Measuring Digital Safeguarding Confidence as Social Value in Adult Social Care
Digital safeguarding confidence is a practical social value issue because adult social care services increasingly support people to use phones, apps, video calls, online banking, social media, portals and digital communication. Providers working within the Social Value Knowledge Hub need to evidence how people are supported to use technology safely, without being unnecessarily restricted or excluded.
Strong providers use social value measurement and reporting to evidence confidence, safety and prevention outcomes, while linking digital safeguarding to social value policy and national priorities such as inclusion, prevention, protection from harm, digital access and accountable service delivery.
Digital safeguarding confidence should not be measured only by staff training completion. Strong evidence shows whether people, staff and families recognise risk earlier, know what to do and remain digitally included.
What Digital Safeguarding Confidence Means
Digital safeguarding confidence means people and staff understand common online risks and know how to respond without panic, blame or unnecessary restriction. In adult social care, this may include scams, coercive online contact, unsafe sharing of personal information, privacy breaches, cyberbullying, financial exploitation, inappropriate images, password risks and misuse of devices.
The social value comes from safer participation. Strong providers demonstrate that digital safeguarding helps people stay connected, informed and included while reducing avoidable harm.
Why It Matters in Real Services
Digital harm can be subtle. A person may receive repeated requests for money, be pressured by someone online, share private information, lose access to an account or become distressed by messages they do not understand.
If staff lack confidence, they may ignore early signs, overreact by removing devices or fail to record concerns clearly. Strong services evidence how staff support people calmly, proportionately and in line with safeguarding processes.
What Good Looks Like
Strong services evidence digital safeguarding confidence through accessible information, staff training, person-specific risk assessment, consent, escalation routes, family involvement where appropriate, outcome tracking and governance.
Providers should be able to evidence the risk recognised, the support offered, the safeguarding action taken and whether the person remained safely included. This creates a clear line of sight from confidence to prevention and social value impact.
Operational Example 1: Recognising Online Financial Pressure
Context: A supported living service supported a person who began asking staff for help transferring small amounts of money to someone they had met online. Staff were unsure whether this was a friendship, a scam or possible coercion.
Support approach: The provider used a calm safeguarding discussion, explored the person’s understanding and agreed proportionate support without removing access to their phone.
Five practical steps:
- Record what has been observed, including messages, requests and any change in behaviour.
- Speak with the person privately using accessible language and without judgement.
- Check consent, capacity considerations and whether immediate safeguarding escalation is needed.
- Agree safer online actions, such as pausing payments, checking contacts and involving trusted support.
- Review financial safety, anxiety, online access and any further contact attempts.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff supported the person to recognise pressure, practise saying no and ask for help before sending money. Managers reviewed records and confirmed whether safeguarding advice was required.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The provider evidenced earlier reporting, reduced financial risk, maintained phone access and improved confidence. This demonstrated social value through protection without exclusion.
Deepening the Digital Safeguarding Evidence Pathway
Digital safeguarding evidence is strongest when it shows prevention, confidence and proportionate response. Providers should avoid reporting only that staff completed training unless they can evidence better recognition and action.
Guidance on measuring social value outcomes in adult social care reinforces the need to connect activity with impact. Digital safeguarding confidence evidence strengthens this by showing how awareness reduces harm and supports inclusion.
Operational Example 2: Supporting Safe Social Media Use
Context: A day opportunities service supported several people who enjoyed social media but were accepting friend requests from unknown accounts. Some people felt embarrassed when staff raised concerns.
Support approach: The provider introduced accessible digital safety sessions linked to real-life examples, individual choices and safeguarding confidence.
Five practical steps:
- Identify common online risks without singling people out or causing shame.
- Use accessible examples to explain privacy, friend requests and unsafe contact.
- Support people to choose their own privacy settings where they have capacity and consent.
- Agree how people can ask for help if a message feels worrying.
- Review confidence, reported concerns and whether people remain digitally active.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff used screenshots, visual prompts and short discussions rather than long formal sessions. People practised checking profiles, blocking contacts and asking for support.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The provider evidenced increased confidence, more people reporting suspicious messages, fewer unsafe contacts and continued social media use. This showed social value through safer digital participation.
Systems, Workforce and Consistency
Teams apply digital safeguarding confidence well when staff know how to recognise concerns, record them clearly and escalate proportionately. Digital risks should be discussed through ordinary safeguarding, supervision and care planning processes.
Supervision should review online risks, staff uncertainty, consent, capacity, family involvement and safeguarding thresholds. Handovers should include current digital concerns where they affect immediate wellbeing or safety. Managers should check that staff do not use personal devices, informal passwords or private messaging routes outside agreed governance.
This also supports commissioner confidence. Wider explanation of social value in UK public sector commissioning shows why providers need evidence that digital inclusion is safe, preventative and accountable.
Operational Example 3: Family Concern About Unsafe Messaging
Context: A family carer contacted a domiciliary care provider because their relative was receiving distressing messages from someone online. The person wanted help but feared losing phone access.
Support approach: The provider clarified consent, supported the person’s choices and coordinated safeguarding advice where appropriate.
Five practical steps:
- Listen to the concern while confirming what the person wants shared or acted on.
- Assess immediate distress, coercion, financial risk or threats.
- Support practical safety steps such as blocking, saving evidence and changing settings.
- Record decisions, consent, family involvement and any safeguarding escalation.
- Review emotional wellbeing, continued digital access and confidence asking for help.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff reassured the person that support was not about punishment or removing their phone. The care coordinator checked that follow-up actions were completed and that family contact remained within agreed boundaries.
How effectiveness was evidenced: The provider evidenced reduced distress, safer messaging settings, clearer family communication and maintained digital independence. This demonstrated social value through protection, reassurance and rights-aware support.
Governance and Evidence
Governance gives digital safeguarding confidence evidence credibility. Providers should maintain an audit trail showing training, accessible guidance, concerns raised, consent, capacity considerations, safeguarding decisions, actions taken and outcomes.
Data may include digital safeguarding concerns, escalation timeliness, staff confidence, repeated scam attempts, privacy incidents, training themes and outcomes after intervention. Qualitative evidence explains reassurance, confidence, choice, dignity and reduced anxiety.
Strong services demonstrate how digital safeguarding evidence informs care planning, supervision, safeguarding review, commissioner reporting, quality assurance and board oversight. This creates a clear line of sight from support model to action to outcome.
Commissioner and CQC Expectations
Commissioners expect providers to evidence safe digital inclusion, prevention and protection from avoidable harm. Digital safeguarding confidence evidence helps show that services support modern communication without exposing people to unmanaged risk.
CQC expectations focus on safe, caring, responsive and well-led care. Digital safeguarding confidence supports this when leaders protect people from harm, respect choice, maintain dignity and ensure staff act on concerns appropriately.
Common Pitfalls
- Removing devices instead of managing risk proportionately.
- Treating digital safeguarding as an IT issue rather than a care issue.
- Failing to record low-level online concerns early.
- Assuming people understand privacy settings or scam risks.
- Using informal staff messaging routes without governance.
- Reporting training completion without evidencing safer outcomes.
Conclusion
Measuring digital safeguarding confidence as social value in adult social care means showing how people, staff and families recognise risk, respond earlier and maintain safe digital inclusion. Strong providers demonstrate this through accessible guidance, staff judgement, person-led support, safeguarding action, outcome evidence and governance. When evidence is credible, digital safeguarding confidence becomes a strong social value measure because it shows how adult social care can protect people from modern risks while supporting connection, choice and independence.