Staffordshire County Council: local authority assessment

There was effective senior level leadership and oversight of safeguarding . Leaders had clear sight of frontline safeguarding practices and gained assurance that the local authority’s approach was protecting people from harm, for example, by shadowing local authority staff and monitoring safeguarding data. Leaders prioritised both a timely and high-quality response to safeguarding concerns, and triangulated feedback and data to maintain oversight of this.

The local authority was part of a multi-agency Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Safeguarding Adults Board which helped deliver a co-ordinated approach to safeguarding adults in the area. Leaders and partners said the local authority actively participated in carrying out Safeguarding Adult Reviews (SARs) and leading on discussions and learning from these. Additionally, there was a strong multi-agency safeguarding partnership in the local authority’s Quality and Safeguarding Information Sharing Meetings (QSISM), and the roles and responsibilities for identifying and responding to concerns through this forum were clear. Information sharing arrangements were in place, so concerns were raised quickly and investigated without delay. 

The local authority was working with people in the area and partner agencies to increase awareness of how to raise safeguarding concerns with the local authority. Staff said work was ongoing with care providers to reduce the number of inappropriate safeguarding referrals received by the local authority. For example, providers were encouraged to access safeguarding threshold guidance via an online platform commissioned by the local authority to improve understanding of the safeguarding referral process. Additionally, information distributed by health providers and community groups about how to raise a concern was being developed in different languages and formats. This indicated the local authority improving communication with people about how to raise concerns and help keep people safe, and reflected national data showing 84.65% of people who used services said those services made them feel safe, which was in line with the England average of 87.82%.

There were effective systems, processes, and practices to safeguard people from abuse and neglect. These were standardised across the different county boroughs and districts, ensuring consistency and continuity of approach. Roles, responsibilities and pathways within the local authority for responding to concerns were clear and used consistently. For example, staff told us they used a decision matrix during the safeguarding referral triage process to support decision-making around safeguarding thresholds, and all referrals were risk-rated to determine the prioritisation of the response required. There was a clear process in place for referrals that did not meet the threshold. This ensured a consistent approach to actioning safeguarding concerns to help protect people from harm.

Staff involved in safeguarding work were suitably skilled and supported to undertake safeguarding duties effectively. 61.81% of adult social care staff across the sector had completed safeguarding adults training, which was significantly better than the England average of 48.70%. Additionally, 53.18% of sector staff had completed Mental Capacity Act (MCA) Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) training, which was significantly better than the England average of 37.58 (Skills for Care Workforce Estimates, October 2024). Though both levels of training were higher than the England average, it was acknowledged that a significant proportion of the adult social care workforce had still not undertaken Safeguarding or DoLS training.

Staff and leaders told us there was space for reflective practice and practice development to support staff to learn from safeguarding incidents and improve practice as a result.

There was a clear understanding of the safeguarding risks and issues in the area. Partners of the multi-agency Safeguarding Adult Board (SAB) told us the local authority worked with them through the SAB and their own Quality and Safeguarding Information Sharing Meetings (QSISM) to reduce risks and to prevent abuse and neglect from occurring, and to learn from safeguarding incidents.

Lessons were learned when people experienced serious abuse or neglect, and action was taken to reduce future risks and drive best practice. The local authority was an active partner in completing Safeguarding Adult Reviews (SAR) and other serious incident enquiries, and took appropriate action to embed learning into systems, processes and practice. For example, the local authority was in the process of embedding learning on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and issues around self-neglect through increased training for staff in response to a recent SAR.

The local authority recognised the risks to people’s well-being presented by deprivation of liberty. People’s waits for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) application reviews had improved significantly over the 18 months prior to the assessment, despite a 20% increase in demand for reviews between January 2024 and December 2024. Local authority data indicated 969 people were awaiting review of a DoLS in December 2024, and 423 of these people had waited for more than 21 days. Local authority data indicated the median time for allocation of a review to a practitioner had decreased from 14 to 12 days between 2023 and 2024. Leaders were aware people did not always receive DoLS assessments within the target timeframe of 21 days and work was ongoing to further decrease waits. However, processes were in place to reduce the risk to people’s liberty while they waited. For example, staff triaged and risk-rated all people awaiting a DoLS assessments to prioritise cases and ensure those at highest risk were reviewed within 21 days.

The local authority had clear guidelines on what constituted a section 42 (s42) safeguarding enquiry and when s42 enquiries were required. Staff applied the guidelines consistently. Leaders had clear oversight of decisions around s42 enquiries and provided challenge to ensure concerns consistently met the agreed criteria. Staff provided a clear rationale and outcome from any initial enquiries, including those which did not progress to a s42 enquiry. Local authority data indicated 16,169 safeguarding concerns were received in the 12 months up to December 2024 and 16,003 had been actioned and completed in this time. All referrals were reviewed on the day of receipt by the local authority and for 82% of concerns, a decision had been made and/or had been allocated to a local authority team to action within 5 days. This indicated timely processing of enquiries regardless of if they progressed to an s42 enquiry. Of the concerns not addressed within the 5-day timeframe, the local authority told us 99% had the lowest risk level and a decision for them had been made and completed within 11 days.

Local authority leaders told us 75% of s42 enquiry investigations were completed within 90 days, and 7% took over 180 days in the year prior to December 2024. The reason 7% of the people involved with an investigation experienced longer waits was due to time taken to work with these people to put safeguarding plans and actions in place to reduce future risks, and ensure they were safe and protected from harm. Action was taken to reduce risks to people whilst they waited for s42 enquiry investigations to be completed. Staff told us ownership and responsibility for any ongoing safety work was allocated to a specific team. 

There were clear standards and oversight arrangements in place for responding to information of concern and for conducting s42 enquiries. Local authority data indicated 21% of safeguarding concerns progressed to s42 enquiries in the year prior to December 2024. 3148 concerns meeting the s42 enquiry threshold were started in this period, and 801 enquiries were in progress as of December 2024. Enquiries were carried out without delay: no s42 enquiries were awaiting allocation to a practitioner in December 2024 as all enquiries were allocated as soon as a concern met the criteria.

The local authority focused on preventing abuse and neglect and identifying risks early. They had robust risk management processes in place to reduce risks to people’s well-being. For example, adult social care staff worked across local authority teams to investigate concerns relating to young people approaching adulthood, and findings were shared with the central safeguarding team to ensure oversight of immediate or future actions. The local authority also monitored and analysed themes arising from safeguarding concerns, for example, increased incidences of self-neglect concerns and alleged abuse taking place in people’s homes. This intelligence was being used to increase workforce awareness through training in key areas and the local authority had further ambitions to use the data proactively to inform future safeguarding practices help improve safety.

Care providers and voluntary, community, faith and social enterprise sector (VCFSE) partners gave mixed feedback about the extent to which the local authority kept them informed of the outcomes of safeguarding concerns they had raised. For example, some described timely responses and outcomes as a result of raising safeguarding concerns, while others said communication about outcomes was inconsistent. This indicated further work was needed to improve the consistency with which safeguarding responses were communicated to partner agencies.

Local authority staff and partners told us safeguarding enquiries were carried out sensitively and without delay, keeping the wishes and best interests of the person concerned at the centre. Leaders gained assurance of how well-embedded Making Safeguarding Personal principles were in frontline practice through discussion and review of cases at the Safeguarding Adults Board and by monitoring data on people’s satisfaction with their care and support. For example, leaders were aware that, of the 63% of adults who were the subject of a s42 enquiry in 2023/2024, 91% said their desired outcome from the enquiry had been fully or partially met (Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board 2023/2024). This was small decrease from 97% in 2022/2023 and work was ongoing to improve people’s experience of in safeguarding enquiries.

Staff said people had the information they needed to understand safeguarding, what being safe meant to them, and how to raise concerns when they didn’t feel safe, or they had concerns about the safety of other people. They supported people to participate in the safeguarding process as much as they wanted to, and work was in train to increase people’s access to independent advocacy through workforce training in collaboration with the local authority’s commissioned advocacy provider.

People were supported to understand their rights, including their human rights, rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and their rights under the Equality Act 2010. Staff used trauma-informed approaches to support people to make choices that balanced risks with positive choice and control in their lives.