Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Study statutory safeguarding frameworks
2–3 weeks
Study the statutory safeguarding frameworks applicable to your placement setting (Children Act 1989/2004, Care Act 2014, Working Together 2023, or equivalent devolved jurisdiction frameworks). For each framework, document: (a) the legal threshold for safeguarding intervention; (b) the professionals' duties; (c) the process from concern to formal assessment. This is prerequisite knowledge before conducting any assessment under supervision.
Proof required
Submit: (1) summary document covering the applicable statutory framework's thresholds, duties, and process; (2) 300-word reflection on how this framework shapes decision-making in your placement setting.
What gets checked
- Correct statutory framework is cited for the placement setting (children or adults — not mixed)
- Thresholds and duties are accurate and specific — not paraphrased generically
- Reflection identifies how the legal framework shapes actual decisions in the placement — not just what the law says
Common mistakes
- Confusing children's and adults' safeguarding frameworks — they have distinct legal bases and thresholds
- Summarising the framework without engaging with how it is actually applied in the placement
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Check the correct framework is cited for the placement type (children vs adults)
- Verify thresholds are accurately stated — not paraphrased
- Practice educator review required — they know the local authority threshold context
Conduct a supervised safeguarding assessment
3–4 weeks
Under close supervision by your HCPC-registered practice educator, conduct one safeguarding risk assessment for an anonymised case. Document the risk factors identified, the evidence base for each, the protective factors, and your professional recommendation. Your practice educator must review and countersign the assessment before it is used in any actual decision-making. Anonymise all identifying information.
Proof required
Submit: (1) anonymised safeguarding risk assessment document covering risk factors, evidence, protective factors, and recommendation; (2) practice educator countersignature confirming supervision; (3) 300-word reflection on the most difficult aspect of the assessment process.
What gets checked
- Assessment follows the placement's statutory or approved format — not a student-invented structure
- Risk factors are evidence-based (citing what was observed or reported, not assumed)
- Practice educator countersignature confirms this was supervised — not conducted independently
Common mistakes
- Conducting the assessment independently and then having it countersigned retrospectively — supervision must be active
- Risk factors stated without the evidence base that supports them — an unsupported assertion is not a risk assessment
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm practice educator countersignature was given DURING the assessment process — not retrospectively
- Check all identifying information is anonymised
- Verify risk factors are evidence-based — not assumed
- HCPC-registered practice educator required — peer verification never acceptable for safeguarding assessment
Receive formal safeguarding assessment evaluation
End of placement
Receive a formal written evaluation from your HCPC-registered practice educator assessing your safeguarding assessment capability. The evaluation must cover: (a) application of statutory framework; (b) evidence use; (c) professional reasoning; (d) recommendation quality. Submit alongside a 600-word critical reflection on what you have learned about safeguarding risk assessment.
Proof required
Submit: (1) practice educator's written evaluation of your safeguarding assessment capability, covering all four domains; (2) 600-word critical reflection on your development in this area.
What gets checked
- Evaluation covers all four domains and is specific to your assessed work — not generic
- Evaluation is signed and dated by an HCPC-registered practice educator
- Critical reflection demonstrates learning about the limits of risk assessment tools — not just improvement narrative
Common mistakes
- Evaluation that praises without specificity — 'good assessment skills' is not evaluative
- Critical reflection that is entirely positive without acknowledging limitations or dilemmas
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm evaluation covers all four specified domains
- Check practice educator is HCPC-registered — registration number verifiable on HCPC register
- Verify critical reflection acknowledges genuine limitations, not just improvement claims