Agenda item

This report introduces the Kent and Medway Safeguarding Adults Board’s (KMSAB) Annual Report for April 2022–March 2023.  The Annual Report sets out the responsibilities and structure of the Board and details how the multi-agency partnership delivered against its strategic priorities for the year.  The report also provides information pertaining to safeguarding adults reviews and safeguarding activity.

Discussion:

The Independent Chair and the Manager of the Kent and Medway Safeguarding Adults Board introduced the report which set out the responsibilities and structure of the Board and how the multi-agency partnership delivered against its strategic priorities for the year. The report also provided information pertaining to safeguarding adults reviews and safeguarding activity. They added that they would attempt to provide some information that related to just Medway in the next annual report, where the information was possible to separate out.

Members then raised a number of questions and comments, which included:

·      Multi-agency working – in response to a query about the risks around multi-agency working and whether there was evidence of learning and improvement in this area, the Board Manager explained that there was some improvement in this area and referred to a multi-agency risk management process the Board was developing to demonstrate best practice in working together for high risk cases. This had been identified in other areas as best practice. The Independent Chair of the Board added that in Medway relationships were well developed and effective, referring particularly to joint working with the Community Safety Partnership and with other organisations, including the Council.

·      Referrals increase – in response to a question as to whether the increase in safeguarding adults review referrals was due to increased cases or increased awareness of reporting concerns, the Independent Chair explained that the Board had put great effort into raising awareness to the public, as well as agencies with increased engagement from policing and Medical Examiners. There was also a self-assessment process, which agencies completed every 2 years, which included a question on how they make their staff aware of the safeguarding adults review criteria and process. The Assistant Director, Adult Social Care also referred to the work that had been done across the service to raise knowledge and awareness which had seen an increase of 69% over 5 years in referrals for safeguarding concerns. 

·      Discharge from in-patient mental health services – reference was made to a discussion earlier in the meeting about whether these discharges were too soon and the Independent Chair was asked if this was a concern.  He responded that the role of the Independent Chair was to understand safeguarding practice and to learn, not attribute blame.  When there were issues and areas of concern that were repeated, despite remedial actions, the relevant agency was approached to identify issues and provide assurance, but there would be significant evidence for such challenge.

·      Defensible decision making – it was suggested this phrase could be misinterpreted and the Board representatives undertook to rephrase this in future reports.

·      Repeat referrals – in response to a question about whether repeat referrals in relation to individuals were flagged, the Assistant Director, Adult Social Care reassured the Committee that this would be flagged by social care staff in the Council and the staff were being encouraged to use professional curiosity to improve the safety and wellbeing of service users.

·      Training – reference was made to the large amount of training and support provided by the Board to all organisation, including those from the community and voluntary sector. Case studies were often used to embed learning by both the Board and for in-house staff development within the Council’s Adult Social Care service.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.