Thresholds, Referrals & Section 42 — Getting the Safeguarding Response Right
🔔 Blog 3 of 7 in our Safeguarding Series
Thresholds, Referrals & Section 42 — Getting the Response Right
Links to all 7 blogs in this series are at the bottom of this post.
📌 Why Thresholds and Referrals Matter
Recognising abuse is essential, but what happens next is equally critical. Once potential harm is identified across the spectrum of types of abuse, providers must make sound threshold decisions and act in line with Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) principles.
Thresholds determine whether a concern is managed through internal quality assurance, escalated to safeguarding leads, or referred to the local authority. Referrals must be timely, accurate, and proportionate — because delays can leave people at risk, while inappropriate referrals overwhelm local safeguarding systems and can distract attention from high-risk cases.
Staff must follow clear protocols, particularly in the first stages of concern, as outlined in immediate safeguarding response guidance for the first 24 hours, ensuring timely, proportionate and person-centred action.
Commissioners want providers to evidence that they know when and how to escalate concerns, and that their teams can apply professional judgement consistently. Inspectors will ask frontline staff what they would do if they suspected harm — and they expect confident, consistent answers across roles, shifts, and locations.
⚖️ Understanding Thresholds in Practice
Every local authority publishes safeguarding threshold guidance. While wording differs by area, most frameworks separate:
- Internal quality issues / low-level concerns — poor practice, missed tasks, isolated errors, or documentation failures that can be addressed through supervision, competency checks, and internal audits.
- Safeguarding concerns requiring management oversight — repeated missed care, emerging patterns of neglect, suspected financial exploitation, or escalating behaviours that need a safeguarding lead review and risk-managed action plan.
- High-risk safeguarding concerns — abuse or neglect (suspected or confirmed) that poses a significant risk of harm and requires immediate escalation and referral to the local authority (and potentially police or NHS partners).
High-scoring tenders show that threshold decisions are not left to individual interpretation. They demonstrate:
- Clear decision-making support (e.g., safeguarding lead advice, on-call escalation, quick-reference tools).
- How staff differentiate between an “incident” and a “safeguarding concern”.
- How patterns are identified (not just single events).
- How decisions remain person-led, consistent with MSP.
🧭 A Simple, Defensible Decision Model
In practice, strong providers use a structured set of questions to support safe, proportionate decision-making:
- Is anyone in immediate danger? If yes, act immediately (emergency services / urgent safeguarding escalation).
- What is the nature of the harm? Map the concern to the relevant type of abuse or neglect category (including self-neglect, domestic abuse, modern slavery, financial exploitation).
- Is there evidence of coercion, control, or inability to protect oneself? Hidden harm often sits here.
- Is this a one-off error or a pattern? Patterns elevate risk and should trigger safeguarding lead review.
- What does the person want, and what outcomes matter to them? Document wishes and desired outcomes in line with MSP.
- Is there a capacity or consent consideration? Apply MCA principles where relevant, and record decision-making clearly.
- What needs to be shared, with whom, and why? Keep information-sharing lawful, necessary, and proportionate.
This approach reassures commissioners because it shows your response is consistent, person-led, and anchored in sound governance — not ad hoc judgement.
📤 Making Referrals That Are Timely, Accurate, and Useful
When threshold guidance indicates a referral is required, the quality of the referral matters. A good referral enables the local authority to assess risk quickly and coordinate an effective response.
High-quality referrals are:
- Timely — immediate for high-risk cases; same-day escalation where there is potential ongoing harm.
- Factual — who, what, when, where; verbatim comments; clear separation of observation vs. interpretation.
- Traceable — linked to contemporaneous records (daily notes, body maps, care logs, incident forms).
- Person-led — includes the person’s views, wishes, and desired outcomes (MSP).
- Proportionate — shares what is necessary for safeguarding, avoiding excessive or irrelevant information.
Operationally, this also means you need clarity on:
- Who can submit referrals (and who must authorise).
- What happens out of hours (on-call escalation and referral process).
- How you ensure referral follow-up, outcome tracking, and case closure actions.
📜 Section 42 Enquiries Under the Care Act 2014
Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities must make (or cause others to make) Section 42 enquiries where they believe an adult:
- Has needs for care and support (whether or not the local authority is meeting those needs),
- Is experiencing, or is at risk of, abuse or neglect, and
- As a result of those needs, is unable to protect themselves from the abuse or neglect or the risk of it.
Providers play a central role in Section 42 enquiries. Commissioners and inspectors expect providers to demonstrate that they:
- Provide detailed records promptly (chronologies, care notes, incident logs, risk assessments, witness accounts).
- Contribute openly to multi-agency meetings and safeguarding planning.
- Support staff to participate without fear of blame, while maintaining accountability.
- Embed learning from enquiries into training, supervision, audits, and service improvement plans.
Strong providers are not defensive. They treat enquiries as part of a learning culture and can show what changed afterwards.
💡 Practical Example: The End-to-End Safeguarding Cycle
Example (Home Care): A care worker notices unexplained bruising and a significant change in presentation. They record objective observations and escalate immediately to the safeguarding lead. The safeguarding lead applies threshold guidance and determines the concern meets the threshold for referral. The local authority accepts the referral and proceeds under Section 42.
The provider then:
- Submits a clear chronology (care visits, observations, conversations, actions taken).
- Ensures the person is offered advocacy and their wishes are recorded (MSP).
- Implements an immediate safety plan and adjusts support pending enquiry outcome.
- Completes a reflective debrief and identifies learning actions (e.g., refresh body mapping, strengthen escalation prompts in supervision).
This demonstrates the cycle commissioners and inspectors want to see: recognition ➜ threshold judgement ➜ referral ➜ Section 42 enquiry ➜ learning and improvement.
📊 How to Evidence Thresholds & Referrals in Tenders
Commissioners are not reassured by statements like “we follow safeguarding procedures.” High-scoring answers demonstrate operational control and learning, for example:
- Escalation pathways that are simple, visible, and consistent (staff ➜ safeguarding lead ➜ local authority / police / health partners).
- Threshold training that is refreshed, scenario-based, and reinforced through supervision and spot-checks.
- Referral quality assurance (peer review, safeguarding lead sign-off, audit of referral completeness and timeliness).
- Governance reporting that tracks volume, themes, outcomes, and actions (including “you said, we did” learning loops).
- Section 42 participation evidenced through examples of contribution, improvement actions, and measurable change.
Done well, this reassures commissioners that your safeguarding system is proportionate, person-led, and effective — and that it will protect people in real-world conditions.
📚 Catch up on the full Safeguarding Series:
- 📘 Why Safeguarding Matters in Social Care
- 🧭 Recognising Abuse, Neglect & Self-Neglect (Including Modern Slavery & Domestic Abuse)
- 🔔 Thresholds, Referrals & Section 42: Getting the Response Right
- 🤝 Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) & Advocacy in Practice
- 🧩 Multi-Agency Working, Information-Sharing & Record-Keeping
- 🧯 Building a Speak-Up Culture: Whistleblowing, Supervision & Debriefs
- 📄 Evidencing Safeguarding in Tenders & Inspections