Direct Work with Service Users

Proof required

Submit: (1) confirmation of enhanced DBS clearance (can be redacted to show clearance date only); (2) safeguarding training completion certificate with module name and date; (3) 300-word reflection on maintaining professional boundaries in direct work with vulnerable adults/families.

What gets checked

• DBS confirmation shows clearance date — not an application acknowledgement
• Training certificate names a recognised safeguarding module (not just 'induction') with completion date
• Reflection demonstrates understanding of power dynamics and professional role — not just list of rules

Common mistakes

• Starting direct work before DBS clearance is returned — this is both a legal and placement risk
• Treating safeguarding training as a tick-box rather than engaging with the content — shows in practice

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm enhanced DBS clearance is documented — not just applied for
• Check safeguarding training certificate names a specific recognised module
• Verify reflection shows understanding of professional boundaries — not a rule recitation
• Practice educator must be HCPC-registered — peer verification is not acceptable at any milestone

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit: (1) three session plans (anonymised) showing service user needs, aims, and your planned approach; (2) three written reflections (anonymised) on each session noting what you did, what the service user's response was, and what you would do differently; (3) practice educator countersignature on at least one session plan confirming supervision took place.

What gets checked

• All documentation uses role descriptors only ('Service User A, a 45-year-old male') — no names, addresses, or case numbers
• Practice educator countersignature confirms supervision was real — unsigned documentation is insufficient
• Reflections demonstrate critical analysis of your own practice — not just description of what happened

Common mistakes

• Including any identifying information about service users — this is a serious confidentiality breach
• Writing reflections as narrative descriptions rather than critical analysis — 'I asked X and they said Y' is description, not reflection

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Check all service user references are anonymised to role descriptors only — reject any that include real names
• Confirm practice educator countersignature is present and they are HCPC-registered
• Verify reflections are critical analysis, not narrative description
• Peer verification is never acceptable for this milestone

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit: (1) practice educator's written assessment covering your direct work across the placement, with specific observations referenced; (2) your own critical reflection of 500 words on your development as a direct practitioner across the placement.

What gets checked

• Assessment is written by the HCPC-registered practice educator — not a peer or fellow student
• Assessment references specific observed sessions, not generic praise
• Assessment maps practice to PCF domains explicitly — 'good with service users' is not sufficient

Common mistakes

• Receiving only a verbal endorsement and not a written assessment — verbal confirmation cannot be verified
• Assessment that is entirely generic and not placement-specific — should reference what was observed in these sessions

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm written assessment is from an HCPC-registered practice educator — check their registration number if needed
• Verify assessment references specific observed sessions
• Check PCF domain mapping is explicit in the assessment
• Peer-only verification is never acceptable for any sw-* outcome

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.