Language:

Single Unified Safeguarding Review (SUSR) statutory guidance

 

Question 1. Does the introduction provide clarity on the aims and reasons for producing the Single Unified Safeguarding Review (SUSR) process ? Is the Introduction as set out in Section 1 clear and easy to understand?

 

Question 2. Do the principles which underpin the SUSR set out in Section 2 achieve the desired outcome of a proactive approach to taking solutions forward and a positive shared learning culture which avoids multiple reviews of an incident, helping to reduce further trauma for victims and families?

 

Question 3. Does Section 3 provide the clarity required to determine when a SUSR should be undertaken and are the criteria clear and useful?

 

Question 4. Does Section 4 provide clarity of the SUSR process and is there sufficient detail for each stage?Is the process overview in Section 4 clear?

 

Question 5. Are each of the roles and responsibilities as set out in Section 5 clear and useful?

 

Question 6. Do paragraphs 5.6-5.9 and appendix 3 of the guidance help reviewer(s) to consider whether community partners (such as independent and third sector organisations) should be engaged in the SUSR process? If not, how could the guidance improve on this?

 

Question 7. Do paragraphs 5.7 – 5.9 and Appendix 3 of the guidance help Reviewer(s) to consider whether specified information should be requested from a ‘qualifying person or body’? If not, how could the guidance improve on this?

Please comment:

 

Question 8. To what extent do you think engagement from relevant community partners or the supply of specified information from a ‘qualifying person or body’, where appropriate, could assist the SUSR process?’

Please comment:

 

Question 9. Are the guidelines for engagement with victims, families and principal individuals as set out in Section 6 clear and useful? Consider whether it is clear that the reviewer(s) and review panel need to approach each participant in the review on a case-by-case basis and ensures that the victim, families and principal individuals are at the heart of the review process.

 

Question 10. Section 7 outlines the number of stages which need to be undertaken as part of the review process. Are these stages in the appropriate chronological order and clear in terms of what is required?

 

Question 11. Does Section 8 ensure that learning is a key component of the SUSR process and a statutory obligation by providing clarity on how learning and information is shared as part of the wider process including working with relevant partnerships such as Community Safety Partnerships and Public Services Boards?

 

Question 12. Does Section 9 set out the Data Protection considerations in a way that is clear and useful? Would you like to see a clear legal obligation in this section requiring review partners to share information for SUSR review purposes when requested, if one could be found?

 

Question 13. Does the guidance provide sufficient clarity and flexibility to ensure that key partners including Community Safety Partnerships and Public Services Boards will be effectively engaged and involved within the SUSR process, where this is appropriate and helpful?

 

Question 14. What in your view would be the likely impacts upon individuals and groups with protected characteristics of the ways of working set out in this guidance? Your views on how positive effects could be increased, or negative effects could be mitigated, would also be welcome. Please use the text box to explain your reasoning.

 

Question 15. What in your view are the likely other impacts of the ways of working set out in this guidance? You may wish to consider, for example, benefits, and disbenefits; costs (direct and indirect), and savings; other practical matters. Your views on how positive effects could be increased, or negative effects could be mitigated, would also be welcome. Please use the text box to explain your reasoning.

 

Question 16. We would like to know your views on the effects that the SUSR process would have on the Welsh language, specifically on opportunities for people to use Welsh and on treating the Welsh language no less favourably than English.

What effects do you think there would be?

How could positive effects be increased, or negative effects be mitigated?

 

Question 17. Please also explain how you believe the proposed policy could be formulated or changed so as to have positive effects or increased positive effects on opportunities for people to use the Welsh language and on treating the Welsh language no less favourably than the English language, and no adverse effects on opportunities for people to use the Welsh language and on treating the Welsh language no less favourably than the English language.

 

Question 18. We have asked a number of specific questions. If you have any related issues which we have not specifically addressed, please use this space to report them: