Safeguarding adults' referrals in the Eastern region: an investigation into varying referral rates

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to respond to the findings of the initial phase of the Safeguarding Adults Programme (November 2009-March 2010, which found an unexpected inverse relationship between referral rate for safeguarding adults and population size of local authority in the data captured from April 2008 to March 2009. Design/methodology/approach -An analysis of regional safeguarding referral rates relative to population with a breakdown by service groups was undertaken; statistics from the economic deprivation index (EDI) were also used. A questionnaire was designed and sent out to the authorities regarding thresholds, eligibility, definitions, advice and information available to referrers, accuracy of recording and public awareness. The data analysed here cover the following year's safeguarding referrals.Findings -The questionnaire revealed broad differences in thresholds, eligibility, definitions, advice and information available to referrers, accuracy of recording and public awareness campaigns across the studied authorities. These differences contribute to obscuring real differences in underlying processes. A highly significant relationship between EDI and safeguarding referral rates was found, implying real differences in abuse rates driven by underlying socio-economic factors. Differences in abuse allegations were systematic, so that authorities with a particularly high level of referrals did not have unusually high contributions from particular service user groups or from particular referral sources. Similarly the nature of abuse allegations did not differ between authorities with high or low-referral rates.Originality/value -The paper investigates the reasons for variation and explores thresholds for safeguarding referrals.

Models of adult safeguarding in England: A review of the literature

“…Collins (2010) reported that where generic team managers define safeguarding concerns their role may impact upon their decision to define an incident as safeguarding. Thacker (2011) found the higher the level of seniority the decision-making the lower the referral rate, suggesting higher thresholds. In these cases Thacker 2011 responsibilities.…”

“…In these cases Thacker 2011 responsibilities. Interestingly, and perhaps unsurprisingly, this was not found to happen in specialist safeguarding teams (Thacker, 2011; see also .…”

“…Given the ambiguity and varying factors that influence the decision to consider an incident as a safeguarding concern it is unsurprising that different thresholds for investigating 'abuse' have developed in different areas (Thacker, 2011;Manthorpe, Perkins, Penhale, Pinkney & Kingston, 2005). McCreadie, Mathew, Filinson and Askham (2008) found safeguarding to be an 'elastic' phenomenon stretching and contracting by individual decision-making and agency priorities.…”

Staff understandings of abuse and poor practice in residential settings for adults with intellectual disabilities

“…In the UK, and in other national contexts including the USA, Australia, Republic of Korea and South Africa, the research evidence on the increased risk of abused faced by adults with disabilities is still developing (Mikton, Maguire, & Shakespeare, ). However, studies investigating patterns of adult safeguarding referrals in England have identified that adults with intellectual disabilities are over‐represented in referral statistics (Beadle‐Brown, Mansell, Cambridge, Milne, & Whetton, ; Cambridge, Beadle‐Brown, Milne, Mansell, & Whelton, ; Mansell, Beadle‐Brown, Cambridge, Milne, & Whelton, ; Thacker, ). UK researchers have also noted that a disproportionate number of adult safeguarding alerts emanate from residential care settings (Beadle‐Brown et al, ; Mansell et al, ), that early indicators of abuse in residential settings are often overlooked (Marsland et al, ) and that living in residential care increases an individual's risk of suffering abuse (Cambridge, Beadle‐Brown, Milne, Mansell, & Whelton, ).…”

The feasibility of introducing an adult safeguarding measure for inclusion in the Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework (ASCOF): findings from a pilot study

“…of referrals or of concluded cases). The effectiveness of SARs (previously the Abuse of Vulnerable Adult (AVA) returns) as a comparative indicator has also been questioned as the thresholds whereby a concern is designated a ‘safeguarding’ case vary across LAs [ 5 , 6 ]. Such challenges are acknowledged by LAs: “Currently Directors and Safeguarding Adults Boards are faced with a plethora of input/output data but no way of telling from it if they really are making any impact.…”