Risk assessment and scenario planning in adult social care: building defensible continuity assumptions
Risk assessment and scenario planning sit at the heart of credible business continuity in adult social care. Without structured assessment of what could realistically go wrong, continuity plans become generic documents that fail under pressure. Commissioners and regulators increasingly expect providers to evidence how risks have been identified, prioritised and translated into practical response scenarios. This article explores how effective risk assessment and scenario planning underpins defensible continuity assumptions, and how this aligns with commitments made through business continuity in tenders.
Why generic risk registers are not enough
Many providers rely on static corporate risk registers that list broad threats such as staffing shortages or system failure. While useful at board level, these rarely translate into actionable continuity planning because they:
- Do not model realistic service-level impacts.
- Fail to reflect local commissioning contexts.
- Do not connect risk likelihood with delivery consequences.
- Are not updated based on live operational experience.
Effective scenario planning starts by turning abstract risks into practical, testable situations.
What risk assessment should cover in practice
Operational risk assessment for continuity should examine:
- People risk: impact on individuals’ safety, rights, routines and wellbeing.
- Workforce risk: staffing availability, skill mix, fatigue and resilience.
- Infrastructure risk: buildings, utilities, IT systems and supplier dependency.
- Governance risk: decision-making capacity, escalation clarity and oversight.
Each risk should then inform realistic disruption scenarios.
Operational example 1: staffing risk translated into scenario planning
Context: A domiciliary care provider identifies recurring short-notice sickness during winter periods.
Support approach: Rather than listing “staff shortages” as a risk, the provider models a 20% workforce reduction over 72 hours.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Scenario planning examines which visits become priority, how rotas would be reconfigured, what authorisation is required for agency spend, and how safeguarding checks are maintained for people receiving personal care or medication.
How effectiveness is evidenced: During later disruption, the provider implements the scenario plan with minimal missed calls and clear audit trails.
Operational example 2: infrastructure risk and realistic service impact
Context: A supported living provider operates older properties with known utilities vulnerabilities.
Support approach: Risk assessment identifies loss of heating or power as high-impact but time-limited risks.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Scenario plans define actions at 2, 6 and 24 hours, including welfare checks, temporary environmental adjustments, relocation thresholds and safeguarding reviews for any increased restriction on routines.
How effectiveness is evidenced: When outages occur, staff follow pre-agreed decision points rather than improvising responses.
Operational example 3: system dependency risk
Context: A provider relies on a single electronic care planning system.
Support approach: Risk assessment models a 48-hour system outage.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Scenario planning sets out paper-based documentation use, handover processes, medication recording controls and governance checks to ensure information accuracy.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Internal audits confirm continuity of records and reduced incident reporting during outages.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioners expect risk assessment to inform realistic delivery planning. They look for evidence that providers understand their vulnerabilities and have proportionate, tested scenarios aligned to commissioned services.
Regulator and inspector expectation (CQC)
CQC expects providers to identify and manage risks to people. Inspectors may assess whether continuity plans are grounded in realistic risk assessment and whether disruption responses protect safety, dignity and rights.
Governance and assurance mechanisms
- Service-level risk assessments feeding into continuity plans.
- Scenario planning workshops involving operational leaders.
- Board oversight of high-impact continuity risks.
- Regular review following incidents or near misses.
What good looks like
Good risk assessment produces clear, believable scenarios. Providers can explain what would happen, who would decide, and how people would remain safe if disruption occurs.