Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-qj5tk Total loading time: 0.261 Render date: 2022-07-06T03:34:04.461Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Articulating the Improvement of Care Standards: The Operation of a Barring and Vetting Scheme in Social Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2009

SHEREEN HUSSEIN*
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS
JILL MANTHORPE
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS
MARTIN STEVENS
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS
JOAN RAPAPORT
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS
JESS HARRIS
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS
STEPHEN MARTINEAU
Affiliation:
Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS

Abstract

The vetting and barring scheme known as the POVA (Protection of Vulnerable Adults) List established in England and Wales by the Care Standards Act (2000) was intended to provide greater assurance about the quality of social care for adults. This article discusses referrals to the POVA List in the period 21 May 2004 to 17 November 2006, details of which were made available to the researchers. These comprised 5,294 cases. Further data relating to the investigation process were provided through drawing on all material supplied in a purposively selected sample of 298 referrals. These have been analysed and findings are reported here in respect of referrals and prior disciplinary action, interactions with local and national agencies and the involvement of the police. What happened to the referrals and the length of time for decisions about Listing are also reported. The article concludes with some policy recommendations for the future of the scheme and sets this in the context of regulation.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Commission for Social Care Inspection (2006), ‘The state of social care in England 2005–2006’, Commission for Social Care Inspection, London, http://www.csi.org.uk/pdf/state_of_social_care_05_06_1.pdf (accessed 15/08/07)Google Scholar
Cornes, M., Manthorpe, J., Huxley, P. and Evans, S. (2007), ‘Developing wider workforce regulation in England: Lessons from education, social work and social care’, Journal of Interprofessional Care, 21: 3, 241–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Court of Appeal (2007), Wright & Ors, R (on the application of) v. Secretary of State for Health and Secretary of State for Education & Skills (October, 2007) EWCA Civ 999 (24 October 2007), Court of Appeal, Civil Division, http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/999.html (accessed 5/11/08)Google Scholar
Cowburn, M. and Nelson, P. (2007), ‘Safe recruitment, social justice, and ethical practice: should people who have criminal convictions be allowed to train as social workers?’, Social Work Education: The International Journal, 27: 3, 293306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Health (1998), Modernising Social Services, London, Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health (1999), Building for the Future, London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2000), ‘No secrets: guidance on developing and implementing multi-agency policies and procedures to protect vulnerable adults from abuse’, The Stationery Office, London, www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4008486 (accessed 15/08/07)Google Scholar
Department of Health (2004), ‘The government's response to the recommendations and conclusions of the Health Select Committee inquiry into elder abuse’, Cmnd 6270, London, Department of Health, www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4134725 (accessed, 15/08/07).Google Scholar
Department of Health (2006), ‘Protection of Vulnerable Adults Scheme in England and Wales for adult placement schemes, domiciliary care agencies and care homes: a practical guide’, the Stationery Office, London, www.dti.gov.uk/files/file11516.pdf (accessed 15/08/07).Google Scholar
Department of Trade and Industry (2004), ‘Findings from the 1998 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (surveys of applicants and employers)’, Employment Relations Research Series, No. 13, Department of Trade and Industry, London.Google Scholar
Dickens, L. and Hall, M. (2006), ‘Fairness up to a point: assessing the impact of New Labour's employment legislation’, Human Resource Management Journal, 16: 4, 338–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donohue, B. and Strawbridge, H. (2006), ‘Explaining about and managing disciplinary situations’, Working with Older People, 10: 1, 912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earnshaw, J., Marchington, M. and Goodman, J. (2000), ‘Unfair to whom? Discipline and dismissal in small establishments’, Industrial Relations Journal, 31: 1, 6273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Employment Act (2002), London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Freud, D. (2007), ‘Reducing dependency, increasing opportunity: options for the future of welfare to work: an independent report to the Department for Work and Pensions’, The Stationery Office, London, www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/dwp/2007/welfarereview.pdf (accessed 15/08/07).Google Scholar
Gillespie, A. (2006), ‘Barring teachers: the new vetting arrangements’, Education and the Law, 19: 1, 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansard (2000), House of Commons, 2nd reading Care Standards Bill, 18 May, column 481.Google Scholar
Harris, P. and Keller, K. (2005), ‘Ex-offenders need not apply’, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21: 1, 630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussein, S., Stevens, M., Manthorpe, J., Rapaport, J., Martineau, S. and Harris, J. (in press), ‘Banned from working in social care: a secondary analysis of staff characteristics and reasons for their referrals to the POVA list in England and Wales’, Health and Social Care in the Community.Google Scholar
Jackson, J., Cunningham, I. and Dutton, A. (2001), ‘The impact of the Employment Relations Act 1999 on Scotland's voluntary sector’, Employee Relations, 23: 3, 256–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. (2007), ‘More than one victim: when people with learning disabilities make false allegations of sexual abuse’, Learning Disability Review, 12: 1, 2835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, J. (2001), ‘Of knights, knaves and merchants: the case of residential care for older people in England in the late 1990s’, Social Policy and Administration, 35: 4, 360–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladyman, S. (2004), ‘Foreword’, in Department of Health, The POVA Scheme in England and Wales: A Practical Guide, London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Lathlean, J., Goodship, J. and Jacks, K. (2006), ‘Regulation of Adult Social Care (RASC): research project final report’, masc.bham.ac.uk/reports/RASC.pdf (accessed 2.9.08).Google Scholar
Lewis, I. (2007), ‘Review of no secrets’, 13 June, press release, Department of Health, London.Google Scholar
Madoc-Jones, I., Bates, J., Facer, B. and Roscoe, K. (2007), ‘Students with criminal convictions: policies and practices in social work education’, British Journal of Social Work, 37: 8, 1387–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, K. (2007), ‘Regulation and risk in social work: the General Social Care Council and the Social Care Register in context’, British Journal of Social Work, 37: 7, 1263–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, L. and Convery, L. (2000), ‘The Care Standards Act 2000’, Housing Care and Support, 3: 4, 2932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Assembly for Wales (2000), In Safe Hands: Protection of Vulnerable Adults in Wales, Cardiff: National Assembly of Wales.Google Scholar
O'Keeffe, M., Hills, A., Doyle, M., McCreadie, C., Scholes, S., Constantine, R., Tinker, A., Manthorpe, J., Biggs, S. and Erens, B. (2007), The UK Study of the Abuse and Neglect of Older People: Prevalence Survey Report, London: National Centre for Social Research.Google Scholar
Parsons, A. (2007), ‘Protection of vulnerable adults but at what cost?’, Journal of Care Services Management, 1: 3, 303–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rapaport, J., Stevens, M., Manthorpe, J., Hussein, S., Harris, J. and Martineau, S. (2008), ‘Weighing the evidence: a case for using vignettes to elicit public and practitioners views of the decision making process in the POVA vetting and barring scheme’, Journal of Adult Protection, 10: 2, 617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruddell, R. and Thomas Winfree, L. (2006), ‘Setting aside criminal convictions’, The Prison Journal, 86: 4, 452–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCIE (Social Care Institute for Excellence) (2006), Making Referrals to the POVA List: Practice Guide, London: SCIE.Google Scholar
Stevens, M., Hussein, S., Martineau, S., Harris, J., Rappaport, J. and Manthorpe, J. (2008), ‘Protection of Vulnerable Adults List: investigation of referral patterns and approach to decision-making: a report to the Department of Health’, London, Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King's College London. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_086635 (accessed 1/11/08).Google Scholar
Unison (2006), ‘POVA ruled incompatible with European Convention on Human Rights’, www.unison.org.uk/professionaservice/pages-view.asp?4334 (accessed on 15/8/2008).Google Scholar
Waine, B. (2004), ‘Regulation and inspection of adult social care services – baseline study’, Department of Health, London, www.bham.ac.uk/baseline/base1.htm (accessed 16.7.08).Google Scholar
Wasik, M. (2006), ‘Protecting vulnerable groups after Soham and Bichard: is IT the solution or part of the problem?’, International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 20: 1 & 2, 719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, S. and Marchington, M. (2003), ‘Developing HR responsibility to the line: Threat, opportunity or partnership?’, Employee Relations, 25: 3, 245–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Articulating the Improvement of Care Standards: The Operation of a Barring and Vetting Scheme in Social Care
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Articulating the Improvement of Care Standards: The Operation of a Barring and Vetting Scheme in Social Care
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Articulating the Improvement of Care Standards: The Operation of a Barring and Vetting Scheme in Social Care
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *