How to Commission a Safeguarding Audit

2. Define the audit scope

Set the organisational boundaries Specify whether the audit covers the whole organisation, particular services, sites, departments, programmes, subsidiaries or commissioned services. State any areas deliberately outside scope.

Consider the safeguarding domains Depending on your context, consider:

• governance and leadership; policies and procedures; roles and accountability;
• safer recruitment; training; reporting and recording; referral and escalation;
• concerns and allegations; supervision; safeguarding culture; partnership working;
• case management; board or trustee oversight; quality assurance; safeguarding data; and
• learning from previous incidents, reviews and audits.

3. Agree the evidence base

Use multiple sources A robust audit should not rely on policy review alone. Specify the documents, records, cases, data and people that should inform the assessment.

Documentary evidence may include

• safeguarding policies and procedures; governance papers and minutes;
• safeguarding reports and dashboards; training and recruitment records;
• referral and incident data; case audits; complaints and concerns;
• supervision evidence where appropriate; previous reports; and improvement plans.

People and practice may include

• interviews with senior leaders, safeguarding leads, trustees or board members;
• staff and volunteer interviews or focus groups;
• observation of relevant meetings or processes; case sampling; and
• proportionate engagement with people who use services, children, young people, families or

carers.

?

Key question What evidence will allow the auditor to distinguish between what our organisation says it does and what it actually does?

4. Set expectations for methodology

Ask providers to explain how they will conduct the audit A proposal should describe:

• the methodology or framework used and how evidence will be triangulated;
• how samples will be selected, who will be interviewed and how case records will be reviewed;
• how strengths and risks will be assessed;
• how immediate safeguarding concerns will be escalated; and
• how recommendations will be prioritised.

Look beyond checklist compliance A useful audit combines structured assessment with professional judgement and evidence from practice. Ask how the provider will test whether arrangements operate effectively, not simply whether documents exist.

5. Specify the reporting requirements

Agree outputs before comparing providers Consider requesting:

• an executive summary and a clear statement of overall findings;
• evidence supporting significant findings;
• strengths and effective practice;
• identified gaps, risks and vulnerabilities;
• prioritised recommendations and suggested sequencing for improvement; and
• a presentation or discussion of findings with relevant leaders or governance bodies.

6. Make recommendations usable

Where helpful, require a management action plan setting out each recommendation, its priority, responsible owner and target completion date. Ask how findings will be presented so they work for both operational safeguarding leads and governance.

7. Define the organisational outcomes

Decide what success looks like Possible outcomes include:

• stronger safeguarding governance and clearer accountability;
• more consistent practice and better quality records;
• greater staff confidence and improved board or trustee oversight;
• clearer assurance about safeguarding risks;
• completion of outstanding actions; or
• a realistic, prioritised safeguarding improvement plan.

Keep the outcome in view The audit should be the means of reaching a better organisational position, not the end product in itself.

8. Compare providers against the same criteria

Once the scope and requirements are fixed, use the same criteria to assess every proposal. Avoid making price the proxy for quality.

Criterion What to look for Relevant expertise Experience of safeguarding audits in comparable organisations and sectors.

Methodology A clear, proportionate and evidence-based approach.

Independence Appropriate independence and ability to provide constructive challenge.

Evidence A strong approach to triangulating documents, people and practice.

Safeguarding expertise Current knowledge of relevant safeguarding expectations and practice.

Reporting Clear, proportionate and actionable reporting.

Recommendations Prioritised recommendations linked to evidence and risk.

Engagement An appropriate approach to staff, leaders, trustees and people using services.

Capacity Sufficient time, suitably experienced auditors and realistic delivery.

Cost Transparent pricing linked to the agreed scope and outputs.

9. Questions to ask prospective providers

10. How would you approach our proposed scope?

11. What evidence would you need before reaching a conclusion?

12. How would you test whether safeguarding arrangements operate effectively in practice?

13. How would you identify and communicate an immediate safeguarding risk discovered during the

audit?

14. How would you involve staff, leaders, trustees and people who use our services?

15. How do you distinguish compliance from effective safeguarding practice?

16. How do you prioritise recommendations?

17. What will the final report enable our board or leadership team to do differently?

18. What information or access would you need from us before starting?

19. What would you consider outside the scope of this audit?

20. Establish governance and responsibilities

Before the audit begins, agree who will commission, oversee and receive the work. The auditor should have sufficient access and independence to reach credible conclusions.

• Commissioning lead and senior organisational sponsor
• Safeguarding lead and operational contacts
• Governance body receiving the report
• Who will provide evidence and facilitate access
• Who will coordinate interviews and case sampling
• How emerging concerns will be escalated
• Who will own and monitor the resulting improvement plan

21. Agree what happens after the audit

Decide before commissioning how findings will be presented, communicated and converted into an improvement plan. Agree how actions will be assigned to accountable owners, monitored through governance and reviewed to establish whether improvements have been achieved.

22. B

A simple commissioning brief Brief element Question to answer Purpose Why is the audit being commissioned?

Scope Which services, sites, functions and safeguarding arrangements are included?

Evidence base What documents, records, cases, data and people should inform the audit?

Methodology What approach and level of sampling are expected?

Outputs What report, presentation, action plan or other deliverables are required?

Governance Who commissions the audit, who receives findings and how will risks be escalated?

Outcomes What organisational decisions or improvements should result?

Timescale When should fieldwork, draft findings and final reporting take place?

Provider requirements What safeguarding expertise, independence and relevant experience are required?

Budget What funding is available, and what assumptions should providers make when pricing?

i Commission with clarity Define the audit scope, evidence base, reporting expectations and organisational outcomes before comparing providers.

Important information SafeguardingLink helps organisations identify and compare safeguarding professional services. This guide is intended to support commissioning decisions; it is not advice about an individual safeguarding concern or a substitute for your organisation's procurement, legal or safeguarding procedures.

SafeguardingLink helps organisations define professional service requirements and compare independent safeguarding providers. Independent providers supply their own information; a listing is not accreditation, approval, endorsement or a suitability guarantee.

More commissioning resources:

www.safeguardinglink.co.uk/resources