Protecting and supporting vulnerable adults in Scotland: Impacting public policy, services, health and welfare
Submitting Institution
University of DundeeUnit of Assessment
Social Work and Social PolicySummary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Public Health and Health Services
Summary of the impact
Research within the UoA influenced national policy developments,
implementation, and practice
guidelines regarding protecting/supporting vulnerable adults. The Unit's
research, led by Professor
Hogg, was used in the development of the Adult Support and Protection
(Scotland) Act 2007 which
now guides practice with all vulnerable adults in Scotland. The Unit's
research was used to
develop a multi-agency Adult Support and Protection (ASP) self-evaluation
methodology and
toolkit. Over 50% of adult protection committees in Scotland have adopted
its use. The Unit's
research has led to the development of a national strategy and practice
guidelines to ensure all
vulnerable adults with profound and multiple learning difficulties in
Scotland have a right to
appropriate health care provision, including invasive procedures.
Underpinning research
Though a wide range of research within the unit relates to supporting and
protecting vulnerable
adults and their carers, this impact case study focusses on three linked
research projects.
The first area of research (Hogg et al 2009 a & b) examined cases
entailing adult protection in
Scotland prior to the implementation of the Adult Support and Protection
(Scotland) Act 2007. The
study examined the agency and interagency working in adult protection
cases, provided a baseline
to compare such activity before and after implementation of the Act, and
provided the groundwork
for future audit in such cases after implementation of the Act. The study
utilised a multiple
methods, in-depth case study approach. Each case study (n=23) involved
documentary analysis of
service user/patient files (primarily social work), followed by
semi-structured interviews with all
involved professionals. Detailed chronologies were then compiled of events
and interactions over
the course of each case, supplemented by professionals' explanations and
reflections on the
process of response. This information was synthesised in a tabular
chronology with agency and
interagency communication and activity coded and organised into key
themes. This research
highlighted that occupational cultures affected adult protection activity,
how cases were
conceptualised or framed as adult protection cases or otherwise impacted
response, and
operational considerations impacted adult support and protection.
The second area of research (Hogg & May, 2012 & 2011) followed on
directly from the research
outlined above. A self-evaluation resource for adult support and
protection activities was developed
and pilot tested in 15 of the 28 multi-agency partnerships across
Scotland. This research used a
survey methodology of all pilot sites. The utility of the resource was
demonstrated as a mechanism
for enabling multi-agency partnerships to evaluate the effectiveness of
their own policy and
practice and as a benchmarking resource.
The third area of research focused on health care procedures viewed as
invasive by the family
members and paid carers of people with profound and multiple learning
disabilities. Specifically the
research aimed to establish the extent to which barriers exist which
precluded the delivery of such
procedures in service settings and what these barriers were. The research
identified ways in which
barriers may be overcome and described examples of good practice in which
barriers have been
overcome. The research consisted of three components:
- Symposium — A review by experts of evidence and workshops with
practitioners to elicit
their views;
- A national survey of policy and practice in Scotland with respect to
delivering invasive
procedures in educational, health and social care facilities;
- Synthesis of information by an expert committee and a national
reference group.
The results identified healthcare procedures judged by professionals and
family carers as
"invasive" and examined barriers to their delivery in service settings.
Practice guidelines were
developed based on the research and have been included in the Scottish
Government's strategy
for improving the lives of people with learning disabilities.
References to the research
Hogg, J., & May, D. (2012). The development and piloting of the
self-evaluation of adult support
and protection activity in Scotland: Resource handbook. Journal of Adult
Protection, 14(4), 176-187.
Hogg, J., Johnson, F., Daniel, B., & Ferguson, A. (2009a).
Interagency Collaboration in Adult
Support and Protection in Scotland: Processes and Barriers. Volume 1: Main
Report. Dundee:
White Top Research Unit, University of Dundee.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/924/0095150.pdf
Hogg, J., Johnson, F., Daniel, B., & Ferguson, A. (2009b).
Interagency Collaboration in Adult
Support and Protection in Scotland: Processes and Barriers. Volume 2:
Recommendations.
Dundee: White Top Research Unit, University of Dundee.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/924/0095151.pdf
Garrard, B., Lambe, L. & Hogg, J. (2010) Invasive Procedures:
Minimising Risks and Maximising
Rights: Improving practice in the delivery of invasive procedures for
people with profound and
multiple learning disabilities Project Report and recommendations. Dundee:
PAMIS and White Top
Research Unit, University of Dundee
Details of the impact
The findings of the initial study into multi-agency ASP activity
contributed to the work of the
Steering Committee for the Adults Support and Protection (Scotland)
Bill of which Professor Hogg
was a member. The Act now guides practice with all vulnerable adults in
Scotland. The outcome
of the research is therefore reflected in the subsequent Act and the work
of the Implementation
Committee of which he was also a member. This Committee was established to
ensure continual
engagement with stakeholders during the implementation of the Act.
Membership of the group
included representatives from regulatory bodies, local authorities, NHS
Boards, police and a
number of voluntary organisations. After the Act was passed, it was agreed
that the group should
continue through the implementation period in recognition of its much
valued role in informing the
work of the Government. Members represent the views of their organisation
and report back to
their organisations, as appropriate, the outcome of discussions held at
the meetings. Throughout
this process the principal investigator contributed to the development and
implementation of the
Act (C2, C3, C4).
In the light of the findings, and at the instigation of the Scottish
Government, a resource for self-evaluation
of multi-agency ASP activity was developed by Professor Hogg in discussion
with a
wide range of agencies, including the Social Work Inspection Agency, the
Scottish Government,
and ASP multi-agency partnerships. Two national conferences of
stakeholders were held on the
ASP resource, in Perth in 2010 and Glasgow in 2011. The outcome was a
resource handbook
which has been piloted in 14 ASP Partnerships (50%) in Scotland and
revised in the light of
feedback. The evaluation of the Resource indicated that seven ASP
partnerships had changed
their practice as a result of shortcomings revealed through
self-evaluation (see Hogg & May 2012,
p.183).
The chair of the National Adult Protection Committee Convenors Committee
has subsequently
recommended adoption of the resource as a benchmarking tool for reporting
to the Scottish
Government. The Care Inspectorate has indicated that the resource will be
used in modified form
from 2013 to evaluate the adult protection component of adult services
(C7). The resource has
been published on the Scottish Government's website. In 2010 13 of the 29
Adult Protection
Committees in Scotland had undertaken self-evaluation and audit activity
of their work, mostly
using the approach developed in Dundee. In 2012 all but one of the 29
Adult Protection
Committees had undertaken self-evaluation and case file audits (C1, C6).
The invasive procedures research led to the establishment of a Short-Life
Working Group which
developed a Scottish quality framework for the delivery of invasive
procedures in health, education
and social care setting. The recently launched strategy for improving the
quality of life for people
with learning disabilities is recommending that all service providers
follow these guidelines (C5).
The current impact has been on policy development and initial
implementation.
Sources to corroborate the impact
C1. Ekosgen (2013). Adult Support and Protection in Scotland: A Detailed
Review of the 2010-2012
Biennial Reports. Glasgow: Ekosgen.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00418395.pdf
(pages, iv, 16, 23).
C2. Deputy Director Adult Protection Team, Scottish Government.
C3. Chair, National Adults Support and Protection Convenor's Committee.
C4. Senior Policy Lead, Health Protection Policy Team, Mental Health
Division, Scottish
Government.
C5. Scottish Government (2013). The keys to life Improving quality of
life for people with
learning disabilities. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. (pgs 101, 102, 108,
110). (available
on request)
C6. Selected minutes from Adult Support and Protection Committee meetings
from local
authorities across Scotland indicating use of Self-Evaluation Audit:
a. Greater Glasgow Adult Protection Committee
http://library.nhsggc.org.uk/mediaAssets/CHP%20Inverclyde/Biennial%20Report%202012.pdf
b. Western Isles: http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/socialwork/mentalhealth/documents/AdultProtectionProcedures.pdf
c. Scottish Borders Adult Protection Committee:
http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/downloads/file/2826/adult_protection_committee_2010-11
C7. Minutes of the Meeting of Adult Protection Chairs, Wednesday 1 August
2012 at 10.30am
St Andrews House, Edinburgh. (available on request)