Beyond Equal Access: Why Equity Must Become a Safeguarding Priority
Safeguarding is built on the principle of protecting people from harm, promoting wellbeing and ensuring everyone has the opportunity to live safely and with dignity but what happens when the very systems designed to provide support create additional barriers for those who need them most?
A newly published report from the Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) explores exactly that question. Rather than focusing solely on whether people can access care, the research examines how inequalities accumulate throughout people's experiences of health and social care, influencing not only the support they receive but also how difficult it is to navigate the system itself.
For safeguarding professionals, the report offers an important reminder that protecting people is not simply about recognising abuse or neglect. It is also about recognising when systems themselves unintentionally increase risk.
Equality and Equity Are Not the Same
In safeguarding, we often talk about treating everyone equally. Whilst equality is important, equity goes further. Equality means providing everyone with the same opportunity. Equity recognises that people begin from different places and may need different levels or types of support to achieve the same outcome.
The SCIE report demonstrates that people's experiences of care are shaped by multiple interacting factors, including disability, ethnicity, geography, financial circumstances, health conditions, digital exclusion, age and the availability of informal support. Rather than acting in isolation, these disadvantages often combine and compound over time.
For safeguarding practitioners, this should not come as a surprise, every day we work with individuals whose lives cannot be understood through a single characteristic or presenting concern.
When Systems Become Part of the Risk
One of the report's most striking findings is that inequity is often experienced through the work people have to do simply to obtain support.
Participants described repeatedly explaining their circumstances, navigating fragmented services, chasing professionals, proving eligibility and trying to understand complex systems. Over time, this left many feeling exhausted, frustrated and less likely to seek help in the future.
From a safeguarding perspective, this matters. When people stop asking for help because accessing support has become overwhelming, risk can increase significantly.
Delayed intervention.
Unmet needs.
Increased isolation.
Escalating crises.
In some cases, withdrawal from services altogether, and safeguarding should never unintentionally become something people have to fight for.
What Does This Mean for Safeguarding Leaders?
For leaders, the report presents an opportunity to reflect on organisational culture as much as operational practice.
Ask yourself:
Are our services genuinely accessible?
Do people have to tell their story multiple times?
Is our information easy to understand?
Are we considering cultural needs and lived experiences?
Do our referral pathways unintentionally disadvantage some groups?
How confident are we that our systems are person-centred rather than process-driven?
Safeguarding assurance should include questions about people's experiences of accessing support, not simply whether procedures have been followed.
The Importance of Professional Curiosity
Professional curiosity is often associated with recognising hidden abuse, however it should also extend to understanding the barriers people face when trying to access help. When someone repeatedly misses appointments, disengages from services or declines support, it is easy to record them as "non-engaging".
The better question might be:
"What barriers are preventing this person from engaging?"
This shift moves practice from judgement towards understanding.
Safeguarding Through an Equity Lens
The report also reinforces the importance of intersectionality, rarely does one factor alone determine someone's experience.
A young disabled person living in rural isolation may experience barriers very differently from an older adult from a minority ethnic community or someone living in financial hardship. Effective safeguarding requires us to consider the whole person, their identity, circumstances, relationships, strengths and challenges, rather than focusing solely on the presenting concern.
This is where safeguarding moves beyond compliance and towards truly person-centred practice.
Six Practical Questions for Organisations
As safeguarding leaders, this report provides an opportunity to ask:
How easy is it for people to access our services?
Are we actively listening to lived experience?
Do we monitor whether different communities experience our services differently?
Are our safeguarding processes creating unnecessary barriers?
Do staff understand equity as well as equality?
What evidence do we have that people feel respected, heard and empowered?
These questions are just as important as any safeguarding audit.
Final Thoughts
The SCIE report reminds us that safeguarding is not only about responding when harm occurs, it is also about ensuring the systems designed to protect people do not unintentionally contribute to that harm. As safeguarding professionals, we cannot always remove poverty, discrimination or structural inequality, however we can ensure that our own organisations do not add to those burdens.
When safeguarding is viewed through the lens of equity, we move beyond asking whether support exists. Instead, we ask whether people can genuinely access it, understand it and benefit from it with dignity.
That is the difference between compliance and compassionate safeguarding.
Resources
How care inequities shape social care experiences – Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE)