Adult protection significant case reviews: interim framework
Framework to support a consistent approach to conducting adult protection significant case reviews and improve the dissemination and application of learning both locally and nationally. This framework is for all partners.
Annex 4: Person Specification for Lead Reviewer/s
The skills and qualities required for the lead reviewer, both internal and external, include:
- Consider practice experience required for person chairing review - this may differ depending on the particular circumstances of the case
- Responsible for ensuring the required skills and experiences of the review team are made available
- Role of body/person setting terms of reference and providing progress reports
- No preconceived views of the case/outcome
- Quality - ability to set out ground rules
- Should have an in-depth knowledge of protecting adults
- Those chairing/leading reviews must have the ability to interpret and analyse complex multi-agency processes and information.
- Identify what sounding boards the group may have
- Identify where to seek knowledge specific area/profession
- Logical thinking ability to map out review process
- Need to understand the context in which services are delivered.
- Those conducting reviews require to be open minded, fair, a good listener and a logical thinker.
- Experience of practice at various levels across an organization
- A blend of confidence and humility (to be prepared to learn)
- Need to understand professional backgrounds of those involved and be a multi-agency team player
Skills for undertaking the review
- Need to have awareness of adult support and protection
- Risk Assessment/Management
- Ability to challenge constructively
- Open mindedness/fairness
- Good listener
- Fair person
- Logical thinking
- Emotional intelligence
- The interviewing of significant witnesses takes time and must be undertaken with perseverance and with sensitivity
- Consider practice experience for those undertaking review - this may differ depending on circumstances of the case being reviewed
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback