Guidance Seventeen - Inter authority arrangements
Introduction
Inter authority and inter district arrangements are based on the protocol agreed by the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (see Appendix Twelve - Inter Authority Arrangements). This should be followed where necessary using the guidance below.
Inter Authority Arrangements
These arrangements recognise the increased risk to vulnerable adults whose care arrangements are complicated by cross boundary considerations. These may arise, for instance, where funding/ commissioning responsibility lies with one authority and where concerns about potential abuse and/ or exploitation subsequently arise in another. This would apply where the individual lives or otherwise receives services in another local authority area. For example, if a person funded by Derbyshire was abused while living in Broxtowe, it would be the relevant team in Broxtowe who would coordinate the safeguarding assessment.
Likewise, if there is an allegation of abuse against a vulnerable adult funded by Nottinghamshire County Council but living in a different area, for example Derbyshire, then the ‘host authority’ (Derbyshire) will be responsible for carrying out the Safeguarding Assessment in line with their own local procedures.
| It should be noted that the placing authority will still have continuing duty of care towards the vulnerable adult. |
Inter District Arrangements
If there is an allegation against a person who is funded by one district in Nottinghamshire (including Nottingham City) but who is resident in another district, the ‘host district’ will be responsible for coordinating the Safeguarding Assessment following the same process as above. For example, if a vulnerable adult was funded by Gedling but was allegedly abused while residing in Nottingham City, then Nottingham City would be responsible for coordinating the Safeguarding Assessment.
If abuse is alleged to have happened against a vulnerable adult in a district where they don’t normally reside this would initially be sent to the relevant team where the person does normally resides. This should result in early discussion prior to the Safeguarding Strategy Meetings to agree who is best placed to undertake the role of Safeguarding Manager – either the team where the person lives or where the abuse took place.
For example, if a vulnerable adult, normally resident in Newark was allegedly abused while having respite care in Mansfield the initial referral would go to the relevant team in Newark. This would be followed by early discussion between the relevant team in Newark and the relevant team in Mansfield to consider who would be best placed to undertake the role of Safeguarding Manager.
For more details about inter authority arrangements, please see Appendix Twelve – Inter Authority Arrangements