6.6 Protocol for Responding to Allegations about People in a Position of Trust (PiPoT) Working with Adults

1. Introduction

The Care and Support Statutory Guidance requires that Safeguarding Adults Boards establish a framework and process for organisations to use when responding to allegations against anyone who works (in either a paid or an unpaid capacity,) with adults with care and support needs. In this document, this framework and process is referred to as the “Protocol”.

This Protocol should be read in conjunction with the South Tyneside Safeguarding Adults Board Policy and Procedures.

The Protocol applies to all partner agencies of South Tyneside Safeguarding Adults Board (STSAB), and organisations commissioned to provide services by them. It ensures they respond appropriately to allegations against people who work with or care for adults with care and support needs. It applies to anyone who is an employee, volunteer, or student, paid or unpaid. These individuals are known as People in a Position of Trust (PiPoT).

When dealing with PiPoT allegations, STSAB requires its partner agencies to be individually responsible for ensuring they apply their own organisational procedures in line with this Protocol.

STSAB also requires partner agencies, and the service providers they commission, to identify a designated PiPoT lead or contact to oversee the delivery of responsibilities in their organisation.

Partner agencies and the service providers they commission are individually responsible for ensuring that information relating to PiPoT allegations is shared and escalated outside of their organisation proportionately and appropriately, in circumstances where this is required, they are responsible for making the judgment that this is the case in each instance where they are the data controller.

This Protocol is designed to inform and support the decision-making processes of partner agencies and their commissioned services once they become aware of a PiPoT allegation arising from whatever source.

Each partner agency will provide evidence to the STSAB to provide assurance that the PiPoT arrangements within their organisation are functioning effectively, when this is requested. The STSAB will, in turn, maintain oversight of whether these arrangements are working effectively between and across partner agencies in the Borough. Appropriate cross-organisational challenge is an important part of this.

The Care and Support Statutory Guidance also requires that partner agencies and their commissioned services should have clear recording and information-sharing guidance, set explicit timescales for action and are aware of the need to preserve evidence.

This Protocol applies whether the allegation is current or historical.

The STSAB partner agency (or organisation commissioned by them to provide a service) who first identifies or becomes aware of an allegation will be the primary data controller, or the “owner” of the information, and will have first responsibility for responding in accordance with this Protocol.

The Protocol is designed to ensure that if information is shared or disclosed it is done so in accordance with the law but in such a way that allows appropriate and proportionate enquiries to be made that ensures adults with care and support needs are protected and public confidence in services is maintained.

The Care and Support Statutory Guidance reinforces the requirement that if an organisation removes an individual (paid worker or unpaid volunteer) from working with an adult with care and support needs (or would have done so, if the person not left first) because the person poses a risk of harm to adults, the organisation must make a referral to the Disclosure and Barring Service. It is an offence to fail to make a referral without good reason. See also Disclosure and Barring chapter.

This Protocol is not a substitute for, but may be used in conjunction with, other formal legal processes; for example, Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC), Multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) etc.

2. Scope

This Protocol applies to allegations about:

• a person who works with adults with care and support needs in a position of trust, whether an employee, volunteer, or student (paid or unpaid); and
• where the allegations indicate the person in a position of trust poses a risk of harm to adults with care and support needs.

These allegations could include, for example, that the person in a position of trust has:

• behaved in a way that has harmed or may have harmed an adult or child;
• possibly committed a criminal offence against, or related to, an adult or child;
• behaved towards an adult or child in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to adults with care and support needs.

This Protocol must be followed in all cases by the organisation which first becomes aware of an allegation (whether current or historical).

Examples include:

• the PiPoT’s own work / voluntary activity with adults and/or children (for example where a worker or volunteer has been accused of the abuse or neglect of a child or an adult with care and support needs);
• the PiPoT’s life outside work concerning adults with care and support needs in the family or social circle (for example where a son is accused of abusing his older mother and he also works as a domiciliary care worker with adults with care and support needs. Or where a woman is convicted of grievous bodily harm and she works in a residential home for people with learning disabilities);
• The PiPoT’s life outside work concerning risks to children, whether the individual’s own children or other children (for example where a woman is employed in a day centre for people with learning disabilities, but her own children are subject to child protection procedures because of emotional abuse and neglect);
• behaviour that has harmed or may have harmed an adult with care and support needs;
• committing a criminal offence against or related to an adult with care and support needs;
• behaviour towards an adult with care and support needs in a way that indicates they are unsuitable to work with adults with care and support needs;
• behaviour in a way that has harmed children or may have harmed children which means their ability to provide a service to adults with care and support needs must be reviewed;
• experiencing abuse themselves and consequently their ability to provide a service to adults with care and support needs must be reviewed;
• behaviour which questions their ability to provide a service to an adult with care and support needs which must be reviewed e.g. conviction for grievous bodily harm against someone who is not an adult with care and support needs.

3. Children

Children’s Services must be informed if the allegation is such that the person may also pose a risk to children. It is everyone’s duty to refer any current and historical allegations of abuse against children to Children’s Services, whether the alleged perpetrator is a PiPoT or not.

This Protocol does not cover complaints or concerns raised about the quality of the care or professional practice provided by the Person in a Position of Trust (PiPoT). Concerns or complaints about quality of care or practice should be dealt with under the relevant agency or individual complaint, competence, or representations processes.

4. How Might a Concern about a PiPoT be Identified?

Concerns about a PiPoT’s behaviour may be identified by the following people/ procedures:

• police intervention or investigation;
• whistleblowing disclosure;
• safeguarding adults enquiry;
• safeguarding children investigation;
• complaints process;
• reports from members of the public;
• providers alerting commissioners of services;
• commissioner’s contract monitoring activity;
• reports from staff and volunteers; or
•  any other source of disclosure.

5. Whose Responsibility is it to Respond to a PiPoT?

5.1 Allegation

The STSAB partner agency (or service provider they commission) who first becomes aware of an allegation or concern will be the information owner and they have first responsibility for taking the appropriate action in line with this Protocol.

5.2 What should that response be?

Any allegation against people who work with adults with care and support needs should be reported immediately to a senior manager within that organisation and their PiPoT Lead. It should also be reported to their Human Resources (HR) as a disciplinary procedure may be appropriate.

The information owner relating to the allegation is expected to:

• consider if the information indicates that any immediate risk management actions are needed, or referrals into adult or children safeguarding processes;
• consider whether the allegation indicates a criminal offence has occurred or may occur. If so, the allegation must be reported to the Police; early liaison with Police should take place to agree next steps and to avoid contamination of evidence. If a criminal investigation is required, this may take primacy over an agency or organisation’s internal investigation (See Appendix 2: Factors to Consider as a suggested tool to help in this process);
• refer to the relevant Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) where the information indicates the person also works with and could pose a risk of harm to children;
• make a decision whether the information should be disclosed to the PiPoT’s employer;
  • when making a decision, consider any known history of conduct, complaints, cautions or convictions that may be relevant to the potential risk;
  • if disclosing, manage this disclosure in line with legal and best practice requirements for information sharing. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance states that the local authority’s relevant partners, and agencies providing universal care and support services, should have clear policies in line with those from the Safeguarding Adults Board to deal with this area of activity. Some agencies may have well established protocols for sharing information in these types of circumstance – such as the Common Law Police Disclosure process – whereas other agencies may not deal with these issues on a frequent basis and may need to have senior management oversight, and gain legal advice as required, on a case-by-case basis.
  • Where a disclosure is made, notify the relevant service commissioners and regulatory agencies.
• record the information and decisions clearly, including the rationale for any decision made (see also Appendix 3: Position of Trust Referral / Reporting Form for a suggested template example and Section 8, Recording of PiPoT Issues).
• records should be maintained in line with internal agency record keeping policies and requirements;
• where appropriate, notify and refer to statutory and other bodies responsible for professional regulation (such as the General Medical Council (GMC), Nursing and Midwifery Council, Social Work England, Independent Office for Police Conduct, The Charity Commission and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS);
• provide feedback at regular intervals to the relevant local authority (if there is a related safeguarding enquiry) and to their commissioning agency (if they have one);
• ensure the safety and protection of adults with care and support needs is central to their decision making.

Where the person responsible for investigating the allegation or the PiPoT Lead concludes it does not meet the definition of a PiPoT concern (see Section 2, Scope), the PiPoT Lead will make a record of the discussion and decision and the reasons for this conclusion. These details could be drawn upon if further concerns come about in relation to a PiPoT.

Where the person responsible for investigating the allegation and/or the PiPoT Lead concludes the allegation does meet the definition of a PiPoT concern (see Section 2, Scope), appropriate action must be taken in line with Section 5.2 What should the response be?

Where PiPoT allegations are identified by partner agencies, or services they commission, about their employee or volunteer, it will be necessary for the employer (or student body or voluntary organisation) to assess any potential risk to other adults with care and support needs who use their services and, if necessary, to take action to safeguard those adults. If the employer (or student body or voluntary organisation) is aware of abuse or neglect in their organisation, then they have a duty to address this and protect adults with care and support needs from harm as soon as possible. They must inform the local authority in accordance with the South Tyneside Safeguarding Adults Policy and Procedures and Care Quality Commission (CQC) (if a regulated care provider).

5.3 Support for employees

The employer also has a duty to consider what support and advice they will make available to their staff or volunteers against whom allegations have been made. Any PiPoT about whom there are allegations should be treated fairly and honestly. Their employer has a duty of care towards them. The employer should ensure that the employee or volunteer subject to the allegation is made aware of the allegation as soon as is reasonable and kept informed of the progress of the investigation. The employee or volunteer who has had allegation made against them can nominate a trade union representative or a work colleague to support them during the process. Similarly, any witnesses who are involved can also nominate a trade union representative or work colleague for support. The nominated work colleague must maintain and respect the sensitive and confidential nature of the process and any information which may be shared with them.

5.4 Employers, student bodies and voluntary organisations

Any employer, student body, or voluntary organisation who is responsible for a PiPoT where there is a concern or allegation raised is expected to:

• respond in individual cases where concerns are raised about PiPoT, ensuring that the risk is assessed, investigated where appropriate through internal employment processes, and that risk management actions and identified and implemented as appropriate to the individual case;
• ensure all adult or child safeguarding concerns that result from an allegation about a PiPoT are reported;
• where appropriate, notify and refer to external agencies; including to the CQC (where the PiPoT is working or volunteering in a CQC regulated organisation), statutory and other bodies responsible for professional regulation (such as the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council, the Charity Commission) and the DBS.
• provide feedback at regular intervals to the relevant local authority (if there is a related safeguarding enquiry) and to their commissioning agency (if they have one);
• ensure the safety and protection of adults with care and support needs is central to their decision making;
• have clear procedures in place setting out the process, including timescales, for investigation and what support and advice will be available to individuals against whom allegations have been made. Any allegation against people who work with adults should be reported immediately to a senior manager within the organisation. Employers, student bodies and voluntary organisations should have their own sources of advice (including legal advice) in place for dealing with such concerns;
• share information in line with this Protocol where it is known the PiPoT also has other employment or voluntary work with adults with care and support needs or children;
• if a person subject to a PiPoT investigation attempts to leave their employment by resigning to avoid the investigation or disciplinary process, the employer (or student body or voluntary organisation) is entitled not to accept that resignation, conclude the process and, if the outcome warrants it, dismiss the employee or volunteer instead. This is also the case where the person intends to take up legitimate employment or a course of study;
• if an organisation removes an individual (paid worker or unpaid volunteer) from work with an adult with care and support needs (or would have, had the person not left first) because the person poses a risk of harm to adults, the organisation must make a referral to the Disclosure and Barring Service. It is an offence to fail to make a referral without good reason. For full details of when to refer an individual to the DBS and referral when the situation does not meet the legal duty, please visit the DBS website.
• consider, at the end of any PiPoT enquiries, if the findings demonstrate evidence of a theme or pattern in the context of past and historic PiPoT allegations; identify potential themes or system wide issues within the organisation; and ensure that appropriate action is taken by their organisation so that learning from past events is applied to reduce the risk of harm to adults with care and support needs in the future.

Information and decisions should be recorded clearly, including the rationale for any decision made. Records should be maintained in line with internal agency record keeping policies and requirements.

Employers, student bodies and voluntary organisations should have their own sources of advice (including legal advice) in place for dealing with such concerns and allegations.

The flowchart in Appendix 1 provides an overview of the process for managing PiPoT allegations.

6. Information Sharing

The South Tyneside Multi-agency Information Sharing Agreement for Adults  supports lawful information sharing between agencies to protect adults at risk from abuse by setting out an agreed framework.  It contains best practice and standards which staff from partner agencies need to meet in order to fulfil their duty of care in relation to the sharing of information for the purposes of responding to or preventing abuse or neglect of adults at risk.

The PiPoT should be informed about the allegation as soon as possible. Decisions on sharing information must be justifiable and proportionate, based on the potential or actual harm to adults or children at risk and the rationale for decision making should always be recorded.

If the PiPoT asks the information owner not to share the information, a decision must be made by the data controller, in line with the principles contained within this Protocol, whether to agree. If it is agreed that information will not be shared, the rationale for this must be recorded. It may need to be qualified should more detail comes to light to change this decision. The PiPoT should be made aware if a decision is made at a later date to share information. All decisions to share or not share information, and their rationale should be clearly recorded.

Under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018, information relevant to adult safeguarding will often be data that the Act categorises as “special category personal data”, meaning it is sensitive and personal. Wherever possible, individuals and agencies should seek consent to share information and be open and honest with the individual from the outset as to why, what, how and with whom, their information will be shared. If consent is not given or cannot be gained, the GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018 do not prevent, or limit, the sharing of information for the purposes of keeping adults with care and support needs safe.

Individuals and agencies should consider the following information sharing principles to help when making decisions about sharing personal and sensitive information:

• Necessary and proportionate – When taking decisions about what information to share, you should consider how much information you need to release. Not sharing more data than is necessary to be of use is a key element of the GDPR and DPA 2018, and you should consider the impact of disclosing information on the information subject and any third parties. Information must be proportionate to the need and level of risk.
• Relevant – Only information that is relevant to the purposes should be shared with those who need it. This allows others to do their job effectively and make informed decisions.
• Adequate – Information should be adequate for its purpose. Information should be of the right quality to ensure that it can be understood and relied upon.
• Accurate – Information should be accurate and up to date and should clearly distinguish between fact and opinion. If the information is historical then this should be explained.
• Timely – Information should be shared in a timely fashion to reduce the risk of missed opportunities to offer support and protection to adults with care and support needs. Timeliness is key in emergency situations, and it may not be appropriate to seek consent for information sharing if it could cause delays and therefore place an adult with care and support needs at increased risk of harm. Practitioners should ensure that sufficient information is shared, as well as consider the urgency with which to share it.
• Secure – Wherever possible, information should be shared in an appropriate, secure way. Practitioners must always follow their organisation’s policy on security for handling personal information.
• Record – Information sharing decisions should be recorded, whether or not the decision is taken to share. If the decision is to share, reasons should be cited including what information has been shared and with whom, in line with organisational procedures. If the decision is not to share, it is good practice to record the reasons for this decision and discuss them with the requester. In line with each organisation’s own retention policy, the information should not be kept any longer than is necessary. In some rare circumstances, this may be indefinitely, but if this is the case, there should be a review process scheduled at regular intervals to ensure data is not retained where it is unnecessary to do so.

In each case involving an allegation against a PiPoT, a balance must be struck between the duty to protect people with care and support needs from harm or abuse and the effect upon individuals of information about them being shared (for example, upon the person’s Article 8 Human Rights (the right to private and family life) which states that: everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence, and There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety, or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Each case must be judged on its own facts when deciding whether to interfere with a person’s Article 8 rights. The issue is essentially, one of proportionality.

Information may be shared by an individual or an agency in the expectation that it will not be shared with others, i.e. it will be kept confidential. Often, a person will preface the disclosure with ‘I am telling you this in confidence’ or, after making the disclosure, will say ‘you won’t tell anyone will you?’ However, this guarantee must not be given because confidential information can be shared if it is justified as being in the public’s interest (e.g. for the detection and prevention of crime and for the protection of children or adults with care and support need at risk of harm or neglect). It is a matter for professional judgment, acting in accordance with information sharing protocols and the principles of the DPA to decide whether breaching a PiPoT’s confidentiality is in the public interest.

Should a disciplinary process be instigated the outcome cannot be shared due to the individual’s confidentiality; however, the relevant individuals can be informed that the process has concluded and reassured that appropriate action has been taken.

7. Roles and Responsibilities

7.1 PiPoT lead

The PiPoT lead records issues according to individual agency arrangements. The record should include details of the person referring, the PiPoT, the allegation, how the allegation was followed up and resolved, the decisions reached, and the action taken. The record should be kept in accordance with Data Protection Act 2018 principles and should only be shared in accordance with this Protocol.

If not a Safeguarding Adult or Safeguarding Children case, the PiPoT lead will investigate to ascertain the truth or otherwise of allegations and be responsible for deciding what information should be shared with whom and on what basis, bearing in mind the contents of this Protocol. This decision must be recorded in accordance with best practice.

At the conclusion of any PiPoT enquiry, the PiPoT lead will consider if the findings demonstrate evidence of a theme or pattern in the context of past and historic PiPoT allegations; identify potential system wide issues within the organisation; and ensure that appropriate action is taken by their organisation so that learning from past events is applied to reduce the risk of harm to adults with care and support needs in the future.

7.2 Managing officers

The managing officer is the local authority representative who is coordinating any Adult Safeguarding Enquiry, so this section applies in circumstances where the local authority is responding to an adult safeguarding concern (and where a PiPoT issue is also present).

The managing officer informs the PiPoT lead in all cases where a PiPoT is involved so that individual agency recording arrangements can be followed.

Where there is no concurrent Police investigation, the managing officer will be responsible for deciding what information should be shared with whom and on what basis, bearing in mind the contents of this Protocol. This decision must be recorded in accordance with best practice.

Where it is appropriate to do so, the managing office will involve the PiPoT’s employer in the safeguarding process, and inform Commissioning and Care Contracts if the employer is a contracted service and involve them in the safeguarding process.

Ensure that when an adult with care and support needs has been safeguarded but the PiPoT process continues, the adult is monitored according to individual agency arrangements until the PiPoT process is concluded.

Where appropriate, liaise with the CQC (where the PiPoT is working or volunteering in a CQC regulated organisation), statutory and other bodies responsible for professional regulation (such as the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council) and the DBS if there are concerns about the employer’s fitness to operate and safeguard adults with care and support needs.

Liaise with other local authority Safeguarding Adults Teams where there are cross border issues.

Liaise with Children Teams and make a referral to the appropriate LADO if there are specific issues about the PiPoT’s contact with children.

7.3 Police

Report to their PiPoT lead when they know a PiPoT has behaved in a way as described in Section 2, Scope.

Where it is a Police led investigation, be responsible for deciding what information should be shared with whom and on what basis, bearing in mind the contents of this Protocol and their responsibilities under the Common Law Police Disclosure Guidance. This decision must be recorded in accordance with best practice.

Request that the employer considers taking appropriate action in line with their own procedures to ensure adults at risk are protected from any potential abuse and harm.

Where it is a Police led investigation, request that the employer carries out their own risk assessment(s) and consider referral to the Disclosure and Barring Services (DBS) and / or other registration bodies as appropriate.

Where appropriate, liaise with the CQC (where the PiPoT is working or volunteering in a CQC regulated organisation), statutory and other bodies responsible for professional regulation (such as the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council) and the DBS if there are concerns about the employer’s fitness to operate and safeguard adults with care and support needs.

Liaise with other local authority Safeguarding Adults and Children’s Teams where there are out of area issues.

Make a referral to the LADO if there are specific issues about the PiPoT’s contact with children.

Seek advice as appropriate from the South Tyneside Safeguarding Adults Team and attend / share relevant police information at any subsequent PiPoT strategy meeting. Any police information shared is for safeguarding purposes only and must not be used for any subsequent disciplinary proceedings without the permission of Northumbria Police.

7.4 The service commissioner

Where a service commissioner is aware that a service it commissions employs a PiPoT who is under investigation, they  will ensure the commissioned service does the following:

• takes appropriate action in line with their own procedures to ensure adults with care and support needs are protected from abuse and harm;
• carries out appropriate risk management procedures, including consideration of referral to the DBS and other registration bodies;
• provides feedback at regular intervals until case conclusion;
• monitors the activities of commissioned services in their compliance of this Protocol;
• where appropriate, liaises with the CQC (where the PiPoT is working or volunteering in a CQC regulated organisation), statutory and other bodies responsible for professional regulation (such as the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council) and the DBS if there are concerns about the employer’s fitness to operate and safeguard adults with care and support needs;
• regularly updates the service commissioner’s PiPoT lead until case conclusion.

8. Recording of PiPoT Issues

Record-keeping is an integral part of all adult safeguarding processes to ensure that adults with care and support needs are safeguarded, and that organisations and individuals are accountable for their actions when responding to allegations about a PiPoT. All cases should be recorded in accordance with agencies internal recording as per this Protocol.

Individuals with responsibility for the investigation and management of PiPoT allegations must, as far as is practicable, contemporaneously document a complete account of the events, actions and any decisions taken, together with their rationale. This is to enable any objective person to understand the basis of any decision that was made, together with any subsequent action taken.

Records of actions taken to investigate PiPoT allegations which have been found to be without substance must also be retained to build up any history.

The Safeguarding Adult Board will be informed of any themes and trends associated to the PiPOT process. These might also be shared with any other relevant party to ensure the safety of adults with care and support needs.

A chronology or log of key events, decisions and actions taken should also be maintained to provide a ready overview of progress.

Individuals (including a PiPoT who is the subject of the recording) are entitled to have access to their personal records whether they are stored electronically or manually. It is therefore important that information recorded, is fair, accurate and balanced.

The purpose of the PiPoT record-keeping is to:

• enable accurate information to be given in response to any future request for a reference;
• provide clarification in cases where a future DBS Disclosure reveals information from the police that an allegation was made but did not result in a prosecution or conviction;
• prevent unnecessary re-investigation if an allegation resurfaces after a period of time;
• enable patterns of behaviour which may pose a risk to adults with care and support needs to be identified;
• to assure the South Tyneside Safeguarding Adults Board that adults with care and support needs are protected from harm.

9.Complex Cases

Many PiPoT allegations will be proportionately dealt with through straightforward employment management processes. Other circumstances will be more complex and require appropriate planning at each stage. This may include:

9.1 Identifying key stakeholders

• the Employer (supervisor/line manager/ HR manager;
• the commissioner of a commissioned service contract;
• the appropriate service regulator (e.g. CQC, Ofsted);
• the Police where there is a criminal concern;
• the social worker of an adult with care and support needs;
• Children’s Services if children are involved;
• other case specific e.g. University representative if a student.

9.2 PiPoT planning / discussion meetings

The relevant PiPoT lead or managing officer will need to decide, on the grounds of urgency and risk, the best way to share information, risk assess and plan the lines of enquiry. The options would be a discussion, conference calls or a formal meeting. More complex cases and / or those with many stakeholders are likely to require a meeting. Appropriate records should be kept. The Appendices contain templates for agendas and minute keeping.

The planning discussion / meeting should cover the following areas and be clearly recorded:

• confidentiality agreement;
• sharing the PiPoT allegations and purpose of the meeting;
• information from data controller and attendees;
• risk assessment;
• whether a crime has been committed;
• agree lines of enquiry (who is doing what and by when);
• identify actions to be taken in respect of adults with care and support needs;
• identify who will support the PiPoT;
• timescales for actions and feedback; and
• agree next step and actions.

9.3 Progress monitoring and timescales

It is important that PiPoT allegations are managed in a timely way. This is the role of the appropriate PiPoT lead overseeing the PiPoT enquiry. Timescales should be identified at the planning stage. Regular monitoring is essential to ensure procedures are kept on track and risks are managed. Additional meetings can take place at any time as deemed necessary.

9.4 Evaluation and conclusion

It is important these cases have a robust evaluation and conclusion. This should include the following areas:

• share the results of enquiries (e.g. results of disciplinary processes) and assess if they are adequate or if further work is required;
• risk assess, including transferable risk (e.g. child protection risk to adults with care and support needs);
• make recommendations for required actions Feedback mechanisms (to whom, by whom); and
• determine if further work is required or case closure.

See also Appendix 5: PiPoT Case Closure Agenda and Meeting Template.

Appendix 1: Flowchart

PiPoT Flowchart (opens as a PDF) provides an overview of the process for managing concerns and allegations against people who work with adults with care and support needs.

Appendix 2: Factors to Consider in Relation to PiPoT Notifications

The following applies to all cases where current or historical concern, suspicion or allegation arises in connection with:

1. The PiPoT’s own work/voluntary activity (Adults and Children)
2. The PiPoT ‘s life outside work i.e. concerning adults at risk in the family, social circle
3. The PiPoT’s life outside work i.e. concerning risks to children, the individual’s own children or other children.

 

Appendix 3: Position of Trust Referral / Reporting Form

Referral / reporting form (opens in Word)

Appendix 4: PiPoT Planning Meeting Agenda and Template

Agenda for planning meeting (opens in Word)

Appendix 5: PiPoT Case Closure Agenda and Meeting Template

Agenda for closure meeting (opens in Word)

Appendix 6: Agency good practice checklist

• Does your organisation have an adult PiPoT lead?
• Does your organisation have an Adult PiPoT record system to record allegations, the steps taken, the decisions made on actions, or no action taken, and the basis for taking this position?
• Does your organisation include reference to how Adult PiPoT issues have been dealt with in your assurance report to SAB?
• Does your organisation consider what support is offered to a person if an Adult PiPoT alleged to have caused harm?
• Has your organisation established sources of advice (including, where necessary, legal advice.

Appendix 7: ADASS Top Tips for Directors on dealing with allegations against people in a position of trust (PiPoT)

The Care Act 2014 states that local authorities and their partners should have clear policies, in line with the local Safeguarding Adults Board policies, for dealing with allegations against people who work, either in a paid or unpaid capacity, with adults with care and support needs.

Safeguarding Adults Boards need to establish and agree a framework and process for how allegations against people working with adults with care and support needs (for example, those in positions of trust) should be notified and responded to. Whilst the focus of safeguarding adults work is to safeguard one or more identified adults with care and support needs, there are occasions when incidents are reported that do not involve an adult at risk, but indicate, nevertheless, that a risk may be posed to adults at risk by a person in a position of trust (Care an Support Statutory Guidance).

Each partner agency needs to provide assurance to the Safeguarding Adults Board that arrangements within their organisations to deal with allegations against people in a position of trust are functioning effectively.

Examples of concerns could include allegations that relate to a person who works with adults with care and support needs who has:

• behaved in a way that has harmed, or may have harmed, an adult with care and support needs or a child
• possibly committed a criminal offence against, or related to, an adult with care and support needs or a child
• behaved towards an adult or child in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to an adult with care and support needs.

The NHS Safeguarding Children, Young People and Adults at Risk in the NHS: safeguarding accountability framework states that the designated professional for safeguarding adults should be informed where there is an allegation that a member of staff in an ICB or primary care service has abused or neglected an adult in their personal life.

How to deal with allegations against people who work with children is clearly defined in Working Together to Safeguard Children, with the clearly defined and commonly understood role of the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) being central to this process.

The Designated Adult Safeguarding Manager role was removed as a requirement from the original Care Act draft guidance following consultation, however, an equivalent role is considered best practice.

The term ‘person/ people in a position of trust’, which is in common use by Safeguarding Adults Boards, has no clear, legal definition within the Care Act or any other legislation; the Disclosure and Barring Scheme does not recognise this term, but considers the parties with legitimate interest test for disclosure of information.

A ‘person alleged to have caused harm’ may also be a PiPoT in safeguarding concerns.

Clarity is needed about how referrals should be made and how they are dealt with, including who should inform the PiPoT that an allegation(s) have been made and how and when this should be undertaken; GDPR issues in relation to PiPoT referral information need to be clarified.

For more information, please see ADASS website.