Agenda item

Report of Cabinet Member for Health, Care and Wellbeing

The Committee considered a report of the Cabinet Member for Health Care and Wellbeing (Schedule 4 to the signed minutes) regarding the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board Annual Report 2019/20.

The meeting was attended by John Wood, the Independent Chair of the Board who presented the report on behalf of the Cabinet Member.

Members were informed that there had been 4,150 occasions where concerns had been reported that adults with care and support needs might have been at risk or were experiencing abuse or neglect. This was an increase of 439 (11%) compared to 2019/20 and was reflective of the national figure of 8.7%. Following an initial assessment, it had been determined that the duty of enquiry requirement had been met in 93% of concerns.

Of those subject to a Section 42 enquiry under the Care Act 2014, individuals aged between 75-84 and 85-94 represented the largest cohort (both 27%), followed by 64-74 (12.5%). An analysis of the general population in Staffordshire indicated that adults over 65 were disproportionately over-represented in Section 42 enquiries.

Neglect and acts of omission, physical harm or financial abuse continued to be the most frequent types of harm or abuse identified for Section 42 enquiries, accounting for 75% of all harm and/or abuse recorded. The proportion of people subject of a Section 42 enquiry whose outcome was fully met had increased from 80% in 2018/19 to 88% the year.

Members noted the progress made by the Board against their strategic priorities of: (i) Engagement and; (ii) Reducing Financial and Material Abuse. The Partnership had developed a range of methods to engage and communicate with people including the establishment of a website containing a variety of adult safeguarding information. There had been in excess of 58,000 visitors to the site during the year with the most popular pages being “Safeguarding Adult Reviews” and “What is abuse”. With regard to (ii) above the key focus was on raising awareness. Training had been provided to staff working at the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub and Partners were sharing information on their experiences with incidence of Financial and Material Abuse in order to gain a better understanding of the problem Countywide. 

In full and wide-ranging discussion which ensued Members expressed concern over apparent discrepancies highlighted in the report relating to the:- (i) relatively low number of Safeguarding Adult Review Referrals (SARs) (5) during year compared to the total number of safeguarding concerns received; (ii) differences in the statistics for Staffordshire compared to those for Stoke-on-Trent and; (iii) ethnic groups who were under/over represented in the statistics. 

In reply, the Chair explained the Partnership’s robust processes and criteria used for determining whether a SAR should be undertaken or not following a report of concern. Only the most serious cases were the subject of a Review and typically these arose very infrequently. However, in the interests of transparency, all those cases examined by the Board’s Scoping Panel were included in the Annual Report, whereas the Care Act only required inclusion of actual Reviews undertaken. Reviews were always undertaken by persons independent of the Partnership. The Chair also stressed the learning taken by the Board from both SAR and those cases considered by the Scoping Panel.  

Continuing, the Chair explained the differences in the statistics between the County and City Councils were largely as a result of ongoing difficulties with the Care Director computer system, conversion rates and methods of recording cases. However, although additional investment was required, attempts were being made to resolve inconsistencies between the two Authorities and he reassured Members that safeguarding concerns in both Council’s areas were dealt with consistently and in an appropriate manner.

With regard to ethnicity, the Chair explained that the statistics for Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent mirrored those nationwide. However, the 7.6% of reports during the year which didn’t include a record of ethnic background was a cause for concern owing to the likelihood that these might involve people who lacked the mental capacity to self-identify in a particular group. Efforts were therefore being made to revise the “Not Known” category to differentiate between those who were unable to self-identify and those who had refused to state their ethnic origin.

In response to the concerns expressed by the Committee the Chair undertook to include an additional paragraph in future Annual Reports to clarify the processes and procedures adopted by the Board for deciding whether or not to undertake a SAR in cases brought to their attention.

The Chairman then thanked the Independent Chair for an interesting and informative presentation and paid tribute to the Board for their valuable work in promoting adult safeguarding in Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent during the year.

RESOLVED – That the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board Annual Report from April 2018 to March be received and noted.