Assessment framework for local authority assurance

People and their families have sustained positive experiences of moving through the care journey. Proactive planning for the future with people takes place well in advance of changes.  

There is a strong, proactive grasp of risks to people’s safety and wellbeing, supported by rigorous, collaborative processes with providers and partners. This not only reduces potential harm but also drives swift, effective action on safety, quality and contractual challenges. 

Providers, partners and people consistently report safe and well-planned systems and safe transitions between services. Governance and escalation procedures for the oversight of providers and concerns are used effectively and appropriately. 

People experience consistently safe and seamless transitions between all services. There is clear evidence of proactive risk identification and early escalation. Transitions are equitable for all, with a strong understanding of the different pathways people may take based on their protected equality characteristics, ensuring safety and continuity throughout. 

Arrangements for preparing for adulthood begin early in a child’s life and place young people at the centre of decision making, giving them choice and control over their future. People with experience of this transition consistently report that the local authority listens and responds to their feedback. There is a strong collaborative culture across the workforce, care providers and families or carers, which supports a genuinely people-led approach. This is reflected in consistently positive feedback from people and partners. 

The local authority takes swift and effective action to keep people safe and to respond when a provider fails or when there is an interruption to services. It routinely evaluates learning and uses this to improve practice. The local authority consistently supports care providers. Mutual aid arrangements with neighbouring authorities cover all types of care and support if there are incidents or emergencies. 

Safety is a priority for everyone. People have positive experiences of moving through their care journey and only need to tell their story once. This is facilitated through effective use of digital social care records. 

There is a clear understanding of where there are risks to people’s safety and wellbeing, and effective processes with providers and partners that reduce risks and address safety, quality, and contractual challenges. 

There are agreed roles and accountabilities with partner agencies for delivering shared priorities, supported by strong senior oversight to manage and reduce safety risks. The views of people, partners, providers and staff actively shape safeguarding policy, procedures and practice. Concerns from and about providers are routinely reviewed and acted on to ensure services deliver safe and effective care. 

Clear and coherent routes and pathways for safeguarding referrals are embedded and improve people’s experiences, outcomes and safety. There are established ‘waiting well’ process to ensure the circumstances and risks for those waiting do not worsen unnecessarily, and people are kept as safe as possible while they wait. 

Clear information sharing protocols with partners and neighbouring authorities enable safe, timely and secure exchange of personal data, protecting people’s rights and minimising risks to safety and wellbeing. Rigorous information standards, cybersecurity measures and interoperable systems support secure data sharing and reflect growing digital maturity. Staff continue to develop their digital skills to ensure safe and effective practice. 

Pathways and protocols support all major transitions across physical and mental health, to prevent risks to continuity in people’s care. This includes preparing for adulthood, hospital referrals, admissions, discharge, and moves between services, including from out-of-area services or from self-funded care. Care and support are planned with people, partners and communities in ways that improve safety, address inequalities and ensure continuity of care. 

Hospital discharge pathways are clear across partnerships and support a seamless, timely and effective transition from hospital to the community. Strong co-operation and well-established working relationships between partners underpin this.  

Preparing for adulthood arrangements begin early (from age 14) and ensure young people and their families and carers experience smooth transitions in care and support. People with experience of preparing for adulthood report positive experiences, and the local authority listens, adapts and acts on feedback to improve. 

Robust multi-agency out-of-hours arrangements are in place, with teams appropriately trained to hand over to daytime business hours. This has a positive impact on people’s experience and outcomes. 

Comprehensive business continuity plans are in place across adult social care and local providers to ensure uninterrupted delivery of care and support. Staff and leaders can clearly explain and show evidence of how they would respond if a provider fails. Funding decisions or disputes do not delay access to care, and interim arrangements reflect roles and accountabilities. 

People do not have a consistently positive experience of moving through their care journey. There is a need to embed safety in approaches.  

There are limited arrangements for continuity of care and regular change of practitioners. Although there is some understanding of where there are risks to people’s safety and wellbeing, this can be unclear or inconsistent. 

Roles and accountabilities with partner agencies for delivering shared priorities are unclear, and senior oversight of work to manage and reduce safety risks needs to be strengthened. The views of people, partners, providers and staff do not consistently inform safeguarding policy, procedures and practice. Communication between the local authority and providers is often delayed or ineffective. Concerns raised by or about providers are not always reviewed promptly, leading to slow or insufficient action. 

Routes and pathways for safeguarding referrals are in place, but they need to improve to enhance people’s experiences, outcomes and safety. The ‘waiting well’ process is not consistent and does not always prevent risks from escalating unnecessarily or keep people as safe as possible while they wait. 

There are information sharing protocols with partners and neighbouring authorities, but staff do not always understand or use them effectively. As a result, they do not consistently minimise risks to people’s safety and wellbeing or protect their rights and privacy. Learning and skills development, including digital capability, is inconsistent and does not fully support safe or effective practice. 

There are inconsistent transition pathways before and after major transitions in people’s care and support, in both physical and mental health. Not all risks to continuity in people’s care are prevented. Care and support are not consistently planned with people, partners and communities and do not always address inequalities.  

There are known delays in hospital discharge, and transitions between hospital and the community are not always seamless or safe. Changes have not yet been embedded or led to clear improvements, and there are mixed views about the impact of pathways. Partnership working remains inconsistent, affecting the timeliness and quality of hospital discharge. 

Care and support for young people preparing for adulthood, including young carers, is not always planned early enough or co-ordinated effectively. This can affect safety across their care journey and disrupt continuity of care. Some people with experience of preparing for adulthood report that improvements are needed, and although the local authority is open to feedback, progress is inconsistent. 

Out-of-hours arrangements are in place, but handover to business hours is not always effective or consistent, which can have a negative impact on people's experiences. There are locally available crisis services, but they are not always accessible in a timely way to meet people's urgent needs. 

There is limited evidence of effective business continuity planning within adult social care and local providers, meaning the uninterrupted delivery of care and support is not assured. Knowledge among staff and leaders about how to respond to provider failure is inconsistent. Funding decisions or disputes with other agencies can delay access to care and support, negatively affecting people’s experiences. 

People do not have a positive experience of moving through their care journey. Safety is not embedded in approaches. 

There is little to no understanding of where there are risks to people’s safety and wellbeing. There are no arrangements in place to ensure continuity of care.  

Limited collaboration with partner agencies on shared priorities and safety-related work results in unmanaged risks and leaves people unsafe. The views of people, partners, providers and staff do not inform safeguarding policy, procedures and practice. Communication and engagement between the local authority and providers is poor, and concerns raised by or about providers are not consistently acknowledged or acted on. 

Routes and pathways for safeguarding referrals are unclear, and the confusion negatively affects people’s experiences, outcomes and safety. There is little to no evidence of a ‘waiting well’ process. Where there is a process, it is not effective or resourced appropriately to prevent risks from escalating unnecessarily or keep people safe while they wait. 

Information sharing protocols with partners and neighbouring authorities are ineffective or absent and are not used consistently to minimise risks to people’s safety and wellbeing. They do not ensure safe, secure and timely sharing of personal information, and people’s rights and privacy are not fully protected. Learning and skills development for staff, including digital capability, is limited or ineffective and does not support safe or effective practice. 

There are no clear pathways in place for before and after major transitions in people's care and support, for either physical or mental health. Risks to continuity in people’s care are not prevented. Care and support is not planned with people, partners and communities and does not address inequalities. 

Hospital discharge processes and pathways are ineffective, with poor co-operation and working relationships across the system. People do not receive timely reviews after hospital discharge, and planned improvements are either absent or not being implemented, leading to negative outcomes. Significant delays in reviews after discharge to the community result in many people moving from short-term to long-term residential care, and providers are not involved in discharge planning. 

Many young people with experience of preparing for adulthood feel that major improvements are needed. The local authority does not consistently seek, listen to or act on their views, and the preparing for adulthood pathway has limited impact, meaning young people and their families are not supported. 

Crisis services and out-of-hours arrangements are limited or ineffective and mean that people are not safe. There might only be cover for children's services, with a lack of management cover for adults. 

There are no business continuity plans across adult social care or with local providers, undermining the seamless delivery of care and support. Escalation protocols are missing or have not been tested, reviewed or updated, and procurement processes do not require providers to provide evidence of their own continuity arrangements. People experience delays in their care due to unresolved funding disputes, which negatively affects their outcomes.