Section 1.1.1-1.1.7: Triage

Guidance

1.1.1- What is a safeguarding concern or allegation

A safeguarding concern arises where someone has suspicions about a person or situation, but the reason has not yet been established.  For example, there may be concerns about a child who often comes to Sunday School upset, dirty and hungry. An allegation is a more definite assertion, for example, if someone is witnessed hitting a child.

Definitions and advice on how to recognise the signs of different types of abuse can be found in the Safeguarding Children, Young People and Vulnerable Adults guidance. This includes statutory definitions of abuse.

The following additional questions may be useful for a Safeguarding Officer when making an assessment whether a matter is a safeguarding one:

Is the allegation that a Church Officer has:

• behaved in a way that has harmed or may harm a child, young person or vulnerable adult?
• possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child, young person or vulnerable adult?
• behaved towards a child, young person or vulnerable adult in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm?
• behaved in a way that indicates they may not be suitable to work with children / young people or vulnerable adults? or
• incited another person to harm or behave in a way that may have harmed a child, young person or vulnerable adult?

This set of questions highlights the need to consider the potential for further harm to others, not just the harm that is alleged to have already been inflicted. For instance, when dealing with a person who is alleged to have committed non-recent sexual offences against children in a non-faith context, consideration should be given to potential risk in a church context.

A child or young person is an individual aged under 18 years.

Who is a “vulnerable adult”?

The term vulnerable adult is used in section 6 of the Safeguarding and Clergy Discipline Measure 2016 to mean -

a person aged 18 or over whose ability to protect himself or herself from violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation is significantly impaired through physical or mental disability or illness, old age, emotional fragility or distress, or otherwise; and for that purpose, the reference to being impaired is to being temporarily or indefinitely impaired.

This definition of a ‘vulnerable adult’ is different to statutory guidelines in order to take into account the unique position of the Church, which means that someone can be classified as vulnerable even if they do not meet the statutory threshold. For the avoidance of doubt, an individual who is experiencing, or has experienced domestic abuse, could be a vulnerable person in this context, as the nature of domestic abuse puts them in a position where they may be ‘significantly impaired through…emotional fragility or distress’. The same argument would apply to someone who is or has experienced psychological (including spiritual1 ) abuse.  Further guidance on definitions utilised in the Church and by statutory services, can be found in the Safeguarding Children, Young People and Vulnerable Adults guidance.

There are times where wider conduct and capability issues will be reported as a safeguarding allegation. There are various reasons why this happens, such as a lack of understanding of safeguarding, a belief that the matter will be dealt with more swiftly, or unclear boundaries between Safeguarding and other departments within a Church Body. The Safeguarding Officer will use their professional judgement to decide in these situations whether or not an allegation qualifies as safeguarding or should be dealt with by Human Resources (HR), or in some cases, by the ministry office or Archdeacon. 

The interface between safeguarding and other functions, such as HR processes, must also be considered when deciding if the information received constitutes a safeguarding allegation. Issues that do not involve children, young people and vulnerable adults will generally be better dealt with under a HR policy or procedure. However, if potentially abusive behaviours become known, these may be indicators that require evaluation by a safeguarding officer to ascertain if the issue requires a safeguarding response, before being dealt with under non-safeguarding frameworks.  Close working relations between the Safeguarding Officers and other relevant functions within a Church Body are essential when making a decision in these circumstances.

Although the decision whether to treat a matter as “safeguarding” or “not safeguarding” sits with the Safeguarding Officer, there will be situations where a Safeguarding Officer might need to seek further information or advice in order to make that assessment. In such cases, the Safeguarding Officer may consider:

• asking follow-up questions to the person raising the allegation, that can help them determine the nature of the allegation;
• engaging in preliminary discussions with relevant individuals or departments within the Church Body and potentially outside, for example the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) or other children/adult social care services;
• consulting the person responsible for providing them with casework supervision
• consulting with the RSL or NST

There may be a limited number of cases where an SCMG needs to be called to determine if an issue is safeguarding or not, however the timeliness of these meetings happening needs to be considered.

At this stage, when consulting with others, a decision needs to be made whether it is necessary to share personal or identifiable information about the complainant and respondent, and the requirements under data protection legislation should be taken into account2 .

Finally, there may be safeguarding allegations which are “low level”3 , that is, they do not meet the threshold which would warrant intervention from a Safeguarding Officer, or indeed statutory services. These allegations, however, do need to be raised with the Safeguarding Officer for them to record.  This is because multiple low-level concerns about an individual may in fact demonstrate a pattern of behaviour that represents a real risk of harm when looked at overall.

Civil actions and insurance claims

Sometimes a safeguarding allegation will be accompanied by a claim for damages by way of a civil action.  Whilst this falls outside the scope of this Code, some general guidance is set out in Appendix 1.

1.1.2 - Responding to safeguarding concerns or allegations that do not involve Church Officers or individuals

Where a safeguarding allegation is made against someone who is not a Church Officer, Safeguarding Officers must make every effort to signpost, refer or enable access to appropriate support for the person raising the allegation and the complainant. Sometimes, this might be done by a Parish Safeguarding Officer (PSO) or a different designated safeguarding volunteer or member of staff. However, PSOs and other designated roles should consult with Safeguarding Officers, record the advice that they are given, and the actions that they subsequently take. This should not replace the need to act without delay where there is an immediate risk of harm and refer matters to emergency services.

The support that can be offered in these cases includes:

• supporting the complainant to identify the services which may be relevant for them and that may be able to address any allegations;
• helping the complainant to identify the services that may be able to provide them with practical, emotional and other support during this time;
• sharing with the complainant information and contact details for such services;
• supporting the complainant to get in touch with those services, including making initial contact with those services on behalf of the complainant, with their knowledge and agreement and / or
• potentially maintaining contact with the complainant, if they express that preference, whilst they are waiting to hear back from those services, to ensure that any deterioration in their circumstances that may give rise to an immediate risk of harm to them or those close to them (e.g. their children or someone they care for) can be reported to the relevant statutory authorities.

It is important to note that the requirements around reporting to statutory services still apply, even if a concern is not related to a Church Officer. However, the Safeguarding Officer’s involvement following a referral in such circumstances, will likely be limited.

Allegations about collective decision making by a corporate body such as a PCC, DBF or all other trustee bodies, are outside the scope of this Code.   This is because the purpose of this code is to assess and manage individuals who pose a risk. The appropriate route for dealing with a collective decision made by a charity is through the Charity Commission, or through the body's own complaints procedure if they are not a charity.

1.1.3, 1.1.4 and 1.1.5 - Referrals to the National Safeguarding Team

Where the NST takes the lead coordinating role regarding the management of a case, the NST Caseworker(s) involved will work closely with the relevant Safeguarding Officers. Where the NST assesses that the case does not meet its criteria, an explanation should be provided to the relevant Church Bodies in writing. Where the diocese believes that the NST should be taking the case, a final decision will be made by the National Director of Safeguarding. Even if the NST does not take the lead coordinating role in the management of a case, it can provide support to a Church Body that is managing a complex case.

In cases in which the NST takes the lead coordinating role, requirements relating to Safeguarding Officers should be read to mean the NST Caseworker. However, some actions may still need to be undertaken by the Safeguarding Officers in the relevant dioceses or Church Bodies, and where this is the case, this will be discussed with them. Joint working arrangements will be decided on a case-by-case basis and confirmed in writing.

Where relevant, specific considerations for cases managed by the NST (for example the membership of Safeguarding Case Management Groups) are included throughout this Code.

1.1.6 - The split in responsibilities between the CSO and the DSO 

There may be different arrangements in place regarding the management of safeguarding allegations that involve Church Officers in cathedrals. In some areas, Diocesan Safeguarding Officers provide these services for cathedrals, whilst some cathedrals employ their own Cathedral Safeguarding Officer (CSO).

It is good practice and strongly encouraged for a diocese and a cathedral to have a service-level agreement or a memorandum of understanding in place that clarifies expectations regarding the services that a DSO or a Diocesan Safeguarding Team may deliver for the cathedral, including the split in roles and responsibilities between the DSO and the CSO. This includes a clear split in responsibilities in relation to the management of safeguarding allegations.

1.1.7 - Allegations spanning more than one diocese

The general practice is that the diocese where the allegation arises should take the lead.  However, it may be the case that this diocese holds none of the relevant information about the case, in which case there is logic in it being the diocese where most of the information resides which takes the lead.  The matter may also need to involve the diocese(s) where the complainant and respondent now live. In these cases, there needs to be discussion as to who should take the lead, and who will undertake which particular functions. The rationale for this must always be recorded, and the complainant and respondent made aware of who is involved and why.

• 1More information on the definition of spiritual abuse can be found in the Safeguarding Children, Young People and Vulnerable Adults Guidance.
• 2An Internal Information Sharing Plan (https://churchofengland.sharepoint.com/sites/nspp-ext/SitePages/Infor.aspx) is in place between dioceses, the NST and the Church in Wales, which Safeguarding Officers can refer to when making this decision. Further guidance on sharing information with the police can be found at https://churchofengland.sharepoint.com/sites/nspp-ext/SitePages/Information-Sharing-Project---Workstream-2.aspx
• 3Responding to low-level concerns in education | NSPCC Learning (https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/news/2021/october/responding-low-level-concerns-in-education#What%20Is%20A%20Low-Level%20Concern?)