Risk & Restraint Reduction –
An Action Plan
How Safe is Your Service?
Name of Setting…………………………………...
Manager……………………….……………….……
Compiler:………………………………….………..
Date completed:………………………….……….
% Score achieved:
Current Risk Descriptor:
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
1
Introduction.
These target objectives have been developed with the purpose of helping services become safer places for
people to work in. They can be used by leadership and management to actively reduce risk and restraint in
the services and for the people they are legally responsible for.
The target objectives have been informed by research conducted by the NFER who looked at how Circular
10/98 On” The Use of Force to Control or Restrain Pupils.” had impacted on services. See
http://www.teamteach-tutors.co.uk/guidance/documents/NFER_Key_Recommendations.doc
In addition, target objectives have been shaped by the guidance produced by the DfES IRS Co-ordinators.
See http://www.teamteach-tutors.co.uk/guidance/guidance_IRCS.html
Leadership and management set the conditions by which a risk and restraint reduction culture is established.
The active commitment of leadership and management to use this “Risk & Restraint Reduction Action Plan”
as a template to assist with this goal has already proved its worth. See http://www.teamteach.co.uk/CaseStudies.html
Attending, as an observer, the Gareth Myatt inquiry see
http://inquest.gn.apc.org/pdf/INQUEST_gareth_myatt_briefing_feb_2007.pdf
and providing expert witness reports related to investigations into staff practice have helped determine the
key areas that managers should be aware of related to risk and restraint.
Thanks and Acknowledgements are due to: the UK Steering Group See http://www.teamteach.co.uk/Steering_Group.html , the Principal, Senior and Employers tutors, JBE training and Development,
David Coulton Ph.D for producing a “Checklist for assessing Your Orgainisation’s Readiness for Reducing
Seclusion and Restraint” see http://rccp.cornell.edu/pdfs/COLTON_SURVEY.pdf
2
How Safe is Your Service?
Description of risk in relation to service integrity (being able to function and ensure the health and safety of all individuals)
Services can work out a potential descriptor of safety by marking only their service relevant target completed objectives and
scoring those achieved against those to be acted upon.
For example in one service only 50 of the questions are relevant and the service has positively marked 40 of the target
objectives as “achieved” making a score of 80% = ( A level descriptor of : “the majority of foreseeable risks have been
anticipated and reduced”)
Individuals and services are seriously exposed and vulnerable to all manner of potentially damaging risk.
Individuals and services are exposed and open to significant risk.
0-10 %
11-20%
Individuals and services are working within an extremely low level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and
practice
21-30%
Individuals and services are poorly prepared in relation to challenge, allegation and investigation of positive handling policy and
practice
31-40%
Individuals and services are working within a low level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and practice
41-50%
Individuals and services are working within a low to medium level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and
practice
51-60%
Individuals and services are working within a medium level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and practice
61-70%
Individuals and services are working within a high level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and practice –the
majority of foreseeable risks have been anticipated and reduced” )
71-80%
Individuals and services are working within a very high level of safeguarding regarding positive handling policy and practice –
most foreseeable risks have been anticipated and risks have been significant reduced.
81-90%
Individuals and services have anticipated all foreseeable risks and are actively committed via policy and practice to providing a
safe service environment for all involved. The largest risk may now be complacency!
91-99%
3
Target Objectives:
1.
Local Authority / Employer Strategy
Is there a named person in the service setting responsible for the co-ordination, monitoring and
evaluation of the Positive Handling (PH) training programme?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
2.
Do they have a job description where P.H responsibility is acknowledged?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
3.
Are they given dedicated time to achieve P.H responsibilities?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
4
4.
Is there a Governor / Trustee/ Service Manager with designated responsibility for overseeing
Behaviour & Positive Handling policy and practice?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
5.
Are P.H. issues on management & staff meeting agendas & discussed at regular Governor / Trustee/
Service Managers meetings?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
6.
Have Managers / Head teacher attended a training course so that they have a detailed understanding
of issues surrounding positive handling and Team-Teach?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
5
Policy
7.
Is there evidence available to demonstrate that staff have read and understood their service setting
P.H. policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
8.
Does the policy define the terms: “ P.H, P.H Plan, Seclusion, Withdrawal & Time Out?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
9.
Have staff access to and read the D.O.H / D.F.E.S R.P.I policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
6
10.
Does the Local P.H. policy take into account the R.P.I Guidance?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
11.
Does the Corporate P.H. policy take into account the R.P.I Guidance?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
12.
Are primary & secondary prevention strategies stated in the Local Policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No
7
13.
Is there a pain or injuries risk statement mentioned in the policy? ( Local)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
14.
Is there a pain or injuries risk statement mentioned in the policy? (Corporate)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
15.
Is risk in relation to techniques mentioned? (Local)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
8
16.
Is risk in relation to techniques mentioned? (Corporate)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No
17.
Is staff entitlement to training which includes Positive Handling mentioned?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
18.
Does the service setting policy make it clear that employers and managers are responsible for staff
training and deployment?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
9
19.
Is the preferred training provider mentioned in the policy? (Local)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
20.
Is the preferred training provider mentioned in the policy? (Corporate)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
21.
Evidence
Action
Required
Does the policy mention the entitlement of staff and service users to a repair and reflection process?
Yes / No
Page No:
Date
Complete:
Page No:
10
22.
Are P.H. Policies reviewed every 12 months?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
23.
Is the review date published on the front page of the policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
11
CRITICAL FRIENDS:
24.
Have placing authorities & LSCB received a copy of the service setting P.H Policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
25.
Have parents, children and young people been informed of the P.H. policy?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
26.
Is extra support provided to parents who wish to know more about the strategies being used on their
children?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
12
27.
Has the Local Safeguarding Children Board been informed of the P.H Policy and practice?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
28.
Are the local police aware of the PH Policy & Practice?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
RISK ASSESSMENT:
29.
Is there a Risk Assessment Form that measures the risks presented by the service users behaviours
and as a result a planned risk reduction strategy is documented and developed?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
13
30.
Has the training provider satisfied the employer & local manager that the standards achieved and the
techniques taught are relevant to the risks presented by their service users and managed by their
staff.
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
INCIDENT REPORTS:
31.
Does the incident report cover the key areas as stated in D.O.H./D.F.E.S R.P.I July 2002 Guidance?
See http://www.teamteach-tutors.co.uk/guidance/documents/DOH_DfES_RPI_July02.pdf
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
32.
Is there a bound incident book with consecutively numbered and dated pages where initial entries can
be made?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
14
33.
Are incidents recorded within 24 hours?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
34.
Is there professional support “independent to the service” e.g., advisor, who is able to inspect and
initial off incident reports once every 6-8 weeks?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
35.
Is there a system in place where the incident reports are monitored every 6-8 weeks in order to
ascertain trend and pattern information and a report produced for the Governors /Trustees/Service
Manager?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
15
36.
Does the incident form include a data field concerning the effectiveness of techniques?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
37.
Does the incident form include a data field regarding injuries to service users and staff arising from the
use of particular techniques?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
38.
Is this information conveyed back to the Local Authority?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
16
39.
Is this information conveyed back to the preferred training provider?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
POSITIVE HANDLING PLAN (PHP):
40.
Is there a P.H.P in place for service users who require P.H support?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
41.
Has the service user been informed and involved in the positive handling plan?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
17
42.
Have the parents been informed and involved in the positive handling plan?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
43.
Do you have evidence, documented and dated, of the above?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
44.
When appropriate, does the Positive Handling plan state which techniques and strategies should not
be used?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
18
45.
Are environmental changes or primary strategies in place to reduce the likelihood / impact of
dangerous behaviours?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
46.
Are staff aware of and employ the documented P.H.P team de-escalation language/ strategies when
opportunities present themselves?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
47.
Are staff aware of the key de-escalation strategies and praise points of those service users who
require the highest level of P.H support?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
19
48.
Are strategies indicated in the P.H.P to help the service users learn alternative behaviours?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
49.
Evidence
Is their proposed plan documented and reviewed?
Action
Required
Yes / No
Page No:
Date
Complete:
Page No:
50.
Are those with a key ownership & interest kept informed and involved?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
20
51.
When required has medical advice been sought regarding the proposed P.H strategies?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
COMPLAINT & CONCERN, REPAIR & REFLECTION PRCEDURES:
52.
Are service users aware of the process by which they can raise their concern with regard to the
operational use of P.H strategies?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
53.
Are staff aware of the process by which they can raise their concerns or complaints regarding
application of P.H’s
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
21
54.
Is there a documented process of repair and reflection for service users following a critical P.H
Incident?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
55.
Evidence
Is there a documented process of repair and reflection for staff following a critical P.H Incident?
Action
Required
Yes / No
Page No:
Date
Complete:
Page No:
STAFF TRAINING:
56.
At interview, are prospective staff informed of the policy, practice and expectation of staff in the
application of PH?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
22
57.
Before receiving training are steps taken to consider the placement of staff in relation to the risks they
face and the knowledge, skill and understanding they possess.
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
58.
Are new staff trained and authorised before being placed in foreseeable risk situations and
circumstances within 120 working days. (TT Recommendation)
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
59.
Are the physical health issues of all staff taken into account and documented in relation to their ability
to perform their duties as defined by their duty of care and in relation to the behaviours and risks they
are expected to manage?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
23
60.
Have staff received initial and refresher training in using P.H strategies appropriate to the risks they
face?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
61.
Is there a copy kept of each individual staffs signed quiz and completed training evaluation form?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
62.
Has the employer Team-Teach tutor acted within the course training notification protocols required by
Team-Teach?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
24
63.
Evidence
Has the employer Team-Teach tutor acted within the summary evaluation protocols required by Team- Yes / No
Teach?
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
64.
Is there a list available of staff who have been authorised and trained to use P.H strategies?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
65.
Are ancillary and domestic staff aware of preferred P.H practice and have been included in training?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
25
PREFERRED TRAINING PROVIDER:
66.
Evidence
Has your preferred training provider achieved BILD Accreditation?
Action
Required
Yes / No
Page No:
Date
Complete:
Page No:
67.
Has your preferred training provider made it clear which of their courses have been accredited by
BILD?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
68.
Has your service followed a course which has been accredited by BILD? See
http://www.bild.org.uk/03behaviour_organisations.htm
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
26
69.
Does your training provider embed the physical Interventions within a framework of behaviour
supports and interventions that are relevant and appropriate to your settings?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
70.
Does the training provider understand the setting context into which the training is being delivered?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
71.
Is the training delivered by tutors who have recent background and experience of working in that
particular service setting?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No
27
72.
Are the physical techniques provided sufficiently robust and flexible enough to manage the nature of
the challenging behaviours in your setting?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
73.
Does your preferred training provider subject the physical techniques to on goingl review and a risk
assessment process?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
74.
Does the training provider insist on an initial visit to discuss the training needs before delivering the
programme?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
28
75.
Does the training provider insist on quality control and assurance procedures with regard to reporting
of injuries, operationally and in training? Including recording response outcomes?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
76.
Does the training provider insist on feedback concerning the quality and outcomes of staff training?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
77.
Does the training provider certify and give information on the individual attainments of course
participants?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
29
78.
Does the training provider promote an “In House” trainer system for staff training and refreshers?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
79.
Does the training provider issue a Code of Practice and Protocols indicating the respective
responsibilities of “In House” trainers and employers?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
80.
Do “In House” trainers have access to resources, supervision and support, course booklets,
certificates, PowerPoint programmes, media files?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
30
ADVANCED SKILLS TRAINING:
81.
Have staff completed a 12 hour basic course in addition to the advanced modular skill training?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
82.
Have staff been refreshed and re-certified on ground recovery skills within a 12 month period?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
83.
When known, are the advanced positive handling strategies acknowledged within the service users
Positive Handling Plans?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
31
84.
Have advanced skill staff received training in Emergency First Aid?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
85.
Have advanced skill staff passed the Team-Teach Ground Safeguards Quiz?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
86.
Evidence
Action
Required
Have advanced skill staff received their own copy of the Team-Teach Ground Safeguards document?
Yes / No
Page No:
Date
Complete:
Page No:
32
87.
Do staff have access to their own “In House” advanced Team-Teach tutor?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
88.
Is there a named person, external to the service setting, that ground recovery incidents are reported
to?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
89.
Is there a named person within the service setting who is responsible for monitoring and evaluating
incidents involving ground recovery holds on a 6-8 weekly basis?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No:
33
90.
Does the service setting comply with the reporting and recording protocols for ground recovery holds
as required by Team-Teach?
Yes / No
Evidence
Page No:
Action
Required
Date
Complete:
Page No
“Gold Elite Status” is achieved with a 95% + attainment score.
Services can have such an achievement externally verified, certified and celebrated by Team-Teach. See
http://www.team-teach.co.uk/casestudies/Broad_Elms_SEBD_Junior_%20School.pdf and http://www.teamteach.co.uk/casestudies/Kingstanding240107.pdf
For process and cost details please contact admin@team-teach.co.uk or telephone 01825 740778 for further details.
However, the real achievement is management and staff knowing that they have complied with their “duty of care” and
are able to continue providing a teaching, learning and caring environment where foreseeable risks have been
reduced.
34