Procedure for Safeguarding Adult Reviews
Making a decision on SAR methodology
Once it has been agreed to commission a SAR, the SAR Delivery Panel will decide on the most appropriate and proportionate methodology to use. The Essential Guide to Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) Chapter 16 – provides comprehensive information on SAR Methodologies
Whichever SAR methodology is employed, the following key elements should be included:
SAR Delivery Panel – scrutinises information submitted to the review. The panel size should be proportionate to the nature and complexity of the review but should comprise a minimum of three members in addition to an appropriate chair, independent from who made the referral, and any other relevant agencies.
SAR Delivery Panel Chair – should be independent from who made the referral, and with appropriate skills, knowledge and experience. This may be the Independent Author.
Terms of Reference – compiled by the SAR Delivery Panel and published as part of the review. These may be amended in consultation with the Independent Author as the review progresses.
Early discussions with the adult if alive and if appropriate, their family, carers and representative – to agree on if and how they will be involved and how frequently they will be updated. Where appropriate, advocacy can be offered (Safeguarding Adults Review information for families and carers).
Appropriate involvement of professionals and organisations who were working with the adult – to contribute their perspectives without fear of being blamed for actions they took in good faith.
SAR report and recommendations – should provide a sound analysis of what happened, why and what action needs to be taken to prevent reoccurrence, if possible; be written in plain English; and contain findings of practical value to organisations and professionals.
The following should be considered in selecting a SAR methodology:
- choosing the right methodology
- complexity and nature of the review
- purpose and learning obectives
- engagement with adults, family and practitioners
- legal, ethical and prodedural context
- timeframes, resources and urgency of learning
- public interest and transparency
- existing learning and local context