A study of adult protection referrals in two local authorities: an overview of findings for managers and practitioners
| Published date | 10 October 2011 |
| Pages | 238-250 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14668201111178157 |
| Date | 10 October 2011 |
| Author | Paul Cambridge,Jim Mansell,Julie Beadle‐Brown,Alisoun Milne,Beckie Whelton |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Sociology |
A study of adult protection referrals in
two local authorities: an overview of
findings for managers and practitioners
Paul Cambridge, Jim Mansell, Julie Beadle-Brown, Alisoun Milne and Beckie Whelton
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report the key findings from a study of adult protection
referrals collected by two English local authorities during 1998-2005.
Design/methodology/approach – Referrals were analysed for patterns relating to risk with client level
data supplemented by information from the local authority databases and from the Care Quality
Commission. The analysis also examined associations between adult protection processes and
outcomes and looked at how adult protection monitoring data could be improved to better inform
safeguarding management and practice at local and national level.
Findings – Sexual abuse was most frequently reported for people with intellectual disabilities, who were
also at higher risk of abuse when living out of area. Older people were most at risk of financial abuse in
community settings and of neglect in residential care.
Originality/value – The study identifies patterns of risk in the abuse of older people and those with
intellectual disabilities and informs preventive interventions. It also indicates priorities for improving the
quality and comparability of adult protection monitoring data.
Keywords Adult safeguarding, Monitoring data, Intellectual disability,Elderly people, Risk management
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
No Secrets (Department of Health, 2000) suggested audit arrangements to monitor and
evaluate adult protection policy implementation in England and local adult protection
monitoring data was seen as a key such tool. It was suggested that agencies should
routinely gather a relatively wide range of information such as the number and source of
adult protection referrals, the characteristics of the abuse and the abused person and the
perpetrator as well as information on case level processes and outcomes (Section 3.19).
The subsequent review of adult protection monitoring data (Action on Elder Abuse (AEA),
2006) recommended more effective and consistent data monitoring and recording to
improve the quality and comparability of such data. The national framework for practice
standards and outcomes in safeguarding vulnerable adults developed by the Association of
Directors of Social Services (2005) underlined the importance of management information
and the Commission for Social Care Inspection (2005) (CSCI now the Care Quality
Commission – CQC) highlighted the important goal of collecting data about adult protection
work and activity. Despite the evident need to improve such information, the review and
consultation of No Secrets (Department of Health, 2008, 2009) was concerned more with
strategic, legal and inter-agency considerations than with improving the effectiveness
of adult protection monitoring data. With adult safeguarding developments such as the
implementation of vetting and barring being frozen by the new coalition government,
local authorities and their safeguarding adults boards (SABs) have been left to take such
issues forward themselves. It is, therefore, important to have an understanding of the
potentials and limits of such data for risk management and what improvements in data
PAGE 238
j
THE JOURNAL OF ADULT PROTECTION
j
VOL. 13 NO. 5 2011, pp. 238-250, QEmerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1466-8203 DOI 10.1108/14668201111178157
Paul Cambridge is a
Senior Lecturer in Social
Work in the School of
Sociology,Social Policy and
Social Research, University
of Kent, Chatham Maritime,
UK. Jim Mansell is a Chair in
Applied Psychology of
Learning Disability and
Julie Beadle-Brown is a
Senior Lecturer, both at the
Tizard Centre, University of
Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Alisoun Milne is a Reader in
Social Gerontology and
Social Work in the School of
Sociology,Social Policy and
Social Research, University
of Kent, Chatham Maritime,
UK. Beckie Whelton is a
Research Assistant at the
Tizard Centre, University of
Kent, Canterbury, UK.
To continue reading
Request your trial