate that participants are aware of safeguarding but unsure of the terminology or how to discuss it out of context.

For this to be implemented as routine practice in services providing support for people with intellectual disabilities, authentic leadership is required. Services will need to devote time and human resources and will need champions in the safeguarding arena to get on board with the shift in culture required.

While there did not appear to be many barriers to listening to participants, to progress this as a standard practice a very real shift in culture will be needed. It is important for practitioners to ask: Is the vulnerable person aware that this concern has been raised? What is known of the vulnerable person’s wishes in relation to the concern? To truly engage with service users in safeguarding plans these questions need to be more than a “tick box” exercise. This process needs to be fully embedded into a culture that promotes a person-centred, rights-based, inclusive approach as a standard rather than a one-off project. Some structural changes will be needed regarding the time given to designated officers, and what resources they can access (such as speech and language therapy). However, the real difference will be made by services operating authentic leadership that champions engagement on this scale, to fully answer the question posed by the researchers at the beginning of this report, “Whose safeguarding is it anyway?”

There appears to be little evidence of service user engagement in terms of planning and processing safeguarding responses, either in research or anecdotally.

Purpose – UK laws surrounding the duty to prevent individuals being drawn into terrorism often focus on the need to safeguard the populace from exploitation by terrorist or extremist groups. It is within this context that countering violent extremism (CVE) work often takes place. This chapter explores how this legal duty shapes CVE projects in the UK, drawing on practitioner’s perspectives.

Methods – Writing from the perspective of practitioners from ConnectFutures, an organization that has been operating since 2013 in the UK and internationally, who advocate for a contextual safeguarding approach to provide a more holistic attitude to the prevention of violent extremism and exploitation.

Findings – Exploring the intersections between multiple forms of criminal exploitation, as well as engaging in the spaces and places young people experience harm, allows practitioners working in the CVE space to contribute to the protection of individuals from terrorist and extremist radicalization.

Originality/Value – Applying the new developed contextual safeguarding framework to CVE projects provides a contemporary and alternative ways to conduct CVE work. The chapter provides overviews of three CVE projects running with young people today in the UK, exploring how the new frameworks are adopted within these programs, all designed to address the complex causes of violent extremism.

This qualitative study set within Northern Ireland aims to explore professional perspectives on the application of evidence-informed practice to the adult safeguarding threshold screening process.

Data was gathered from seven social workers in one health and social care trust area, who perform the designated adult protection role, through individual semi-structured interviews in one region of Northern Ireland. The interview schedule comprised of a series of questions examining the role of the designated adult protection officer and included three vignettes (Appendix). A thematic analysis was undertaken using NVIVO software.

This paper reports main findings under the themes of: the role of the designated adult protection officer, threshold decision-making, evidence-informed practice and service improvement. One of the main findings was that professionals viewed the current process as too bureaucratic, and there was a desire to engage in more preventive safeguarding in collaboration with service users. There was a need to promote awareness of evidence-informed practice as it applies to the threshold screening process. Furthermore, the study raised the question of the need to consider the application of models or methods of assessment to the threshold screening process.

This in-depth exploration of the role of designated adult protection officers in Northern Ireland provides a valuable insight into the complexity involved in managing adult safeguarding referrals and investigations. This study adds to the existing knowledge base, identifies potential service improvements and highlights the gap in evidence-based practice as it applies to the threshold screening process. Threshold screening of adult safeguarding referrals remains a subjective process and is open to interpretation and differences in professional judgement. The study highlights the need to consider the application of quality improvement methodology to the threshold screening assessment and the need to promote the exchange of safeguarding knowledge.

The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the significance of safeguards in digital ecosystems and their role in generating trust among participants. This paper argues that the right mix and number of safeguards are crucial for an ecosystem’s growth and success. It offers ecosystem orchestrators concrete guidelines for how to implement and monitor safeguards.

This research is based on both consulting experience and publicly available information on several digital ecosystems.

This research conceptualizes safeguards as precautionary mechanisms that mandate or promote desirable behavior in an effort to engender trust among ecosystem participants. Safeguards can take various forms, including passwords, escrow, user privacy controls, ratings and reviews and policies and contracts. Striking the right balance of safeguards – neither too few nor too many – is crucial for ecosystem orchestrators. This paper identifies the factors that determine the optimal mix of safeguards, including the power asymmetry between sellers and buyers, the sophistication of participants, the nature of transactions, the cost of negative outcomes and the cost-benefit tradeoff.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the first to illuminate the relationship between safeguards and trust in the context of digital ecosystem. It is also one of the few attempts to provide managerial guidance for ecosystem designers trying to structure their platform for trust.

The purpose of this paper is to critically review the context of adult protection in Ireland with a focus on older people. The paper traces advances and current limitations in policy, regulation, practice and legislation.

A review of historical and current contexts in adult safeguarding in Ireland is presented with consideration of key public reviews and commentaries related to care provision, governance and the legislative status of adults at risk.

While Ireland’s journey to provide adult safeguarding responses for older people has progressed since 2002, there remain many gaps. Further work needs to be addressed urgently to enable a comprehensive alignment of fit-for-purpose, responsive legislation, practice and policy to meet the complex and diverse needs of an increasing ageing population who may require safeguarding support. This includes fostering robust inter-sectorial collaboration, safeguarding legislation and cultural change related to human rights approaches.

The paper is a discussion on the context of adults safeguarding in relation to practice, policy and legislation.

Identifies the need for significant reform in the Irish system of health service. Argues for an overarching, inter-sectorial approach to addressing adult safeguarding, which focuses on prevention as well as early intervention.

The paper offers a review of the current diverse elements comprising current adult safeguarding and older people in Ireland and integrates legislative, regulatory, policy and practice realities. Challenges are illustrated within the context of reactive rather than proactive safeguarding agendas which are linked to public scandals and debates. The paper argues for a more integrated and robust inter-sectorial approach to safeguarding underpinned by adult safeguarding legislation and an overarching governance structure.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983 in safeguarding adults at risk of abuse and neglect. The author has undertaken a thematic review of Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) commissioned in England and Adult Practice Reviews (APRs) commissioned in Wales where the MHA 1983 was a central aspect to the review.

Reviews were included based on specific determinants, following analysis of SARs, APRs and executive summaries. This should not affect the credibility of the research, as themes were identified in conjunction with analysis of literature regarding use of the MHA in the context of adult safeguarding. Consequently, this review has been underpinned by evidence-based research in the area of study.

The interaction between statutes, such as the MHA 1983 and Care Act 2014, signify challenges to professionals, with variable application of mental health legislation in practice.

Lack of a complete national repository for review reports means that it is likely that the data set analysis is incomplete. It was noted that limitations to this research include the fact that Safeguarding Adults Boards in England may not publish SAR reports or may choose to publish an executive summary or practice brief instead of the full SAR report, therefore limiting the scope of disseminating learning from SARs, as this is difficult to achieve where the full report has not been published. The author aimed to mitigate this by undertaking comprehensive searches of Local Authority and SAB websites, in addition to submitting Information requests to ensure that this research encompassed as many relevant review reports as possible.

This is an important and timely topic for debate, given that the UK Government is proposing reform of the MHA 1983. In addition, existing thematic reviews of SARS tend to be generalised, rather than specifically focused on the MHA.