STRONG leadership, an open culture, and good partnerships with statutory bodies are amongst the important thing findings of a recent audit of safeguarding within the diocese of Bristol.
Person-centred support of victims and survivors within the diocese, nonetheless, may very well be improved, the audit says: five individuals reported that they’d not felt empowered by the way in which by which their cases had been handled.
The Independent Safeguarding Audit was carried out earlier this yr by the INEQE Safeguarding Group, which has been commissioned by the Archbishops’ Council to audit all dioceses and cathedrals (News, 4 August 2023).
Four have to date been audited by INEQE: Truro (News, 5 July), Salisbury (News, 12 April), Gloucester, and Bristol.
The Bristol audit, published on Monday, relies on evaluation of 302 documents, and one-to-one discussions, focus groups, online surveys, and confidential contacts with 457 individuals, including victims and survivors, children and young people, in addition to those worshipping or working throughout the parishes, cathedral, and diocese.
Like many other dioceses, Bristol had already undergone two previous independent audits: by SCIE and PCR2 (second past-cases review), which, together, made 55 local recommendations.
Most of those, the brand new audit says, had been acted on. It lists 40 of its own recommendations for the diocese and 25 for Bristol Cathedral.
Survivors reported a mixture of experiences, it says. While there have been examples of being “heard, understood, respected, taken seriously, genuinely cared for, and met with belief”, five individuals showed “significantly less confidence in how their individual cases had been managed. None had felt empowered to report their concerns, none believed they’d received effective support, none believed their safety had been prioritised and there have been concerns that the status of the Church had taken precedence over safeguarding.
“This feedback, uncomfortable because it is, reinforces the necessity for the DBF [Diocesan Board of Finance] to keep up engagement and person-centred support at any time when and wherever possible. It also reflects the necessity to repeatedly reflect on the sufficiency of practice and the processes in place to quality assure it.”
The diocese is mostly commended for its safeguarding practices, including for its strong relationships with statutory partners. The cathedral safeguarding team, clergy, and music department are praised for his or her support of cathedral choristers.
Most choristers were positive about their experiences, the audit says, although parents wanted clearer communication concerning the supervision of and responsibility for choristers, for instance, during services. The public must be asked, in quite a lot of languages, to refrain from videoing choristers, it says.
Governance and oversight across the DBF, Diocesan Safeguarding Steering Group (DSSG), and the cathedral has improved, the audit says, including an increased openness to scrutiny and independent challenge.
A skills audit of the Chapter and DSSG is really useful to make sure sufficient safeguarding expertise, and diversification of members is usually recommended.
“Stubborn challenges” remained with culture, leadership, and capability, but on the entire, the leadership of the diocese is praised: “It was clear that the Bishop has put the needs of victims before what some people class because the needs of the Church.”
The Bishop and Dean are described as “a formidable team. . . committed to doing whatever is crucial to create a safer, more open and welcoming Church.”
The Bishop, the Rt Revd Vivienne Faull, can be praised for raising awareness of safeguarding, including the publication of an opinion piece on modern slavery within the Church Times (Comment, 8 March).
The diocese had, nonetheless, had some negative feedback from survivors through the audit, and a more structured feedback system for ongoing cases is really useful. “Rebuilding trust will take time and the hurt caused to many up to now can’t be undone. That said, the Audit saw no evidence in any contemporary sense of covering up or excusing the inexcusable.”
Other recommendations include a variety of specific training modules, consolidating safeguarding staff across the diocese and cathedral; that the DBF request that Trinity College undergo a full independent safeguarding review; that a commitment to safeguarding is obvious in all job adverts; to update its risk register; and to lift awareness of its digital safeguarding policy.
A clearer record of outcomes, including rationale for closed cases, must be logged under the diocesan “My Concerns” system.
Bishop Faull said on Monday: “We are pleased to have participated early on this thorough process. The audit highlights the robustness of our safeguarding practices and demonstrates the strong commitment from our senior clergy and leaders to making a safer Church. It is a privilege to see our efforts recognised and appreciated.”
The Gloucester audit, published in April, made 33 recommendations to the diocese, and 24 to the cathedral. Progress had been made for the reason that previous SCIE and PCR2 audits, owing largely to consistent leadership, with a bishop and dean who, it says, “lead by example”.
Capacity, it concludes, is the important thing issue. A director of safeguarding must be appointed to work across the diocese and cathedral, it recommends, in compliment to additional staff resources and the creation of local partnership.
“There are significant capability issues. This doesn’t mean that cases requiring immediate attention should not addressed. It does, nonetheless, reflect that the demand placed on such a small team means they’re largely reactive and vulnerable if faced with an unexpected reduction of their strength.”
Similarly, the cathedral, it says, must have “a more defined Cathedral Safeguarding Advisor” to supply “greater insights” and construct relationships with its neighbours, in addition to elect a scrutiny body with an independent chair.
Other recommendations include redesigning each the diocesan and cathedral safeguarding pages.
