SAR 4a SAR criteria

SAR 4a: Safeguarding Adults Review - Criteria Document

The purpose of these criteria is to support Scoping Panel Meeting members in their considerations. It is important that the intensive resources required for an effective Safeguarding Adults Review are only used to ensure the greatest learning and multi-agency practice development for SSASPB.

A Safeguarding Adults Review should be conducted when:

  • an adult in the SSASPB area who has needs for care and support (whether or not the local authority was meeting any of those needs)
  • dies, and the SSASPB knows or suspects that the death resulted from abuse or neglect (whether or not it knew about or suspected the abuse or neglect before the adult died)

Or

  • does not die but the SSASPB knows or suspects that the adult has experienced serious abuse or neglect

and in both cases

  • there is reasonable cause for concern about how the SSASPB or a member of it or any other person involved in the adult’s care worked together to effectively protect the adult;

and

  • there are clearly identified areas of learning and practice improvement or service development that have the potential to significantly improve the way in which adults are safeguarded in the future.

Care Act guidance outlines that in the context of SARs something can be considered as ‘serious abuse or neglect’ where, for example:

  • the individual would have been likely to have died but for an intervention
  • the individual has suffered permanent harm
  • the individual has reduced capacity or quality of life (whether because of physical or psychological effects)
  • the individual has suffered serious sexual abuse.

A Safeguarding Adults Review should be consideredwhen:

  • an adult in the SSASPB area has care and support needs (whether or not the local authority was meeting any of those needs) and when abuse or neglect is known or suspected to have taken place and the adult at risk has sustained:
  • institutional or systemic abuse where the outcome may not be life threatening but may have a long-term detrimental effect on a person’s well-being and is of a nature where there are serious negative outcomes for the individuals concerned
  • a potentially life threatening injury
  • serious or permanent impairment of development
  • financial abuse where the outcome may have a long- term detrimental effect on a person’s well-being and is of a nature where there are serious negative outcomes for the individuals concerned

In deciding whether a Safeguarding Adults Review should be conducted the following questions may be considered:

  • Do the case details give reason for serious concern about the way in which professionals and services worked together to safeguard the adult?
  • Is there clear evidence of a risk of significant harm to an adult that was not recognised or shared by professionals or agencies?
  • Are there serious concerns about how agencies have worked together to prevent, identify, minimise or address a risk of significant harm and may place other adults at risk of significant harm?
  • Are there actions or omissions in a number of agencies involved in the provision of care, support or safeguarding of an adult that may have caused or be implicated in their harm?
  • Does one or more professional, agency, family member, carer or advocate consider that their concerns were not taken seriously or acted upon appropriately?
  • Does the case indicate that there may be operational failings in one or more aspects of the use of the SSASPB Policies and Procedures?
  • Does the case involve serious or systematic organizational abuse from which learning could be transferred to other organisations to prevent such abuse or neglect in the future?
  • Was the adult subject to unauthorised Deprivation of Liberty?
  • Was there evidence of discrimination?
  • Is there adverse media interest or serious public concern?
  • Do the issues link to the strategic priorities of the SSASPB?
  • Would a SAR enable the SSASPB to tackle practice issues before harm arises?

 

Updated Feb 20