Agenda item

Purpose of the item: Scrutiny of the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report 2021-22.

Witnesses:

Mark Nuti – Cabinet Member for Adults and Health

Liz Uliasz – Chief Operating Officer, Adult Social Care

Sarah McDermott – Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Manager

Simon Turpitt – Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Independent Chair

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    A Member asked about the nature of safeguarding training available for healthcare practitioners. The Independent Chair explained that all statutory agencies had a requirement for mandatory safeguarding training. There was a document containing the levels of training and what was expected which was checked monthly. Within GP practices, there was a named GP for safeguarding, who was responsible for ensuring that staff have access to safeguarding training. The training was also inspected by the CQC. Training had been delivered by webinar for GPs and this had resulted in greater participation, with the resources accessible at any time. In other organisations, there was a combination of face-to-face and virtual training offerings. 

2.    A Member queried the safeguarding training offer for ASC staff specifically. The Chief Operating Officer explained that there was mandatory training for all staff and specialist training was mandatory for those conducting safeguarding enquiries. This was delivered internally which means it can be monitored. Learnings from serious safeguarding reviews and homicide reviews were also fed into training. There was quarterly reporting to the Board and the leadership team at the Council on performance. The Chairman asked what happened if staff did not attend training. The Chief Operating Officer explained that this was reported to the manager, and they would attend at a different date.

3.    In response to a question on raising the profile on unpaid carers and the impact that fatigue could have on cases of neglect, the Independent Chair explained that there was a focus on supporting carers in discussions with ASC. It was crucial to raise awareness of understanding the stress that carers are placed under. Sometimes carers worried that by voicing concerns, they could lose care over a loved one, thus, it was essential to support them in a way that makes them feel empowered.

4.    A Member asked about work undertaken to raise awareness of safeguarding amongst residents, especially those who were isolated. The Independent Chair shared examples of a presentation in a shopping centre, information on the radio and on social media for national safeguarding week. There was also information in contact points, such as, hospitals, libraries, and GP practices. There was a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word, in the context of adults compared to children. The Board had established a Task and Finish Group to look into engaging with harder to reach communities. Members raised the issue of language barriers to accessing services. The Independent Chair shared that there were leaflets in different languages, however, the uptake of these were low. The Board Manager added that the Boards nationally had been looking into getting software to create more engaging resources beyond leaflets, such as YouTube videos, with subtitles in a variety of languages and British Sign Language. Google translate had been added to the website of the Board as well.

5.    The Chairman asked about raising awareness of financial abuse and organisational abuse. The Independent Chair explained that the Board worked closely with trading standards to highlight issues of financial abuse. It was challenging as individuals were getting more sophisticated with this type of abuse; however, people were becoming more aware of it. The Department of Work and Pensions sat on the Board and helped in this area. In terms of organisational abuse, the Independent Chair explained that figures in this area had always been high. There needed to be a better breakdown in recording to understand it more effectively. There was a group focusing on this area.

6.    A Member asked whether safeguarding had improved for homeless individuals in Surrey. The Independent Chair emphasised that the Board’s work was specifically around adults with care and support needs, not the entire adult population. The Board Manager sat on the steering group for homelessness, which kept the Board involved in the conversation. It was a challenging area that involved other systems primarily if an individual did not have care and support needs.

7.    In response to a question on safeguarding within prisons, the

Independent Chair explained that this responsibility sat with the Ministry of Justice. The Board worked with the prison group to support them with their safeguarding training. If an individual had care and support needs, the Board would need to be aware of them once they leave prison.

8.    A Member asked for further information on self-neglect. The Chief Operating Officer explained that it could occur due to a number of reasons, including poor mental health, learning disabilities and autism, and trauma. It was not taken down the safeguarding route, rather, ASC staff would try to put the correct support in place to improve their situation. There was now a Hoarding Protocol within the Council to improve support in that area. The Independent Chair added that there would be a safeguarding adults review if an individual died as a result of hoarding.

9.    A Member enquired about increasing joined up working with partners. The Independent Chair explained that learnings came out of reviews and were actioned by the relevant people involved. They would then share the learnings with other organisations. There was better working between agencies than previously, for example, voluntary representatives sat on the Board. Moving forward, the learnings from reviews would also be shared with the Committee.

10.A Member enquired into the working relationship with Surrey

Safeguarding Children Partnership (SSCP). The Independent Chair shared that he worked closely with SSCP and there was a children’s services representative on the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board. He also had bi-weekly conversations with the Chair of SSCP. The Independent Chair noted the importance of differentiating between transition (moving from children’s services to ASC and making sure the dialogue started early on) and transitional (those who did not meet the criteria of safeguarding provision as an adult but were vulnerable and ensuring similar support was available). There was a conference taking place next year (2023) on transitional safeguarding.

11.In response to a question on embedding safeguarding principles into the Integrated Care Systems, the Independent Chair explained that the Chair of the Integrated Care Board and Mental Health System Delivery Board met regularly with the Independent Chair and the Chair of SSCP. The ICB was trying to be more safeguarding aware and not leave any gaps when transitioning to a new strategy.

12.The Chairman asked about the issues raised in the report by St Catherine’s Hospice and Clarion House. The Independent Chair noted the difficulties when issues crossed county borders, especially with Clarion as a national company. The Board Manager explained that the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub delivered a webinar to agencies to feedback on safeguarding concerns, but it may not always be appropriate if an agency was not directly involved in a case.

Actions/requests for further information:

1. Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board to provide more information on the Group looking into organisational abuse.

Recommendations

Surrey County Council Adult Social Care Leads & Surrey Safeguarding Adult’s Board:  

1.    That Adult Social Care service users and Adult Social Care frontline staff, are continuing to receive adequate Adult Safeguarding reassurances and support, and to raise awareness of such support available.

2.    Formulate a concerted multi-agency plan to raise awareness of the various aspects of Safeguarding, and to help residents understand the distinction between Children’s and Adult’s Safeguarding.

3.    To collate data and insights from member agencies into Safeguarding training provision, and for this to be incorporated into future Surrey Safeguarding Adult Board reports.  

4.    That a concerted effort is undertaken alongside Surrey

Heartlands and Frimley Integrated Care Systems, to further raise awareness of Safeguarding issues and the support available.