Sample policy · Reg 13

Safeguarding adults policy template

Statutory anchor: Regulation 13 (safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment), Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 (SI 2014/2936). This policy also engages the Care Act 2014 (section 42 safeguarding enquiry duty) and Regulation 18 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009 (notification of abuse). · primary source

Download the PDF

The PDF version of this template is the same content, formatted for adaptation in your document control system. The disclaimer above is repeated on the PDF cover.

Verivius pack version v1, 2026-06-10

1. What the regulation says

Service users must be protected from abuse and improper treatment in accordance with this regulation. (Reg 13(1) (the headline duty))

Systems and processes must be established and operated effectively to prevent abuse of service users. (Reg 13(2) (prevention systems))

Systems and processes must be established and operated effectively to investigate, immediately upon becoming aware of, any allegation or evidence of such abuse. (Reg 13(3) (investigation systems))

A service user must not be deprived of their liberty for the purpose of receiving care or treatment without lawful authority. (Reg 13(5) (lawful authority for deprivation of liberty))

any behaviour towards a service user that is an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, (Reg 13(6)(a) (sexual offences))

ill-treatment (whether of a physical or psychological nature) of a service user, (Reg 13(6)(b) (ill-treatment))

theft, misuse or misappropriation of money or property belonging to a service user, or (Reg 13(6)(c) (theft / misuse / misappropriation))

neglect of a service user. (Reg 13(6)(d) (neglect))

The full text of the regulation is at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/2936/regulation/13. Where this policy and the regulation diverge, the regulation wins.

2. Plain-English summary

Service users must be protected from abuse and improper treatment. You need effective systems to prevent abuse, and effective systems to investigate any allegation or evidence of abuse as soon as you become aware of it. Care must not be provided in a way that discriminates, uses disproportionate control or restraint, is degrading, or significantly disregards the service user's needs. Service users cannot be deprived of their liberty without lawful authority. Reg 13 sits alongside Section 42 of the Care Act 2014 (local-authority safeguarding enquiry duty for adults at risk), Working Together to Safeguard Children for children, and the LADO process for allegations against staff working with children.

3. Scope

This policy applies to all employees, contractors, volunteers, and external parties who interact with service users at any location operated by . It covers safeguarding of adults at risk under the Care Act 2014, safeguarding of children under the Children Acts 1989 and 2004, and the staff-allegation routes (LADO for children, the equivalent adult-allegation process for adults).

(Tenant updates the angle-bracket placeholder.)

4. Types of abuse and the signs to look for

Staff are trained to recognise abuse and neglect and the signs that may indicate it. The Care Act 2014 recognises these categories. No list is exhaustive, and a person may experience more than one type.

Staff report any concern that a person is being, or may be, harmed, whether or not it fits neatly into a category.

5. Preventing abuse

The Service actively prevents abuse, it does not only respond to it. Its preventative measures include:

6. The Service's approach to restraint

Restraint is any restriction of a person's movement or freedom against their will, or any use of force. It includes physical holds, medication used to control behaviour (chemical restraint), seclusion, and mechanical or environmental restriction. The Service:

7. Roles and responsibilities

(Tenant updates the named role-holders.)

8. Who to contact

The Service makes the reporting routes easy for everyone to find, at every level of the organisation:

(Tenant completes the named contacts, including the Local Authority Safeguarding Team for its own geographic area.)

A one-page reporting flow is displayed where staff can see it: recognise the concern, make the person safe (call 999 if urgent), tell the Safeguarding Lead the same working day, the Lead applies the threshold and refers to the Local Authority where it may be met, and CQC is notified where required.

9. Procedure

The safeguarding-response procedure operationalises Reg 13 across the lifecycle from first awareness to closure.

  1. Recognise and report. Any team member who suspects abuse, neglect, or improper treatment, or any deprivation of liberty without lawful authority, raises the concern to the Safeguarding Lead the same working day. Where the harm is immediate, the team member ensures the person is safe before raising. Police are called immediately if a crime is in progress.
  2. Log the concern. The Safeguarding Lead opens a safeguarding-concerns record the same working day. The record captures the subject (without identifying patient detail in the summary field where it can be avoided), the category (physical, neglect, financial, sexual, psychological, discriminatory, organisational, modern slavery, domestic, self-neglect), the source of the concern (witnessed, reported by the person, reported by a family member, reported by a colleague), and the initial threshold reasoning.
  3. Threshold call. The Safeguarding Lead applies the Section 42 threshold for adults (or the child-safeguarding threshold for children) within 24 hours. The reasoning is recorded against the concern record, not in the Safeguarding Lead's head.
  4. Refer where required. Where the threshold may be met, the Safeguarding Lead submits a referral through the local authority's safeguarding channel (LA portal, MASH form, or duty officer call, depending on the area). The referral submission is recorded with channel, submitter, timestamp, and any reference number the LA returns.
  5. Staff-allegation fork (where relevant). Where the concern involves an allegation against a staff member, a parallel staff-allegation case opens with cross-link preserved (see section 10). The two response tracks (safeguarding concern about the service user; allegation about the staff member) operate independently.
  6. CQC notification check. Reg 18 of the Registration Regulations 2009 requires notification of any allegation of abuse to CQC. The Safeguarding Lead spawns a statutory notification record where the threshold is met, per the CQC statutory notifications policy.
  7. Track outcomes. The local-authority response (no further action, s42 enquiry opened, joint investigation, safeguarding plan) is recorded against the concern when it arrives. The concern stays open in the register until the LA outcome is captured.
  8. Closure with reasoning. Closure happens when the LA outcome is known and any provider-side actions have been completed. The closure paragraph records what was found, what was done, and what changed at the provider as a result.
  9. Improvement actions. Where the concern surfaces a change-to-practice requirement, one or more improvement actions are opened and cross-linked to the concern. The actions run through the standard improvement-actions lifecycle.
  10. Aggregate pattern review. Quarterly safeguarding-pattern review at the governance meeting. The Safeguarding Lead presents the trailing-12-month picture (referral count, outcome mix, theme tagging, time-to-referral) and the leadership team agrees any system-level action.

10. Allegations against a member of staff or management

Where a concern is an allegation against a member of staff, the response runs separately from the safeguarding response for the person, so neither prejudices the other.

11. Involving the person and their consent (Making Safeguarding Personal)

Safeguarding is done with the person, not to them. The Service:

12. Training requirement

All staff complete safeguarding training to the level the role requires (Adult Safeguarding Level 1 minimum for any role; Level 2 for clinical and direct-care staff; Level 3 for the Safeguarding Lead and any team member regularly making referral-threshold judgements; Level 4 for the named safeguarding lead in services involving complex multi-agency casework). For services working with children, Child Safeguarding Level 1, 2, or 3 applies per the same role-level pattern.

Refresher cadence: every three years minimum for Levels 1 and 2; annually for Level 3 and Level 4.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 awareness training (minimum Level 1) is also required for any staff likely to encounter incapacitated adults; the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards element is required for any staff in adult social care or service-user-restriction roles.

Training records are held in the tenant's training matrix register and surfaced on the assurance calendar.

13. Audit

Compliance with this policy is monitored by the Registered Manager and Safeguarding Lead jointly:

Audit findings are recorded in the tenant's audit register and presented at the monthly governance meeting; any actions are logged in the improvement-actions register.

14. Record-keeping

Safeguarding records (concerns, referral records, LA outcome letters, staff-allegation case files, statutory notification records spawned from safeguarding) are held in the tenant's safeguarding system for a minimum of 8 years from the date of the last entry, aligned to the NHS Code of Practice on Records Management. Records relating to children's safeguarding concerns are retained until the child reaches the age of 25 (or longer where the matter is the subject of legal proceedings), per Working Together guidance.

Staff-allegation case files are retained until the staff member retires or for the equivalent period above, whichever is the longer, given the potential need to reference the file in a future fit-and-proper-persons check.

The Verivius platform records the per-record audit trail indefinitely while the workspace is active.

15. Accessible information and specialist services

The Service makes this policy, and the way to raise a concern, accessible to everyone, including in easy-read or another format on request, so that people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss can use it. A service that specialises in the care of autistic people or people with a learning disability sets out how its staff are trained to communicate and work with them, and how its safeguarding arrangements meet their needs.

16. Related policies in this pack

17. Sources and further reading

This template is based on CQC's guidance for providers and managers, the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, and other topic-specific legislation and guidance listed below. It is a starting point for adaptation, not a substitute for legal, clinical, HR, safeguarding or specialist professional advice.

18. When to seek further advice

Seek specialist advice where the issue involves serious harm, safeguarding, deprivation of liberty, restraint, children, professional misconduct, controlled drugs, radiation, termination of pregnancy, infection outbreak, water safety, employment dismissal, DBS barring referral, or regulatory enforcement.

19. Document control

Version Date Author Changes
v1 2026-05-19 Verivius (sample) Initial sample template.
v1.1 2026-06-01 Verivius (sample) Filled out Sections 3 to 8 with concrete content. Named the Safeguarding Lead and Children's Safeguarding Lead roles. Expanded the procedure to a 10-step flow tied to the safeguarding lifecycle, the staff-allegation fork, and the Reg 18 notification cross-link. Named the safeguarding-training levels by role and the audit cadence. Referenced the NHS Code of Practice and the Working Together retention for children.
v1.2 2026-06-05 Verivius (sample) CQC content-checklist pass. Added Section 4 (types of abuse and the signs to look for), Section 5 (preventing abuse and preventative measures), Section 6 (the approach to restraint and how to recognise it), Section 8 (who to contact: named Safeguarding Lead, out-of-hours and emergency contacts, and the Local Authority Safeguarding Team for the Service's area, plus a one-page reporting flow), Section 10 (allegations against staff or management and how impartiality is assured, including where the Registered Manager and Nominated Individual are the same person), Section 11 (involving the person and their consent, Making Safeguarding Personal), and Section 15 (accessible information and specialist services). Updated stale related-policy slugs.
v1 (2026-06-10) 2026-06-10 Verivius (sample) Re-conformed to the current Verivius policy standard, preserving the original content. Adopted the current disclaimer, header block and policy-owner line; replaced the four-quote extract with the full verbatim Reg 13(1) to Reg 13(6)(d) blockquote set and cite labels from the guidance manifest; added the standard Sources and further reading and When to seek further advice blocks. No operational section or rule removed.

This sample policy template was issued by Verivius. It is a template, not a substitute for legal advice or the tenant's own policy-development process. Where this template and live law or regulator guidance diverge, the live source wins.

What good looks like here

Written from an ex-CQC inspector's chair, but the point is safe, well-led care your team can stand behind. Each row shows what strong evidence looks like, what thin evidence looks like, and where the expectation comes from.

Adult safeguarding rarely turns on a single dramatic event. The harm that hurts people here is usually slow and quiet: money drained a little at a time, a walking aid withheld, a person held in a rigid routine that strips their choice, or self-neglect that everyone notices and nobody names. The pivot is the judgement about whether a concern may reach the local authority's Care Act Section 42 threshold, and it cuts both ways. Pitch it too high and a person living with ongoing abuse is left exposed. Pitch it too low, or override the person's wishes without cause, and you have done safeguarding to someone rather than with them. Because any single concern can look minor in isolation, the value of a complete, reasoned trail is that the pattern becomes visible: a cluster of low-level concerns on the same unit, or around the same member of staff, is how organisational neglect or a predatory individual gets caught before somebody is seriously harmed. Making Safeguarding Personal, the person's capacity, and the outcome they say they want sit at the centre of that judgement, which is why the recorded reasoning, not just the outcome, is what protects the person.

  1. The threshold decision is written down against each concern, not held in the safeguarding lead's head, so a colleague picking the concern up later can see why the call went the way it did.

    Strong evidence: The safeguarding-concerns register showing source, date and category, with the Care Act section 42 or local threshold reasoning recorded per concern.

    Weak evidence: A concerns register that logs the date and category but leaves the threshold field blank, filled with a tick, or holding a single word like 'met'. The reasoning for whether the concern might reach the local authority's Care Act Section 42 threshold lives in the lead's memory or a lost email, so nobody could reconstruct why the call went the way it did if the lead is away or the local authority queries it.

    Our recommended baseline. Not a legal or regulatory requirement, but a sensible standard we suggest where the rules leave the detail to you. Adapt it to your service.
  2. Where a concern is not referred to the local authority, the reason why is recorded, so a considered decision not to refer is distinguishable from a concern that was simply dropped.

    Strong evidence: A not-referred closure showing what guidance was checked, why the threshold was not met, and the senior review of any borderline or high-risk decision.

    Weak evidence: Concerns closed as 'no further action' with no line recording what was weighed or which guidance was checked, so a considered decision not to refer is indistinguishable from a concern that was simply dropped. Borderline or high-risk cases carry only the lead's own sign-off, with no second pair of eyes recorded.

    Our recommended baseline. Not a legal or regulatory requirement, but a sensible standard we suggest where the rules leave the detail to you. Adapt it to your service.
  3. Referrals close the loop, so the local authority's outcome comes back against the concern and the team can see whether the person was made safe.

    Strong evidence: A referral record with route, submitter, date and any reference number, plus the local-authority advice or outcome recorded against it.

    Weak evidence: Referrals that were clearly submitted but where the record stops at the point of submission: no reference number, no note of what the local authority advised or decided, and concerns sitting open for months with no outcome ever captured. The record shows it was sent, but not what came of it or whether the person was made safe.

    Our recommended baseline. Not a legal or regulatory requirement, but a sensible standard we suggest where the rules leave the detail to you. Adapt it to your service.
  4. Each allegation of abuse is tested against the CQC notification duty in its own right, separately from any safeguarding referral to the local authority, and any allegation against a colleague runs through a separate, impartial route rather than being handled by the person who line-manages them.

    Strong evidence: A submitted CQC notification or a recorded not-applicable reason for the allegation itself (distinct from the local-authority safeguarding referral, which is not a CQC notification), and the separate handling record for any staff allegation.

    Weak evidence: A local-authority safeguarding referral treated as if it were the Care Quality Commission notification, so the notification of abuse or allegation of abuse under the 2009 Registration Regulations is missing and there is no recorded reason why it was judged not to apply. Where the allegation is against a member of staff, the person who line-manages that colleague runs the response, with no separate, impartial handling record and nothing showing whether a referral to the Disclosure and Barring Service was considered.

    A legal duty. This comes from legislation that applies to your service, so meeting it is not optional. The exact provision is cited beneath the badge.

    Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009, reg 18(2)(e)

  5. A named safeguarding lead and deputy whose training goes deeper than general staff awareness, and safeguarding themes that changed practice rather than only being counted.

    Strong evidence: The named lead and deputy with their training records, the training matrix, and governance minutes where safeguarding themes were reviewed and learning applied.

    Weak evidence: A named lead holding only the same general awareness certificate as frontline staff, or a deputy named on paper who has never acted and holds no lead-level training. Governance minutes that record a safeguarding count but show no theme being discussed and no change to practice traced back to it.

    The recognised standard from a professional or clinical body, such as NICE or a royal college. Not a legal duty, but the accepted mark of safe practice, and a departure needs a documented reason.

Last verified 20 July 2026

Audit this policy

Safeguarding adults procedure checklist

A policy is the intent; the evidence is what a CQC inspector actually asks to see. This matching checklist turns the policy above into the records to keep, the audit to run, and the places small services most often fall short.

Open the Safeguarding adults procedure checklist

Spotted something to improve?

These are sample templates, not the last word. If you would change a wording, or want to help us confirm a detail, tell us and we will look at it.

Related Verivius content

Want help adapting this to your service?

A Verivius consultant can read your adapted policy against the live regulation and your service shape. The work fits inside a Mock Inspection engagement or a shorter consulting brief. A 20-minute conversation is the fastest way to find out whether the fit is right.

Get started free

Free to start, no card. A 14-day trial when you subscribe.

Last reviewed 10 June 2026