Glossary

Local Resources

tri.x Resources

Using this Procedures Site

Amendments

https://trixcms.trixonline.co.uk/api/content/barnsleyadults

Caseloads & prioritisation procedure.pdf

                                operational owner kwai mo/ linda richardson author shvonne nakonecznyi/kerry kilburn /amanda bannister version no. 1 date written or reviewed 08/08/2023 date of impact assessment - impact assessor - ratified by slt date ratified 13/11/2023 date of next review 12/11/2026 procedure for caseloads and prioritisation 
    1. purpose   the aim of this procedure is to set guidelines for managers and staff around effective caseload management and the prioritisation of requests. this is to help ensure that:   • people get the care and support they need in a timely manner, • staff have safe caseloads which allows them to work effectively with people and            families • we have a transparent and lawful way of prioritising requests • we ensure that there are robust governance arrangements for the oversight of            safe caseloads and escalation of associated risks and issues.    2. related legislation, policies and procedures  care act statutory guidance   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/care-act-statutory-guidance/care-and-support-statutory-guidance   online procedures   https://barnsleyadults.trixonline.co.uk/contents/contents   3.  risk factors    4. personnel   • social work practitioners  • advanced practitioners  • team managers  • service managers  • heads of service  • service director  • director of adult social services   5.  procedures/protocol/practice guidance/policy   caseloads   team managers are responsible for ensuring they monitor and manage caseloads within their teams. if they feel there are risks and issues associated with caseloads they should escalate these to their service manager / head of service where further discussions may be required with the service director or director of adult social care. the following procedure is designed to help team managers to do this effectively.  
   everyone should be clear that the system will not simply be based on numbers, nor a definitive statement of what a reasonable caseload should be. it should be seen as a basic framework to aid effective workload monitoring and support. it will never substitute the professional judgement of a team manager in consultation with their advanced practitioners.     managers should consider a number of factors including the experience and capabilities of the worker, the complexity of the case or task and any unique personal or professional factors. considering intervention levels, risk and travel time as these variants can have a significant bearing on case allocation, as they all have an emotional or time implication on a worker’s ability to respond. these factors are informed through regular case discussions and supervision between workers and line managers where caseloads are adjusted accordingly.  there is likely to be a variation in caseload numbers and the length of time cases are allocated to workers between different service areas. this is due to the nature of the work undertaken and associated risk management.    the below model contains a baseline benchmark for what would be a reasonable and manageable number of notionally “standard” cases for a full-time practitioner allowing time within their contractual working week to deal with admin, respond to crises and the many other calls on their time.   the following is to be used as a guide by staff and managers. professional judgement will still need to be used depending on the individual case, or circumstances. managers and staff should have a clear rationale for making allocations outside of the guidelines below. this may include if a staff member is on sick leave with no agreed return date or long-term sick leave, extended periods of leave over 1 week, or agreed recommendations from occupational health:  • assistant social care practitioners 18-22  • social workers 20-25 • nqsw undertaking an asye aim to have a starting caseload of up to 16 (80% caseload as per skills for care recommendations), until approximately 9 months when this can increase up to between 18- 20 (16-18).  on completion of the asye programme in 12-24 months, the expectation would be to work towards 20-25 cases.  • advanced social workers 5-8 • team manager does not hold a caseload.  the above numbers are to be adjusted on a pro-rata basis for part-time staff.  for example, a social worker employed on a contract of 18.5 hours per week (0.5fte) would be expected to have a caseload of 10-12.    
    caseloads – process for exceeding levels  there will be times when caseloads are higher than the caseload standards set out above. this should be short-term and/or based on a specific professional judgement around the type of work, any special considerations and the ability of the worker.   if a team manager is experiencing caseloads which breach these levels across multiple staff members (3 or more) for a period of longer than 8 weeks or backlogs of allocations are growing they should escalate this formally to their service manager / head of service. it is the responsibility of the service manager / head of service to agree on an appropriate response to this. this may involve requesting mutual aid from another team, reducing the number of face-to-face assessments or deploying greater use of the trusted assessor model. the service manager / head of service should ensure that the service director and director are sighted on this. the corporate risk register should be updated to reflect the identified issues and appropriate response deployed.   service managers should discuss caseload numbers with the senior leadership team on a quarterly basis using the caseload tracker. this should focus on the teams they have responsibility for and cover:   • caseloads across these teams • how this has changed over time  • number of staff with caseloads in excess of the guidelines  • number of unallocated cases   prioritisation    in ordinary circumstances, requests for assessment and care and support will be allocated and discharged as per the dates when they were received. this will ensure that people receive assessments and care and support in a timely manner and that safeguarding concerns are investigated promptly.   in circumstances where teams are under pressure and the team is unlikely to be able to respond to the majority of items within local and national timescales the advanced practitioner and team manager will need to use their professional judgement to effectively prioritise requests and resource deployment. each case will be considered individually and all relevant considerations taken into account; requests will be different and judgements will be based on the managers reading of the referral. the manager should use the following to aid decision-making:   • high priority for allocation   • medium priority for allocation      • low priority for allocation   
  high priority / high complexity medium priority / normal complexity  low priority / low complexity • immediate hospital discharge; • crisis or near to breakdown of care, carer or services; • immediate safeguarding actions; • immediate risks; • immediate changes impacting on wellbeing; • legal requirements / deadlines, e.g. social circumstances report, court of protection, care and treatment reviews, community deprivation of liberty; • high complexity and intensity of needs; • overdue due dates for allocations that have become urgent; • financial issues that are jeopardising services being provided; • direct payments requiring urgent review; • end of life support; • upcoming events/meetings; • article 5 or 8 hra98 breaches impacting on wellbeing; • police information requests.  • new assessment requests with low risk; • settled cases with community dols requests; • notice given to leave accommodation or end services; • people moving into bmbc  from another borough; • process or funding disputes; • carers stress and carers assessments with low risk; • mha assessments; • requests relating to settled support plans and met needs; • accommodation requests where the person is settled and a planned move is requested; • mca and best interests requests; • planned chc dst meetings; • actions from mdt meetings, e.g. marac; • other agency requests. • financial assessments; • direct payment and commissioning audit feedback that can await annual review; • mdt requests such as chc review or mca requests where there is no planned event; • people detained under mha long-term in hospital, not ready for discharge; • planned transitions that are not due yet; • uplifts and financial adjustments for provisions.    6.  related documentation   as above 7. references  safe standards and case allocation , lga   https://www.local.gov.uk/our-support/workforce-and-hr-support/social-workers/standards-employers-social-workers-england-2   workload management for social work  
   https://unison-scotland.org/wp-content/uploads/workloadsupservisionupdated-1.pdf   care act statutory guidance   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/care-act-statutory-guidance/care-and-support-statutory-guidance   caseloads report   https://barnsleycouncil.sharepoint.com/sites/bi/sitepages/powerbi.aspx   8.  glossary   9. appendices     


Caseload Management and Weighting Practice Guidance_.pdf

 adult social care case-load management and weighting practice guidance date march 2025  with thanks to rotherham metropolitan borough council   operational owner: kwai mo & linda richardson  author: amanda bannister  version number: 2 date written/ reviewed: march 2025 date of equalities impact assessment:  impact assessor:  ratified by: slt meeting  date ratified: 23 april 2025 date for next review: june 2026            
 asc caseload management and weighting practice guidance this caseload management practice guidance has been developed to enable you to under-stand the complexity, ambiguity, diversity and demands placed upon yourself to undertake your social care statutory duties.  prior to your supervision, you should use this practice guidance to provide an overview of each of your cases in preparation of your case load discussion with your supervisor.  this tool provides a transparent method for escalating any significant demands or unmet needs to your manager, ensuring your concerns are addressed and promoting safe working practices. whilst there is no direct number that constitutes a safe case load for example high vol-ume/lower complexity, low volume/high complexity, short-term/long-term, the procedure for caseloads & prioritisation caseloads-and-prioritisation-procedure.pdf aimed to support safe caseloads for practitioners, this guidance builds on the aims to take a holistic view of case-load weightings for practitioners.   in addition, this practice guidance enables: 1. effective and equitable caseload management  2. consideration of staffing capacity against resources and demand 3. pro-active workflow management 4. having the right tools to do the job – work life balance. 5. a healthy workplace – provides greater resilience and ownership. 6. effective service delivery through a happier and more resilient workforce  within caseload management it is also important to consider the impact cases may have on individual practitioners. one case may be more emotive or challenging to a practitioner due to other pertinent circumstance. when undertaking the personal scoring practitioners should consider complexity, risk, emotional and psychological impact as well as wider deter-minant factors. practitioners may like to consider a rag rating in terms of personal impact ahead of a planned supervision and then review this with their supervisor alongside the overall case rag rating. 1-4 green, 5-7, amber, 8-10, red     caseload management scoring matrix 
 domain score complexity complexity is not just around the nature of the case, or risk management, it is also around the volume and intensity of a case  • number of professional involved • number of contacts with service user, family,  other stakeholders, professional  • level of professional skills required 1 point – contact with other agencies either mini-mal or operating as regularised / unproblematic or standard.  2 points – contact with other agencies changeable, requiring initiation and/or maintenance.  3 points – multiple or complex contact with other agencies requiring careful negotiation / advocacy/ development or other high input.  risk risks management relates to your open cases but also relates to you and the emotional drain that could be present.  • multiagency risk management protocol • cmarrac/varm/vap • mappa/marrac • safeguarding • assertive outreach approach • reputational risk  • resources pressures – extra duties placed upon yourself. 1 point – no current risk involved /risk assessment known and understood by all parties, with conse-quent decisions and actions, including contingency plans negotiated.  2 points – risk assessment in process of being  undertaken, with options for action and decision ready to be put into place.  3 points – current risk not assessed / change of  circumstances requiring new assessment or high level of risks identified travel/time  travelling appreciable distances to undertake the work for example, placements in another part of the country.  certain cases, such as court cases and safeguarding, require more time due to their nature. considera-tion should be given to the past month's work since the last supervision.                                       1 point – no travelling outside usual agency area involved, and/or not requiring more than 2 hours per week since last supervision.     2 points – regular, planned travel, no more than 3 times per year, and/or not requiring more than be-tween 2-4 hours per week since the last supervi-sion.   3 points – unexpected travel on an occasional basis and/or regular travel more than 3 times per year, and/or requiring more than half a day per week since the last supervision personal impact: for example, the stress / impact placed upon  yourself due to: • your other professional responsibilities (amhp, bia, pe) • tight time scales to complete task i.e. documents/    reports • professional confidence to manage the case  effectively. • repetitive contacts in relation to your overall well-being, score yourself on a rag rating (red / amber / green).  agreed actions: to be discussed and agreed  between yourself and your supervisor.  any case management concerns should be esca-lated by the team manager to the service manager for their information and to action accordingly  
 • supporting peers with complex cases or practice issues (legal framework cop/dol, complex contex-tual sg) • verbal abuse from others • increased demands  • other emotive or trigger factors.                      
 case example mrs miggins is an 82-year-old woman living alone. last winter she fell leaving the house and broke her hip; she made a good recovery and was discharged from hospital to home, with reablement. an assessment and care plan were undertaken then. as a result, grab rails were fitted at the front door and in the bathroom; mrs. miggins began to attend a local club twice a week. at the time, mrs. mig-gins’ son was concerned that his mother should not return home alone but be admitted to residen-tial care. mr. miggins lives in another part of the country and has said that he is not able to provide the regular contact he would like to give. the assessing social worker ascertained that mrs. miggins wanted to return home from hospital. mr. miggins has contacted your team to say that his mother is no longer able to look after herself: she is being treated for a recurrent chest infection by her gp and is becoming forgetful. mr. miggins says his mother is not eating properly and has not been attending her local club. the gp also writes to your team recommending residential care for mrs. miggins. in supervision, the case is rated as follows: complexity: multiple or complex contact with other agencies requiring careful negotiation / advocacy /  development or other high input (2). risk: current risk not assessed / change of circumstances requiring new assessment (2). travel: no travelling outside usual agency area involved, and/or not requiring more than 2 hours per week since last supervision. (1). total: 5/10 overall rag rating amber. overall score rag rating, 1-4 green, 5-7, amber, 8-10, red. in discussion, both the manager and practitioner agree that this rating should have  lessened by the time of the next supervision. the anticipated changes through the  worker's interventions are: • a clearer picture about mrs. miggins’ state of health and causes of current distress,  the risks to her well-being and what this implies about her ability to continue living at  home. potential to move to weighting 1. • renewed contact with mrs. miggins, her son and her gp to negotiate the options  available to her, dependent on her wishes. addressing mr. miggins’ concerns as  legitimate may be a major part of this. potential to remain at weighting 2 for the  present time.   
 caseload management & weighing tool  name:   date of caseload review:  total allocated cases:   erica id  personal impact case overview & agreed actions  score  rag  rating   (red/amber /green)  case overview:    management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:    management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions   (red/amber/ green)  
    (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:      (red/amber/ green)  
 management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions       (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green) case overview:   (red/amber/ green) 
     management comments/agreed actions      (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions      (red/amber/ green)  
  (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:    management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:    management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber case overview:  (red/amber/ 
 /green)      management comments/agreed actions    green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:     management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   (red/amber /green)  case overview:    management comments/agreed actions     (red/amber/ green)   notes: the caseload weighting tool should be completed in advance of supervision.  the completed form should be dis-cussed at each supervision session to aid the practitioner and manager in ensuring appropriate case oversight, staff wellbeing and delivery of the council’s core statutory duties.  


Case transfer protocol.pdf

                                operational owner jez jackson, shvonne nakonecznyi and kerry kilburn  author version no. 3 date written or reviewed 02/05/2023 date of impact assessment - impact assessor - ratified by julie chapman date ratified 17/05/2023 date of next review 17/05/2027 case transfer protocol 
   case transfer protocol 1. purpose  1.1    1.2                        1.3  to support management and staff with case transfers across teams within adult social care, communities directorate.  to ensure a consistent approach takes place and key issues are reflected as listed below.  principles and best practice guidance • reduce where possible the number of social workers an adult will have during their involvement with adult's social care; • transfers should be as seamless as possible for the individual whose needs take priority; • promote caseloads that are manageable and allow sufficient capacity for meaningful change orientated interventions to be successful with adults and their families; • services will always apply the most collaborative approach to any individual, team or service • disputes should be resolved at team manager level where possible; escalating to service manager  should this not be resolved • if a decision is made to issue care proceedings the service making that decision should provide the initial documents for court (i.e. initial statement and care plan). all teams within barnsley adult social care directorate should practice a ‘one council  approach’ adopting strengths based model of care to help us deliver key outcomes from the better lives programme.  2. related legislation, policies and procedures  2.1  the protocol should be read in conjunction with the statutory duties as outlined in the care act 2014 and associated legislation and operating procedures including but not limited to: the mental health act, the mental capacity act and gdpr.  3.  risk factors  3.1   not adhering to this protocol may result in an unsafe case transfer within place, health and adult social care  
    3.2  not adhering to this protocol may result in an untimely case transfer and a lack of consistency and delay of services for adults and carers who access adult social care.  4. personnel  4.1  all staff within adult social care, place, health and adult social care   5.  protocol  5.1   5.2       5.3        5.4     5.5  5.6    5.7    5.8      the transfer of a case within adult social care should not cause delay to seamless social care interventions with service users, family or carers.   cases are transferred from one team to another when they require further work in terms of the  knowledge of those individual’s needs, the geographical area, teams capacity issues and relationship building. teams should ensure they have completed the  core documents and assessments before transfer is considered so that all information is as up to date as possible.  whenever a case is transferred or moved across to another team, the individuals and family's needs will be considered, with the emphasis on a smooth handover, and with the aim of reducing the numbers of workers with whom the individual and family will need to engage. as a matter of good social work practice, handover points will be identified which match the needs or requirements of the individual and their family and not rigidly adhere to the team structures within the service  prior to a case transfer taking place the current manager must audit the case file located on erica and discuss the current situation and any matters arising with the current caseworker.  case worker responsibility   all erica case records must be up to date including all family and professional contacts. the demographics page is to be completed and up to date within all domains.  any relevant assessments must be completed on erica and as up to date as possible to reflect the current situation. this should include any risk assessments – identifying any issues for the individual or receiving team   a summary of the focus and purpose of the current workers involvement must be documented and actions from the new team identified on erica. all transfer summary should include but are not limited to: • concise summary of the case 
         5.9    5.10        5.11    5.12   5.13   5.14   5.15   5.16  5.17       5.18     • an accurate detail of the professionals involved  • aims of the plan  • imminent tasks requiring action  • key meetings and dates  • communication needs of the service user/representative are clear  the service user/representative must be made aware of any case transfer prior to it taking place.   where appropriate an introduction of the new worker by the existing worker and following that introduction, an agreement made about the date for the transfer of case responsibility and agreement on who will be responsible for notifying all involved professionals. on some occasions it will be important and necessary for a period of joint working between the outgoing team and the team receiving the case so as to allow for a smooth transfer of practice.  any agencies and external partners involved with the case are to be notified that a case transfer is to take place.  any identified risks are to be documented on erica within the demographics page in the risk section.  a record of any outstanding tasks should be documented on erica and within the case file summary on erica.   a review of the case should take place prior to a case transfer wherever possible.  a period of joint working could be considered where appropriate to promote relationships between the individual and the service.   managers responsibilities  a discussion or meeting between team managers from the current team and the receiving team should take place to ensure that the receiving team is aware.  the outgoing team manager will authorise the transfer and ensure that there is an up to date chronology, recordings are up to date, relationships are correct which will ensure that erica pulls through all relationships.   when both managers are satisfied that the case is ready for transfer they will then send the transfer of the case to the receiving team’s  tray on erica. the receiving team manager should agree a date for the new provision of service aligned to the correct budget code.  
   5.19     5.20  5.21       5.22     5.23     5.24     there may be exceptional circumstances where it is preferable for a case to remain with the existing team. this must be agreed by both team managers and suitable date  for a potential later transfer to be reviewed.  disputes  there may be occasions where difficulties arise in the transfer of cases between areas. it is essential that any difficulties are addressed and resolved as swiftly as possible by the team managers. in the first instance the matter should be addressed by discussion between the outgoing team manager and their equivalent in the receiving team manager’s area. it is anticipated that most matters will be resolved at this stage.   if there is a difference of opinion about which team is best placed to meet the needs of an individual or the point of transfer, attempts should be made to resolve this by dialogue between the respective team managers.   where the matter remains unresolved, the team manager should discuss the case with the service manager.  it may then be appropriate for them to contact their equivalent in the receiving area, in order to ensure the matter remains live and is resolved at the earliest opportunity.  the service manager, and, where appropriate, team managers, will review the information and any relevant assessments to formulate an analysis on the appropriateness of case transfer.     


ADULTS  - Practice Framework pdf.pdf

 barnsley council place health and adult social care     adult social care procedure for    operational owner:  author: amanda bannister version number: v1 date written/reviewed: may 2023 date of equalities impact assessment:  impact assessor:  ratified by: better lives board barnsley place health & care senior management team date ratified: july / august 2023 date for next review: july 2026 
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework                                        
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework  welcome to barnsley's adult social care and wellbeing practice framework in adult social care, our focus is wellbeing, community resilience and independence. supporting people to live independently in their homes for as long as possible. living in a place they call home with the people and things that they love. helping those in need of our support to have more say over the care they receive. we want everyone to have the best possible chance of enjoying life in good physical and mental health. our adult social care services play a vital role in making sure local people experience high-quality care and support when they need it. taking a ‘strengths-based’ approach to our practice is essential to this. strengths-based approaches are key to effective social work and social care interventions, helping us achieve the best outcomes for people. the care act 2014 also emphasises that local authorities should consider a person’s strengths and capabilities, and what support might be available from their wider support network or in their community to help. we want this framework to develop and change over time with feedback from the people we support and our staff, which will help us to develop the journey together and create the social care future we all seek. we want barnsley to be the place of possibilities, a rewarding place to work for practitioners who are focused on practice and are excited to be part of our adult social care and wellbeing services. 
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework  what do we mean by practice framework? our practice framework brings together our organisation’s approach to practice, recognising what underpins our work, how this informs our interventions and how we support frontline practice. we can only make this effective by identifying ways of understanding the voice and experiences of the people we support. we want our framework to support the ongoing development of excellent practice by providing a clear set of expectations applied with a consistent approach. we want to empower our staff with an ethos of being flexible and adaptable so we can work inclusively with our communities, understanding cultural differences and diversity. our practice framework has been developed to support you to use your professional judgment and spend time doing relationship-based work with adults and their carers that changes lives. we want to measure the success of our practice framework by evidencing our work with the people whose lives we touch in our communities. we want this to be an ongoing process of reflection and learning, applying new tools and approaches as they develop. adult social care in barnsley the focus of our plans for adult social care is to promote long-term independent living where local people enjoy good physical and mental wellbeing. our objective is to make sure residents who need our support are safe, protected and well, enabling them to lead fulfilling, active and healthy lives. we will:  maximise the independence of adults in our communities and champion an asset-based approach to help them achieve positive outcomes.  make sure a strengths-based approach is used consistently across all our interactions with the people we support, their carers and their families.  make sure staff are confident and equipped to deliver services, helping them feel inspired and positive about the work they do.  streamline pathways for support to improve people’s experiences of care and provide more efficient and effective interventions.  explore innovative ways to prevent, delay or reduce someone’s need for our care and support in the first place.  work to fully understand the benefits that can be gained by effectively coordinating health and social care. 
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework  what is expected from our practitioners working in adult social care? we expect our social care practitioners to work in a strengths-based way, where we involve people as equal partners in conversations and decisions about them, their families and their communities. we are making sure our approach is responsive and proportionate. it is important that we encourage our practitioners to work with people, promoting autonomy, choice and self-determination. the role of our practitioners to support these functions is challenging, requiring a range of skills, experiences and a sound knowledge base:  understanding and working within the relevant legal frameworks, undertaking statutory responsibilities.  establishing and maintaining positive and constructive relationships with the people we support, their carers and their families as well as other professionals.  having the skills and knowledge to identify high-quality and effective interventions.  using reflection, critical thinking and analysis to create meaningful assessments and support plans.  having strong report-writing and communication skills.  having the ability to engage in and make good use of supervision.  being professionally curious, hopeful, sensitive and reflective. to work in a strengths-based way, our practitioners need to: the role of our practitioners is to work with the people we support to develop different ways of thinking about their experiences and support positive change by:  understanding lived experiences holistically, providing narrative and context around what they want to achieve with our support.  approaching the people we support, their families and their carers with empathy, creativity and compassion.  identifying, celebrating and building on someone’s resources, strengths, assets and connections.  building trusting and effective relationships based on honesty and openness.  supporting social networks and connections between the person, their families and the wider community, developing resilience through relationships. 
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework  the practice tools and approaches that are in place to support practitioners in their roles we're supporting our practitioners as part of our practice framework by using the following tools and approaches:  risk enablement multi-agency panels, supporting practitioners working with risk by providing the advice, challenge and recommendations they need to take a positive approach to risk. this includes young people transitioning from children’s services.  providing training in strengths-based approaches and outcome- focused support planning to help everyone understand our approach and apply it to their work.  developing family group conferencing (fgc) with other agencies to support holistic working with a person’s family and friends. this will help them to arrive at their own solutions.  making safeguarding personal (msp), with a key set of tools and resources you can use when working with residents at risk of harm so they can achieve positive outcomes. 
adult social care and wellbeing practice framework  what's next for delivering good quality social work and social care in barnsley? we want our staff to feel part of our organisation, which values, promotes and enables strengths-based principles by not only investing in training but embedding these principles in our practice. our commitment to you:  developing a useful, reflective supervision and support process and effective personal development reviews (pdrs) for learning and development.  developing peer groups, including around diversity and inclusion.  working towards realistic, achievable and effective caseload levels.  enhancing the professional practice development offer, with dedicated support for practice education and newly qualified social workers.  enhancing the assessed and supported year in employment (asye) programme for newly qualified social workers.  extending the use of practice quality assurance frameworks so we can remain focused on practice quality, embedding this as standard.  investing in pre and post-qualifying development, including degree-level apprenticeship schemes for social work.  developing a career progression framework with training and development opportunities for all social work and social care staff, including health professionals in our teams. this will be will continually reviewed with a focus on embedding current practice.  a commitment to the national standards for employers of social workers and developing action plans to evidence our commitment to workforce voice.  continue developing the annual social work team celebration event.  engaging with universities through social work teaching partnerships and working with them on curriculum development.  refreshing job profiles. 
     what's next for delivering good quality social work and social care in barnsley? we need to be ambitious for our staff, enabling everyone to reach their full potential by providing structured development opportunities. for example, we already support social workers with post-qualifying training to become practice educators, best-interest assessors and approved mental health professionals. we also have management and leadership programmes for those pursuing management roles. our commitment is to go further and develop a career pathway framework, a structured career progression pathway illustrating learning and development opportunities. as part of this, we’re committed to investing in our non- registered staff, providing learning and development opportunities for those who want to pursue degree-level apprenticeships. this will help our non-registered staff become our future social workers. this framework will give help everyone to continue improving, developing better practice skills for working with our communities. implementing this framework will be monitored by our better lives programme and the adult social care senior leadership team.    adult social care and wellbeing practice framework 


DOLs Community DOLs policy.pdf

                                operational owner kwai mo author jez jackson version no. 2 date written or reviewed 11/1/2025 date of impact assessment 4/1/2024 impact assessor jez jackson ratified by slt date ratified 26/04/2024 date of next review 26/04/2026 dols community  dols policy 
                                            1. purpose  to have a clear framework to manage and monitor incoming ‘community dols’ referrals 2. related legislation, policies and procedures  • the mental capacity act 2005 • the mental capacity act deprivation of liberty safeguards 2009 • the care act 2014 • caseloads and prioritisation procedure 3.  risk factors  • reputational damage • unlawful deprivation • breach of human rights • safeguarding 4. personnel  • managers • social workers • assistant social care practitioners 5.  procedures/protocol/practice guidance/policy  all incoming community dols referrals follow the pathway detailed on the link below  initial response team – community dols referrals are triaged and screened using the adass task force (a screening tool to prioritise the allocation of requests to authorise a deprivation of liberty). identification and prioritisation of a potential community dols for existing cases is also done using the same tool. once a community dols is identified a community dols ‘banner’ is put onto the case by the worker or manager and the ‘task’ will be placed into the community dols work tray for that team. the following teams have a community dols work tray: mental health localities specialist the dols team has a community dols renewal work tray the dols team will pick up community dols renewals that are unallocated and where the renewal date has not yet expired.  for community dols that have lapsed within 6 months of the date of the request a discussion should be had between the locality/specialist team manager and the dols team manager about the amount of work 
  required on this piece of work.  on some occasions dependant on the amount of work required the dols team can agree to take this piece of work. a standard email message will be sent to the referrer or an appropriate individual involved in the case, for those cases that meet the community dols threshold that have been triaged using the adass task force tool and are deemed as low priority.    i was assessed to lack capacity to consent to my care and accommodation arrangements on x date. this support plan has been agreed in my best interests, with all involved in my care, including x (e.g. family, mdt) on x date. it has been identified that the care and accommodation arrangements necessary to meet my needs safely meet the acid test criteria for an application for a deprivation of liberty authorisation from the court of protection. there are no objections, safeguarding concerns or reasons for urgency identified currently , in this individual situation.  in reaching this decision the adass tool dated xxxx has also been referred to as a guide to ensure consistency.  therefore a dols application is not being prioritised at this time. this will be reviewed should anything change and at each annual review  tracking community dol cases: an ‘assigned individual’ from the team that currently holds the majority of com dol cases will update the tracker document.  there will also be an assigned representative from the locality teams.  once a case is opened as a com dol from a team outside of the team the ‘assigned individual’ works in, notification should be sent to the ‘assigned individual’ who is overseeing the tracker so that the case can be added to the tracker.  it is still the responsibility of the team and worker that have opened the com dol to send it to legal and to chase progress.  the ‘assigned individual’ overseeing the tracker and the ‘assigned representative’ from the locality team will meet with the legal team once a month to get updates on cases that have been submitted to the legal team and to also discuss any questions about prioritisation of cases.  however, the legal team are not the decision maker.  once com dol cases are submitted to legal, the ‘assigned individual’ who is updating the tracker will update the tracker.  the legal team will also keep a record of all cases submitted to them.  the legal team will email progress to the ‘assigned individual’ overseeing the tracker, the social worker who has submitted the application and the dols service manager.  a further update will be added to the tracker once legal have provided an update.  once an order is in place for the case a further update will be added to the tracker as well as the date the authorisation is due for review.  the dols team service manager has oversight of the overall tracker and will meet with the ‘assigned individual’ who is updating the tracker bi-monthly. 
   the tracker will be stored on share point in the com dols folder as a working document.  legal are currently reviewing all the community dols cases and will continue to monitor these currently.   all incoming community dols referrals follow the pathway detailed on the link below   https://barnsleycouncil.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/adultac/_layouts/15/doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7b6ca7823c-36bc-492c-9166-7eafb1ed70df%7d&file=fd%20-%20community%20dols.pptx&action=edit&mobileredirect=true&previoussessionid=e8a5526c-a716-880d-941d-533af3ce300a  referrals are triaged and screened using the adass task force (a screening tool to prioritise the allocation of requests to authorise a deprivation of liberty). identification and prioritisation of a potential community dols for existing cases is also done using the same tool. once a community dols is identified a community dols ‘banner’ is put onto the case by the worker or manager and the ‘task’ will be placed into the community dols worktray for that team.   the following teams have a community dols worktray: mental health localities specialist   the dols team has a community dols renewal worktray.   the dols team will pick up community dols renewals that are unallocated and where the renewal date has not yet expired.  for community dols that have lapsed within 6 months of the date of the request a discussion should be had between the locality/specialist team manager and the dols team manager about the amount of work required on this piece of work.  on some occasions dependant on the amount of work required the dols team can agree to take this piece of work.     a standard email message will be sent to the referrer or an appropriate individual involved in the case, for those cases that meet the community dols threshold that have been triaged using the adass task force tool and are deemed as low priority.    i was assessed to lack capacity to consent to my care and accommodation arrangements on x date. this support plan has been agreed in my best interests, with all involved in my care, including x (e.g. family, mdt) on x date. it has been identified that the care and accommodation arrangements necessary to meet my needs safely meet the acid test criteria for an application for a deprivation of liberty authorisation from the court of protection. there are no objections, safeguarding concerns or reasons for 
  urgency identified currently , in this individual situation.  in reaching this decision the adass tool dated xxxx has also been referred to as a guide to ensure consistency.  therefore a dols application is not being prioritised at this time. this will be reviewed should anything change, at 6 monthly intervals including at annual review.  every 3 months ‘the assigned individual’ will escalate all non-allocated low priority com dol cases to the dols service manager so that this information can be escalated to more senior managers.     tracking community dol cases:  an ‘assigned individual’ from the team that currently holds the majority of com dol cases will update the tracker document.  there will also be an assigned representative from the locality teams.  once a case is opened as a com dol from a team outside of the team the ‘assigned individual’ works in, notification should be sent to the ‘assigned individual’ who is overseeing the tracker so that the case can be added to the tracker.  it is still the responsibility of the team and worker that have opened the com dol to send it to legal and to chase progress.  the ‘assigned individual’ overseeing the tracker and the ‘assigned representative’ from the locality team will meet with the legal team every 3 months to get updates on cases that have been submitted to the legal team and to also discuss any questions about prioritisation of cases.  however, the legal team are not the decision maker.  once com dol cases are submitted to legal, the ‘assigned individual’ who is updating the tracker will update the tracker.  the legal team will also keep a record of all cases submitted to them.  the legal team will email progress to the ‘assigned individual’ overseeing the tracker, the social worker who has submitted the application and the dols service manager.  a further update will be added to the tracker once legal have provided an update.  once an order is in place for the case a further update will be added to the tracker as well as the date the authorisation is due for review.      the dols team service manager has oversight of the overall tracker and will meet with the ‘assigned individual’ who is updating the tracker every 4 weeks.  the tracker will be stored on share point in the com dols folder as a working document. 
   renewals  an outlook calendar has been set up specifically to track com dol renewal progress.  only certain named managers and workers have access to this.  legal will input reminders on to the calendar for cases that are coming up for renewal. • reminder 3 months in advance of the renewal deadline to allocate a social worker • reminder 2 months in advance of renewal deadline to ensure the social worker is             completing the documents. • deadline to submit renewal • dol expiry date • legal to input a reminder 1 month before the deadline to submit the renewal  name and dob will be the naming convention for the reminders.  legal will be responsible for inputting the dates, however, asc are responsible for checking the calendar.  primarily the ‘assigned individual’ will check the calendar in line with updating the tracker.  the ‘assigned representative’ should also be checking it and there are other managers who also have access for oversight.       6.  related documentation   as above adass task force- a screening tool to prioritise the allocation of requests to authorise a deprivation of liberty 7. references   8.  glossary   9. appendices     


Practice Audits v2.docx.pdf

                                operational owner amanda bannister/catherine jackson author amanda bannister/catherine jackson version no. 2 date written or reviewed 12/01/2026 date of impact assessment - impact assessor - ratified by slt date ratified 04/12/2025 date of next review 12/07/2027 practice audits 
                                             1. purpose   1.1 the practice audit process is designed to ensure high quality, person-centered practice across adult social care. it provides a structured approach to auditing casework, supporting compliance with statutory frameworks, and focused on outcomes for people who use services and their families.   1.2 to provide a guide on completing practice audits across adult social care to enable a consistent approach.   1.3 the audit process encourages individual reflection, learning and improvement for both the auditor and the practitioner with significant case responsibility. this supports professional development and competencies in line with the british association of social work (basw) professional capabilities framework.  1.4 the practice audit tool is aligned with think local act personal’s (tlap) making it real ‘i statements’ which define what good practice looks like from the perspective of people with lived experience. this ensures that audits focus on personalised care and support.  1.5 improvements in practice should help to encourage innovative social work practice which improves the outcomes and experience of the person and their families.   1.6 analysis of audit findings provides insight for continuous improvement. findings will be used to  • identify areas of strength and opportunities for development across the wider directorate  • inform service wide practice development and encouraging individual reflection and development • capture feedback from people who use services to ensure their voices influence how support is delivered   2. related legislation, policies and procedures  • care act 2014 – duties relating to assessment, eligibility, and support planning. • mental capacity act 2005 – principles for decision-making and best interests. • care and support statutory guidance (2014) – guidance on assessments, reviews, and safeguarding. • making safeguarding personal – ensuring the person’s voice is central to safeguarding processes. • think local act personal (tlap) making it real “i statements” – standards for personalised care and support. • local authority safeguarding procedures – internal protocols for managing risk and safeguarding adults. 3.  risk factors  audits should identify and address any risks that may impact the person’s safety, wellbeing, or quality of care. key considerations include:  • immediate safety concerns: any urgent issues must be escalated and resolved promptly. • safeguarding risks: ensure concerns are managed in line with statutory duties and local procedures. 
  • legal compliance risks: check adherence to care act, mca, and safeguarding principles. • recording and confidentiality risks: ensure all information is anonymised and documented accurately. • practice gaps: highlight areas where lack of compliance or poor practice could lead to harm or service failure. 4. personnel  4.1 roles and responsibilities  4.1.2 people with supervisory responsibility will audit cases with practitioners, below identifies the roles and responsibilities across adult social care  principal social worker  • holds overall responsibility for the audit process and ensures it is maintained and reviewed regularly.  • identifies development themes and best practice to help inform and identify appropriate learning opportunities for practitioners across the service.  • moderates two audits per service area each month, from service areas of older persons & physical disabilities and mental health and learning disabilities senior leadership team • ensure audits are completed within their service areas in line with policy and timescales.   • provide oversight of audit compliance and support team managers in addressing any issues.   • use audit findings to inform service improvement and workforce development. quality assurance & service improvement    • select and allocate cases across the scope of the service for practice audit and moderation   • identify development themes and best practice to inform and identify appropriate learning opportunities across the service.  • produces quarterly reports in collaboration with the psw to the senior leadership team (slt) with the audit findings and recommended actions   • refreshes audit reports monthly and makes them available to teams, heads of service, and the psw for review and action.  team manager & advanced practitioners  • complete monthly practice audits with practitioners.  • provide a supportive environment to facilitate learning and reflection with practitioners to achieve the best outcomes for the people during the audit process  
  • identify areas of strength and opportunities within the practice audit.  • develop a practice improvement action plan with the practitioner where appropriate  • take immediate corrective action if issues are identified, the manager to resolve and / or escalate to a senior manager where necessary  • share examples of exemplary or best practice with the psw.   practitioners in adult social care • engage in the practice audit process  • work collaboratively with the auditor to learn and reflect on their own practice to achieve the best outcomes for the people  • if appropriate work collaboratively with the auditor and/or their team manager to develop a practice improvement action plan.  5.  guidance  5.1 selection   5.1.1 cases will be allocated monthly by the quality assurance & service improvement (qasi) team   5.1.2 5.1.2 efforts will be made to ensure cases are selected across adult social care teams or as widely as possible when a specific theme is being reviewed. current teams include: • mental health • specialist • preparing for adulthood • locality  • safeguarding locality • hospital  • initial response  • reviewing  5.1.3 practitioners with significant case responsibility will not ordinarily be subject to more than two audits per year  5.1.4 one case will be randomly selected by qasi and provided to team managers and advanced practitioners on a monthly. the audit should be completed collaboratively with the practitioner / person / family and submitted within 30 days  5.1.5 cases will be chosen from the practitioner’s recent caseload where significant activity has occurred (e.g., assessment, review, safeguarding episode) to ensure relevance and timely learning. this approach ensures that judgments are based on recent work, so any necessary development can occur promptly and allowing for timely engagement with the person or their family while the experience is still relevant. 
   5.1.6 the auditor must notify the practitioner when a case is selected and arrange a meeting to review the case together.  5.2 methodology   5.2.1 the audit has been designed to be a reflective process, completed collaboratively between the auditor and the practitioner.  5.2.2 the central focus of audits should be on the outcomes achieved for the person  5.2.3 audits will be completed using the structured interactive practice audit tool on microsoft forms which covers initial contact, assessment and care planning, mental capacity, safeguarding, leadership, feedback, and learning.   5.2.4 auditors must provide a clear rationale for all judgements and reference the evidence on which these are based. each audit should identify up to three strengths and up to three areas for improvement. auditors should also indicate id they feel the case, or any elements of it demonstrates best practice. conversely, auditors are also asked to highlight any serious areas of concern and ensure these are escalated.     5.2.5 when completing audits, managers should use their professional judgement informed by best practice, relevant legislation and case law. the audit process provides an opportunity for both the manager and practitioner to learn and improve. while judgements are subjective, and reasonable differences of opinion may occur, not all judgements carry equal weight. decisions supported by stronger evidence or analysis should be given consideration.   5.2.6 feedback from the person/carer/ or their representative must be obtained as part of the audit journey and recorded in section 8 of the form. if the auditor considers this is inappropriate, they must seek special dispensation from their head of service, providing a clear explanation of the issue and any extenuating circumstances.   5.2.7 all evidence relating to people and families within the audit form must be anonymised. names should be replaced with a title or letter (e.g., “the person,” “the carer,” “mother,” “father,” “x,” “y”). including the person’s title or relationship can help maintain clarity and ensure the narrative is easy to follow.  5.2.8 a draft of the completed audit form should be shared with the social work practitioner who has significant case responsibility. while formal agreement is not required, the practitioner must have the opportunity to review and add comments.  5.2.9 after practitioner review, the audit should be shared with their supervisor. feedback and suggested improvements should be discussed during the next supervision session to ensure actions are implemented and good practice is acknowledged.  5.2.10 completed audits must be submitted to ascqualityassurance@barnsley.gov.uk within 30 days of allocation to allow timely analysis of themes and trends.  5.3 remit of audit   
  5.3.1 a key principle is that good case recording and good practice are the interconnected. audits should review all relevant documentation within the electronic record, which may include (but is not limited to):  • assessments and reviews  • case notes  • care plan  • interventions  • safeguarding procedures followed  • compliance with the care act  • timeliness  • confirmation that all relevant documents have been uploaded  5.4 moderation   5.4.1 moderation will be carried out by the principal social worker (psw).  5.4.2 moderations will be allocated monthly by the quality assurance & service improvement (qasi) team. each moderation must be completed and submitted within 30 days of allocation to ensure timely review and consistency across the service.  5.4.3 the psw will moderates two audits per service area each month, from service areas of older persons & physical disabilities and mental health and learning disabilities  5.4.4 following moderation, feedback and suggestions must be recorded in section 10 of the audit form. this will be stored on the secure sharepoint register of audit findings. feedback will also be communicated through team highlight reports and shared with the practitioner’s supervisor. these points should be discussed in the next supervision session to ensure improvements are implemented and good practice is acknowledged.  5.4.5 adult social care management team will have oversight of the whole quality assurance process.   5.4.6 all evidence relating to people and families within the audit should be anonymised.   5.5 reporting  5.5.1 the quality assurance manager will undertake a review of all completed audits to ensure consistency and transparency in analysing audits. this will focus on identifying areas of strengths, opportunities for improvement and any significant gaps  5.5.2 audits will be reviewed by sections (e.g. assessment, mental capacity & best interests, safeguarding and leadership) against defined indicators. this approach supports thematic analysis, findings from this review will feed into quarterly thematic reports for the senior leadership team  5.5.3 the quality assurance manager will extract all identified strengths and areas for improvement from completed audits and assign themes to these findings. this thematic analysis will be used to quantify results and inform the production of the audit report.  
  5.5.4 a draft report will be shared with managers who completed audits to validate findings and provide an opportunity for revisions. managers should confirm key actions to be taken forward, including how best practice will be recognised and celebrated.  5.5.5 the quality assurance & service improvement (qasi) team, in collaboration with the principal social worker (psw), will produce a final report for the senior leadership team (slt) on a quarterly basis. this report will include audit findings and a recommended action plan.  5.5.6 any improvements identified will be added to the service improvement tracker and allocated to the relevant action owner for implementation.  5.5.7 every two months, the quality assurance & service improvement (qasi) team will select one case that demonstrates best practice to develop into a case study and share learning across the wider business unit   6.  related documentation     7. references  • care act 2014  • mental capacity act 2005  • british association of social work (basw) professional capabilities framework • think local act personal (tlap) making it real “i statements” • care quality commission assurance framework 8.  glossary  • psw: principal social worker – responsible for audit oversight and moderation. • qasi: quality assurance & service improvement team – responsible for case selection, initial moderation, and reporting. 9. appendices  • appendix a: interactive practice audit form – fill in form      


Caseloads & prioritisation procedure.pdf

Caseload Management and Weighting Practice Guidance_.pdf

Case transfer protocol.pdf

ADULTS - Practice Framework pdf.pdf

DOLs Community DOLs policy.pdf

Practice Audits v2.docx.pdf

Supervision Procedure.pdf