SAFEGUARDING - INTERIM GUIDANCE
Case Conference Meeting - within 4 weeks of the conclusion of the enquiry.
The purpose of the case conference stage is two fold;
1. Evaluate the evidence and determine the outcome as to whether or not harm has occurred on the balance of probability, reaching a consensus through discussion.
2. Develop protection arrangements on the basis of those conclusions
Reasons for the necessity of a Case Conference
- several organisations have concerns and need to share information
- there may be a number of investigations by different organisations
- there may be legal or regulatory actions
- a referral to Disclosure and Barring Service or professional body is a potential outcome
- a serious crime may have occurred
- the allegation involves a member of staff/volunteer
- the situation could attract media attention
- there are concerns about the safety of the service/institutional abuse
- a large scale investigation is being considered
The aim of the case conference is to:
•discuss whether the allegation was substantiated
•share and consider the information contained in the investigation report
•plan what further action is needed based on the report
•decide if any further action is required if the allegation is not substantiated
•decide if any further action is required if the investigation is inconclusive
•make a decision about the current level of risk and likely future risk
•agree an adult protection plan for the adult at risk
•agree how the plan will be reviewed and monitored
•consider whether the case warrants referral to the Lessons Learned sub-group(for consideration of a safeguarding adult review SAR) or a referral to Disclosure and Barring Service or professional body. Noteif this is an agreed action then confirmation must be provided to the Chair when done.
There are five possible outcomes: New or emerging issues that are beyond the scope of the investigation undertaken will need to be investigated in their own right. This may require a new safeguarding referral/ investigation or an appropriate alternative response/process.
1.Substantiated- fully This refers to cases where the evidence clearly substantiates the allegation or where it was concluded that all the allegations made against the individual or organisation were verified “on the balance of probabilities”. Where allegations of multiple types of abuse are being considered against an individual or organisation then all will need to be proved for it to be defined as fully substantiated.
2.Partially substantiated This refers to cases where there are allegations of multiple
types of abuse being considered against an individual or organisation. Verification
will be partial where “on the balance of probabilities” it was concluded that one or
more, but not all, of the alleged types of abuse were proved. For example, a referral
that includes allegations of physical abuse and neglect, where the physical abuse
can be proved, but there is not enough evidence to
support the allegation of neglect will be partially substantiated.
3.Notdetermined/inconclusiveThis refers to cases where there is insufficient evidence to
allow a conclusion to be reached. This will include cases where, for
example, the individual subject to the referral, the individual believed to be
the source of the risk or a key witness passed away before they could
provide statements as part of the assessment or investigation.
4.Notsubstantiated This refers to cases where “on the balance of probabilities” the allegations are unfounded, unsupported or disproved.
5. Investigation ceased at individual’s request - This refers to cases where the
individual at risk does not wish for an investigation to proceed for whatever
reason and so preclude a conclusion being reached. Referrals which
proceed despite this, for example where the local authority has duty of care to
protect other residents in a care home setting or multiple individuals in
supported housing, will not come under this definition.
NoteThroughout the whole safeguarding process invitations should include the adult at risk. Where the adult at risk lacks the mental capacity to decide about attendance a best interest decision will be required. The adult at risk is entitled to be supported by an appropriate person(s), such as a family member, friend, advocate or personal assistant (according to their wishes, or decided in their 'best interests' where they lack the mental capacity to decide for themselves). The adult at risk may also choose not to attend and have their views reported via a representative or in writing. Where an IMCA has been appointed, they will be invited to attend.
Protection Planning - Assessment of Risk
Assessments of risk will need to be reviewed in light of the decision as to whether abuse
has occurred and, if so its type. The findings of the investigation may impact on the
assessed risk to the adult at risk or other people. There may also be changes in the adult at
risk's circumstances (or that of the person alleged to have caused harm) that impact on the
risk. Any changes in the assessment of risk will need to be reflected in the protection plan.
An adult at risk who has the mental capacity to make decisions about their safety should be
involved in the assessment of risk. Where the adult at risk lacks mental capacity in relation
to decisions about their safety appropriate representation needs to be taken into account.
Wherever possible any protection plan for the adult at risk should be developed in
partnership with them, taking into account their wishes and the impact on their lifestyle and
independence.
An adult at risk with mental capacity may decide not to accept a protection plan. However,
protection arrangements should be offered and work undertaken to understand the reason
for not accepting support. It may be possible for support to be offered in a manner the
person finds more acceptable.
If the adult at risk has capacity and refuses to agree with the protection plan, this must be clearly recorded and evidenced.
Where a person is without mental capacity to make decisions about their safety, decisions
about protective arrangements should be made in their best interests taking into account
their wishes, feelings, beliefs and values (Mental Capacity Act 2005).
This must be as a result of a formal Best Interest meeting under the MCA.
Possible outcomes for the adult at risk
1. No Further Action under Safeguarding
Actions under Safeguarding
2. Risk Remains
3. Risk Reduced
4. Risk Removed
The safeguarding adults procedures will be closed at this stage unless there is a need for a
review meeting. The purpose of the review meeting will be to review the protection plan to
ensure it is meeting its aims.
Where a review meeting is not required within the safeguarding adults procedures, they can
be exited. This does not preclude a review being undertaken within other processes, such as care management, as required.
BOLTON SAFEGUARDING ADULTS
Case Conference Agenda Template
- Introductions Apologies: Attendance Sheets signed
- Confidentiality Agreements/Ground Rules
- Subjects Personal Details: Name, DOB, Address, Gender, Ethnicity, Religion, GP
- Details of Significant Others in Subjects Life:Advocate, Partner, Family, Carers, etc
- Review of decisions/actions from previous meetings
- Current situation/circumstances around the Adult at Riskincluding the view of the adult at risk
- Summary of the Investigation findings of lead agency
- Decision regarding the alleged abuse or concern: Outcome for the case -*Substantiated(fully), * Not substantiated,* Inconclusive/not determined, *Investigation ceased at individual's request)
- Outcome for the Adult at Risk:Including an agreed Protection Plan regarding the current and any likely future risk
- Agree how the plan will be reviewed and monitored
- Outcome for the Alleged Person Causing Harm:Further action required, including any referral to Disclosure and Barring Service or professional body. Note if this is an agreed action then confirmation must be provided to the Chair when done.
- Consider any Care Standards, care management or commissioning issues
- Consider whether the case warrants a referral to SCR or Lessons Learned sub -groups
- Communication; who needs to know outcomes of this meeting
- Any other issues
Bolton Safeguarding Adult at Risk Case Conference
Minutes
Time, date, venueChair
Minute Taker
Welcome and Introduction
The meeting commenced at XXXX and was chaired by XXXX. The Chair welcomed the members and the attendees introduced themselves.
Attendees:
Name / Contact info. / Role - Agency1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Apologies:
N.B. These notes are not a verbatim record, but should reflect the main points of the discussion. Where the same issue was discussed several times it may only be recorded once. Also, the chronological order of the notes will not reflect the exact sequence of the discussion on the day.
Confidentiality Statement:
This meeting is being held in accordance with the Bolton multi-agency policy and procedures to safeguard adults from abuse. The information shared at this meeting is confidential and is intended to be used solely to enable safety and support measures to be put in place for the adult at risk. The records produced from this meeting shall be subject to the provisions of Data Protection Act 1988 and Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Details of Subject (name, address, date of birth)
Details of Significant Others in Subjects Life:Advocate, Partner, Family, Carers, etc
Purpose of this meeting:
Review of the decisions/actions from the previous meeting:
Decision/Action (please copy from the previous meeting) / Responsible agency/person / Time scale / Review decision/action at this meetingCurrent situation/circumstances around the Adult at Risk including the view of the adult at risk:
Summary of the investigation findings of lead agency:
Summary of investigation findings by other agencies:
unsworth
Decision regarding the alleged abuse or concern: outcome for the case (substantiated/unsubstantiated/ partially substantiated/ inconclusive):
Outcome for the Adult at riskIncluding an agreed Protection Plan regarding the current and any likely future risk
Outcome for the alleged Person Causing HarmFurther action required, including any referral to Disclosure and Barring Service or professional body. Note if this is an agreed action then confirmation must be provided to the Chair when done.
Care standards, care management or commissioning issues:
Consider whether the case warrants a referral to SCR or Lessons Learned sub -groups
Communication; who needs to know outcomes of this meeting
Any other issues
Summary of decisions and action plan:
Decision /Action / Responsible person/agency / Time scaleThe chair thanked the members and closed the meeting at ……..
Note: / These minutes are issued in the belief that they are an accurate representation of the meeting. Please contact the chair within 7 days of receipt to record any inaccuracies or omissions.MINUTE TAKER’S NAME1