1 / 36

West Yorkshire Safeguarding Adult Multi-Agency Policy and Procedures

West Yorkshire Safeguarding Adult Multi-Agency Policy and Procedures. Background. Introduced from the 1 st April 2013 Initially requested by statutory organisations working across West Yorkshire National trend towards regional approaches

louise
Télécharger la présentation

West Yorkshire Safeguarding Adult Multi-Agency Policy and Procedures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. West Yorkshire Safeguarding Adult Multi-Agency Policy and Procedures

  2. Background • Introduced from the 1st April 2013 • Initially requested by statutory organisations working across West Yorkshire • National trend towards regional approaches • SCIE – supporting many of these projects (West Midlands and Pan-London procedures)

  3. What is new for us in Leeds:Similarities and Differences? • For all organisations & practitioners in Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and Wakefield there will be some things that are new and some things which are the same. • In general terms… for Leeds the West Yorkshire procedures are very similar to those we currently have. The main difference is the language used to describe certain stages and actions. This may make them feel different initially, but the process behind the terms is essentially the same.

  4. Key Roles Most of these are unchanged for us in Leeds: • Safeguarding Investigating Officer • Safeguarding Coordinator • Case Conference Chair • Adult at risk • Person or organisation alleged to have caused harm. New: • Alerter (or Alerting Manager) now instead of Referrer.

  5. Policy • The West Yorkshire Policy adopts much of Leeds policy; it is therefore very similar. • Provides more information, particularly about the roles of organisations involved in safeguarding adults. • It highlights the importance of prevention. • It follows Leeds in using the term ‘harm’ rather than ‘significant harm’ as the threshold for safeguarding adults.

  6. The policy adopts the same values, principles and considerations; including the 6 Department of Health safeguarding principles: • Empowerment • Protection • Prevention • Proportionality • Partnership • Accountability

  7. Alert Stage The language here is different: • All employees and volunteers have a responsibility to ‘Raise A Concern’ with their manager. • If there is a need to report the concern to the safeguarding contact point, this is called an Alert. • Within an organisation, the alert will usually be made by the Alerting Manager We are used to describing this differently. We are used to saying, employees and volunteers must Alert their manager, and if there is a need to report the concern to the safeguarding contact point, this used was a Referral. This change of terms will take some getting used to, but the responsibilities are the same, the written guidance is based on that already used in Leeds.

  8. Responsibilities though are the same… • Gather information • Take action to ensure immediate safety • Does a crime need to be reported • Preserve evidence • Record the incident and actions taken • Decide whether an alert is required • Ensure key people are informed e.g. CQC • Support the person raising the concern

  9. Alert Stage (…continued) • The West Yorkshire procedures do not include the Leeds ‘safeguarding referral decision tool’ (an Alert tool in the terminology of West Yorkshire). • This will be retained as separate local guidance in Leeds.

  10. Provisional changes to the forms: • No change to the safeguarding reporting process, ring the contact centre as before… • Current proposal: SA1 form – renamed ‘Safeguarding Adults Concern Supporting Information’ form

  11. Referral Stage The language here is different too. We are used to calling this stage ‘Decision to Investigate’. It is now called Referral. Referral is now the process of receiving an Alert, and deciding whether to investigate this within the safeguarding procedures. If so, it is Referred into the safeguarding process for a strategy discussion/meeting. The guidance comes from the Leeds procedures. It is doing the same thing, just with a different name.

  12. Responsibilities though are the same… • gather information • establishing the wishes of the person at risk • evaluating the risk • consider the need for a protection plan • deciding whether an investigation is required (or another response is more appropriate) • notifying the alerter of the decision

  13. ESCR Recording: Key Points Descriptiondetailing presenting information Decision point Name of Safeguarding Co-ordinator SA1 attached to ESCR Referral Decision notes Referrer informed notes

  14. Strategy Stage The strategy stage allows for a strategy discussion and/or a strategy meeting (and strategy review meeting if necessary) to be convened and chaired by the safeguarding coordinator…. Responsibilities are the same… • Start recording in line with national data requirements • Share information • Consider the adult at risk wishes and support needs • Assess risk and agree an interim protection plan • Confirm a safeguarding investigation is required • Plan the investigation

  15. ESCR Recording: Activity Plan Personal details of Adult at Risk Status of case Name(s) of person involved Start of Episode Safeguarding activity: Sub Types Dates Outcomes ALL MUST BE COMPLETED TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE SAFEGUARDING ADULTS RETURN

  16. This strategy discussion/meeting will need to be a professional judgement and be a proportional response to the nature of the issues. The need for a strategy meeting will be indicated where: • there are significant risk or protection planning arrangements for the adult at risk (or others) • several organisations have concerns and need to share information • there may be a number of investigations by different organisations • there may be legal or regulatory actions • a serious crime may have occurred • the allegation involves a member of staff/volunteer • the situation could attract media attention • there are concerns about the safety of the service/institutional abuse. • a large scale investigation is being considered

  17. Service providers as Safeguarding Investigating Officer…. The decision will need to be a proportionate one, reflecting individual circumstances, and the indicators: • issues are such that they can be investigated impartially by the service provider (and will be perceived to be) • institutional abuse is not indicated or suspected • no other organisation is needing to contribute to the safeguarding investigation • a serious crime is not indicated • no regulatory or contracting authority actions are indicated • there is no reoccurring pattern of incidents of abuse indicated.

  18. There will no longer be different timescales for the different ways of undertaking an investigation. The target timescale is for a case conference discussion or meeting to be held 8 weeks* after the safeguarding referral decision. * to be achieved earlier wherever possible.

  19. Forms: A form for Notes of a Strategy Discussion Templates for a: • A Strategy Meeting • A Strategy Review Meeting

  20. Investigation Stage The investigation process is there to: • Establish the truth behind an allegation, • Support the assessment of risk and • Support the development of a protection plan. Need to follow the investigation plan agreed at the strategy stage The role of the safeguarding investigating officer is unchanged

  21. Current proposal: changes to the forms: • A Service Provider Investigation Report • An Independent Safeguarding Investigation Report

  22. ESCR Recording: Key Points Denotes the type of Investigation: Independent Large Scale Service Provider Denotes the outcome of the investigation: Case Conference Discussion Case Conference Meeting

  23. Case Conference Discussion or Meeting Whether a case conference meeting is needed will be determined with professional judgement taking into account a set of indicators/guidance. Where a strategy meeting is required, a case conference meeting will ordinarily be required.

  24. Case Conference stage • Was called ‘protection plan’ as a stage previously, but responsibilities are the same… • Consider the evidence gained from the investigation • Determine whether abuse has occurred (for each type of abuse) • Assess the level of risk • Agree a on-going protection plan, if required • Record actions taken in response to referral • Agree outcomes (risk removed/reduced/remains) • Decide how protection plan is to be reviewed

  25. Case Conference Discussion • Where a Case Conference Meeting is not required a Case Conference Discussion will need to be held. • The Safeguarding Coordinator will need to review the Safeguarding Investigation report, liaise with the Investigation Officer (and others where needed) and record the outcomes and conclusions.

  26. Case Conference Meetings • Chaired by Independent Safeguarding and Risk Managers from Safeguarding Adult Partnership Support Unit. • Where a case conference meeting is held, the Investigation Reports will ordinarily be sent out to participants 5 working days in advance. There is a consensus of legal advice from across West Yorkshire that this is appropriate in order to provide for a fair process. This means reports need to be received by the unit 7 working days in advance.

  27. Case Conclusions • The case conclusion definitions reflect the new national data requirements • For each type of abuse...(on the ‘balance of probabilities’) • Substantiated – allegation was proved • Not substantiated – unfounded, unsupported or disproved • Inconclusive – insufficient evidence • Investigation ceased at individual’s request Also update definitions for Overall Case Conclusion (p.91)

  28. Current proposal: • Case Conference Discussions are recorded as part of the Investigation Report Templates • Case Conference Meetings are recorded on their own template

  29. ESCR Recording: Key Points Denotes the overall case conclusion: Cease at adult at risk’s request Inconclusive Not Substantiated Substantiated – fully Substantiated - partly Denotes the type of conference: Meeting Discussion Denotes the outcome of Risk evaluation: Risk remains Risk reduced Risk removed Either Action Taken or NFA under Safeguarding

  30. Review Stage • A review meeting is not always required within the safeguarding adult procedures, often a review can be carried out effectively in other ways, such as by CPA or Care Management. This is current practice in Leeds. • Where the need for a review meeting within the safeguarding procedures, is agreed as part of the Case Conference Meeting, the review meeting will be chaired by an ISRM from the Safeguarding Adult Partnership Support Unit. This is already our practice in Leeds. • What is different, is that Case Conference Review Meetings will be simply be called Safeguarding Adults: Review Meetings.

  31. ESCR recording: Key Points Denotes the outcome of the review meeting: Close: No further ASC role Close: Further ASC role Continue Adlt SG role

  32. ESCR recording: Completed Example THE END! A COMPLETED FULLY RECORED SAFEGUARDING REFERRAL FROM ALERT THROUGH TO CONCLUSION, VIA CAPACITY ASSESSMENT, STRATEGY DISCUSSION, INVESTIGATION, CONFERENCE AND REVIEW!!

  33. West Yorkshire P&P Review • 6 month review period • Email address established to receive feedback from across West Yorkshire. feedback.safeguardingadultswypp@kirklees.gov.uk Please use this so that any review encompasses your/Leeds views. cc: safeguarding.adults@leeds.gov.uk Website: www.leedssafeguardingadults.org.uk Phone: 0113 224 3511

  34. Questions?

More Related