Agenda item

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding submits a report providing the ASC Scrutiny Commission with an overview of the issues relating to self-neglect, from the perspective of Adult Social Care.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Safeguarding submitted a report providing the ASC Scrutiny Commission with an overview of the issues relating to self-neglect, from the perspective of Adult Social Care.

The following was noted:

• The report drew on the challenging and tragic circumstances and learning from reviews.
• Mental Capacity assessments could determine the legal options of professionals for intervention.
• Adult Social Care could be challenged as to inaction, however, there was not always a legal route to act without consent and cooperation.
• Two examples were set out in the slides as attached with the agenda.

In discussion with Members, the following was noted:

• The approach had moved on from using a vulnerable adults risk management framework into safeguarding adults procedures.  Increased self-neglect training had drawn in examples, and workshops had been undertaken.  Multi-agency work was in place and had been strengthened by pulling it into the safeguarding process.
• In terms of benchmarking, it was important to consider who to look at.  There was a need to look at what was being aimed for if data was benchmarked.  Numbers didn’t always demonstrate if work was effective.
• It could be considered as to how to identify and report issues in different communities.
• In terms of campaigning, the nature of self-neglect meant that people did not engage, therefore, persistence and consistency were needed.
• In terms of how Leicester compared to the national picture, themes were consistent both nationally and locally.  Section 42 of the report looked at enquiries taken at an individual level, and the Safeguarding Adults Review was covered in Section 44.  A small proportion of around 5-6% were situations which required a review.  It was very complex, and it was difficult to maintain consistency, this was often due to a lack of engagement.
• Locally, training, development and learning were supported.  Self-neglect was a theme in the safeguarding process, and it was checked as to whether the data was moving in the right direction and areas that had been weaknesses were addressed.
• The possibility of an information campaign on the issue was discussed.  It was suggested that it would need to remain a partnership issue.  It was added that much of this was done with government money, but there were pathways through safeguarding information.
• In response to a query on how front-line staff were supported, it was explained that staff were supported through looking at resources and sharing learning on mental capacity and understanding.  The guidance was new, but the process was consolidating existing practices.  Additionally, a recruitment process was under way for a Safeguarding Adults Practice Lead, so there would be a dedicated staff member whose role was safeguarding practice.
• In response to a query on whether there was a threshold on where intervention appeared necessary, it was explained that mental capacity was not binary, so the issue was more complex than just a threshold.  It was important to recognise that people had a right to make decisions about their lives.

AGREED:

1)    That the update be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account by the lead officers.

3)    To be considered as to how to identify and report issues in different communities.

4)    That consideration be given to an information campaign.