SAR Quality Marker 15: Improvement action and evaluation of impact

SAR Quality Marker 15

Improvement actions agreed in response to the SAR set ambitious goals, seeking to align the motivations of different stakeholders, bringing partners together in new ways and foster collaborative working. Actions are integrated, where ever possible, with wider strategic improvement activity, plans and priorities, led locally, regionally or nationally. Evaluation of impact is designed from the start, supported by a logic model or similar, using measures that demonstrate whether the underlying causes of systemic risks identified have been addressed. The SAB maintains a public record of findings, actions and commentary to enable public accountability.

Questions to consider for:

Have you provided clear leadership about the need for an open and mutually challenging discussion about what is said in the report about the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements and practice, or progress against earlier learning, and what needs to be done to address systemic risks identified or progress improvement work?
What part might the person and family subject of this SAR, and people with relevant lived experience and/or who draw on services more widely, have in this process of deciding actions and evaluation planning?
How can you bolster partners toward suitably ambitious goals?
Is specialist support or facilitation needed in the effort to align motivations and think beyond conventional responses and partnership arrangements?
Have discussions considered which findings may NOT be within the gift of partners locally to address, but instead need to be taken to national, regional or other forums for consideration of how best to address them?
Are proposed actions adequately integrated, where appropriate, into on-going or planned workstreams / priority areas of the SAB and/or partner agencies, regional or national bodies?
Are you assured that relevant agencies and sectors have the necessary mechanisms to link the SAR findings into improvement work as agreed and evaluation of impact and if not, what sources of support are available?
Has a logic model or similar technique been used to articulate to the SAB the intended impact and outcomes of proposed actions, for whom, in what timescales and by what mechanisms?
Are SAB expectations clear about plans for longer-term monitoring of improvement actions and follow up to evaluate impact?
Is there agreement about whether follow-up on impact best occurs locally or at a regional or sub-regional level?
Does reporting in the Board’s Annual Report comply with statutory requirements and provide genuine transparency and accountability about whether improvement actions have taken place and whether they have made any difference?

Downloads

Safeguarding Adult Review Quality Markers – Comprehensive checklist tool – March 2022 Safeguarding Adults Review Quality Markers handbook (to be used in conjunction with the comprehensive checklist)

SAR Quality Marker 15: Improvement action and evaluation of impact