|Reference||Due date||Does it hold a database||How many people currently on it||What info can be held on individuals||When was it established||What are criteria for including someone||how many cllrs have access||how many cllrs have accessed it in last year to date||how many staff have access||how many staff have accessed it in last year to date||How many individuals have been removed from it in last year to date|
|North Somerset||responded||yes||12||There are currently 12 live contacts on the system and 59 reviewed contacts. The system records the following level of detail:|
• Precautions to be implemented
• Legal Action
|Mar-05||Individuals can only be placed on the register by staff with Editor Access. Editors are Team Managers and verification is required from their Line Manager before Editor Access is given. |
Once a provisional entry has been made on the on the register by an Editor, approval is required by system administrators before the entry goes live. System administrators are the H&S Advisors for the LA.
|North Tyneside||EF54759E||responded||yes||See: http://www.northtyneside.gov.uk/browse-display.shtml?p_ID=522979&p_subjectCategory=847|
• Approximate Age
• Relationship to injured party
• Type of violent behaviour
|2005||Completion of a violent incident report form||0||0||1467||330||0|
|Peterborough||acknowledged||responded||yes||11||The information held is name, address and details of violent behaviour.||Apr-98||The criteria are verbal abuse and threat of violence or physical violence towards one of the Council’s employees.||All councillors are able to access the database either through the Council’s intranet or via Members’ Services.||It is not known how many councilors accessed the database last year as we do not monitor usage.||All staff are able to access the database either through the Council’s intranet or via their line manager.||It is not known how many councilors accessed the database last year as we do not monitor usage.||0|
|Reading||FOI/11/244||responded||Building one||6||3. The information held will be the name and/or address, a risk assessment and details of the resultant precaution. Staff/Councillors accessing the site will search for a name and/or address and only the precaution would be shown. Access to the site is strictly controlled and monitored. Only staff or Councillors who are dealing with a particular individual or premises are permitted to search the site.||being built||individuals or premises where there is an actual or high risk of violence or aggressive behavior towards staff will be included. Their inclusion needs to be supported by evidence and a risk assessment.||all||0||all||0||0|
|Redcar and Cleveland||38|
|Rotherham||4975||responded||yes||19||Name, address, details of incident.||2006||Where a serious threat or actual act of violence or aggression has been made to a member of staff or elected member||None have requested direct access for themselves – this is facilitated through committee services staff.||None (please see response to Q6) – Please note: The database does not have the capability to determine who has accessed the database.||250||The database does not have the capability to determine who has accessed the database.||104|
|City of Liverpool||responded||flagged|
|Slough||2744||17-May||The council no longer maintains a corporate potentially violent register. The use of this register was suspended due to a legal challenge. Meanwhile services flag client records to indicate caution before contact. However this cannot provide the robustness of a corporate database and the council is currently considering a replacement system but the details of such a system have not yet been finalised|
|Solihull||responded||yes||22||The system only holds basic information, namely:|
a) Address details (property number, street name and post code) where a warning marker is active against that property.
b) If a warning is active against the property, the system will indicate which category of warning is applicable e.g. potentially violent person/cautionary message/uncontrolled animal/unsafe property.
c) Name and telephone contact details of the manager responsible for the active warning marker.
Note: If an employee has to visit a property which has a warning marker shown against it, the employee will contact the manager responsible for activation of the marker in order to obtain further details.
|2009||For an individual to be placed on the council’s warning marker system as a potentially violent person there must have been clear evidence that the individual has either :|
a) Physically assaulted a member of staff, or
b) Threatened to assault a member of staff to the extent that the member of staff has good reason to fear for their safety.
|50||0||All council employees who have access to a council’s intranet system have the ability access to the warning marker system||86||2|
|South Gloucestershire||FOI.11.10466||responded||yes||14||The information is: name, address, date of entry and of update / review and brief description of reason for entry. It also includes on internal contact detail relating to the department or service from which the entry initiated||2002||For an entry to be made, there must be reliable evidence of an incident or threat that is significant or potentially so, and the threat should be relevant to wider groups in the Council than the originating department or service.||All councilors have been informed about it, and they may have access if they request. Typically one or two make such a request. The system is being changed, and because of the new intake of councilors since the May 2011 elections, this may change in the near future.||All councilors have been informed about it, and they may have access if they request. Typically one or two make such a request. The system is being changed, and because of the new intake of councilors since the May 2011 elections, this may change in the near future.||Access is currently organised via workgroups, so the precise number cannot be given. In some teams the information is incorporated into other databases used for managing client contacts. For example, this information is signposted in the system for environmental health and that for the benefits services, because all of their staff are likely to need to make direct customer contact, so those staff all have access. Workgroups that do not have direct customer contact in his way do not have access. I would estimate the number of staff as several hundred (of the 3 – 4000 council staff outside schools)||This is not counted, so no response can be given||8|
|South Tyneside||FOI 00027|
|Southend-on-Sea||STHCC168695||responded||yes||113||It holds name, address, details of threatening behaviour, whether entry is due to an incident report or information received from the police, who the victim was, date of the incident and whether the incident involved animals, weapons etc.||Circa 1996-7||Aggressive, threatening or abusive behaviour as felt by the individual reporting and it is a requirement that a full name or address is entered on the register.||0||0||3 designated users||3 designated users||49|
|Stockton-on-Tees||SOT07272||responded||yes||108||Name, Other Known Names, Current Address, Date of Birth, Detail of Incident or Hazard, Police Involvement (if any). Logged Reviews of information held & Records of letters issued.||Jul-08||The Employee Protection Register shall only be used to record real, present and factual information relating to the risk of harm presented to employees due to their work, and the identified proportionate control measures deemed necessary.||0||0||874 (NB. This is includes Council staff and Tristar Homes Limited employees)||246||Unable to establish this data, as records are not kept of entries removed. All data removed is not recoverable.|
|Stoke-on-Trent||responded||yes||196||Name, address, date of birth, gender, details of behaviour, physical description, details of previous incidents, alias, visiting instructions, ownership of a dangerous animal||Late 2009 to early 2010||Threat of or actual physical violence, overly aggressive behaviour, threat or use of a weapon, dangerous environment, i.e. needles on floor/furniture.||all||The City Council does not hold this information||all||The City Council does not hold this information||The information is reviewed at 6/12 month intervals, therefore at this point in time only a limited number of records have been reviewe|
|Tameside||TWC-10057||responded||there is no current database of such people, although one is being developed. The criteria for inclusion will be where the Council considers that there is clear evidence of a threat of violence or harassment to people from the local authority visiting th||n/a|
|Telford and Wrekin||2296||responded||yes||193||Name, address, age, description, brief description of reasons for inclusion, precautions staff need to take.||1999||If a person behaves in a way which is felt could pose a significant threat of physical or mental harm to employees.||0 (zero) councillors have direct login rights to the database. If they want any information checked they would need to ask an employee with login rights to do this.||Information not held||750||The database itself has been accessed 3705 times in the previous 12 months, however it is not possible to ascertain exactly which staff of the 750 made the examination without reviewing all 3705 records||21|
|Thurrock||1112026||responded||yes||45||FORENAME TITLE UPRN ADDRESS LINE 1 PROPERTY NUMBER ROAD / STREET NAME ROAD / STREET NAME |
TOWN COUNTY POSTCODE INCIDENT DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDATION DATE ADDED TO LIST DATE OF LAST REVIEW
|15 years||See EIPE proceudre (updated) 17.11.2010.doc||49 – all our Councillors||Not held||All our staff have access to the list via our (securely hosted) internal web pages.||Not held||In line with our EIPE procedures (enclosed), the last Annual Review meeting was conducted on 11th November 2010. Changes arising from this (including removals) were made to the list on 17th December 2010 following the checks. 2 entries were removed as part of this review.|
Please note that we have mechanisms in place to ensure the data is kept accurate and up to date; regular checks are undertaken by our team. This may result in other removals / changes being made throughout the year.
|Torbay||acknowledged||responded||yes||39||Name, Address, DoB, and minimal details of incident||2002||Maintaining the Awareness Register|
The Health and Safety team are responsible for updating the Awareness Register on receipt of the completed Accident/Occurrence form and providing general maintenance to the system. No other employees will make alterations to the Awareness Register. Individual managers will designate and authorise, by using form IT05, employees who have been identified through risk assessment by their line managers to have access to the Awareness Register. Once a person, or address, has been placed on the register it will be reviewed for accuracy at six monthly intervals by the Health and Safety team and removed at the end of the expiration of the following periods where the threat to employees no longer exists:
Physical assault After 5 years
Verbal threats and a person reasonably fears for their own or another’s safety Review after 2 years
Verbal abuse and a person reasonably fears for their own or another’s safety Review after 1 year
The above limits will be halved where persons committing the incident were under the age of 17 at the time.
If there are multiple reports attributed to one person, a person’s name will be held on the register from the date of the last report.
|West Berkshire||RFI 3152||responded||yes, called Clients of Concern||38|| Name, address and Risk Category (Physical, Sexual, Verbal, Other)|
Individuals on the register are reviewed at least every 6 months.
|Jan-10||where a member of staff (or several members of staff) have reason to believe that an individual's previous actions make it likely that there is a risk of violence or aggression to themselves, or other members of WBC staff. Prior to the individual being pu||None so far (to have access they would need to be authorised by a senior officer)||n/a||The Clients of Concern Register is only allowed to be viewed by Authorised Users, no third party is able to view the Register. Authorised Users are nominated by the Head of their Service, or the Corporate Health and Safety Team. 181 in total||I am advised that the database is an excel Spreadsheet and we do not monitor the number of times this is accessed||Inclusion on the Clients of Concern database is reviewed every 6 months, but while names may be removed we do not keep a count of how many.|
|Wiltshire||responded||being built||194||NAME, ADDRESS, DISTINGUISHING FEATURES, NATURE OF PREVIOUSLY REPORTED RISK||May-11||A PREVIOUS REPORT OF AGGRESSIVE OR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS A MEMBER OF COUNCIL STAFF OR AN UNSAFE CONDITION THAT MAY BE FACED AT THE PREMISES SUCH AS DANGEROUS DOGS||0||n/a||STAFF WHO VISIT DOMESTIC OR COMMERCIAL PREMISES IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTIES WILL BE ABLE TO REQUEST INFORMATION FROM THE DATABASE. NO INFORMATION IS ACCESSIBLE OR RELEASED WITHOUT THE EMPLOYEE CONFIRMING THEIR IDENTITY AND NEED FOR THE INFORMATION.||not known||n/a|
|Windsor and Maidenhead||n/a||responded||no|
|Wokingham||y3057||responded||Yes||12||a) The address and the reason for being on list, we use a choice of 3 options (1) A Threat of violence (2) Dirty property (3) Sexual harassment. No comments are shared with anyone||It was established around 2004||Violent /aggressive and threatening behaviour towards Council Officers & Contractors||There is only access on a need to know basis.||We do not keep a record of this information.||Only on a need to know basis||We do not keep a record of this information.||3|
|York||yes||278||any relevant to identifying them clearly, or that would assist a risk assessment concerning contact with him or her. It would not usually include a phone number||2004||See attached document||47 (all)||not recorded||416||not recorded||0|
|Barnsley||responded||yes||139||Oct-09||The individual's actions must have prompted/resulted in a member of staff completing a report of an act of violence or aggression towards them. The Manager of that member of staff then requests the inclusion based on the incident and this is confirmed centrally before the entry is made.||None||None||23||23||0|
|Bedford||responded||yes||9||The register is premises based not individual based – There are currently 14 active premises flags listed on the register relating to 9 individuals. Name, address, gender and nature of incident.||2004||The Executive Director Environment & Sustainable Communities [EDE&SC] (Formerly the Head of Technical Services) in his capacity as the Council’s Health and Safety Champion following consultation with the Head of Corporate Safety and Resilience [HCS&R] (Formerly the Corporate Safety Officer) will determine on a case by case basis whether or not there is good reason for a ‘Violent/Potentially Violent warning marker’ to be entered against the Council’s corporate property data base. Good reason will be assessed with reference to one or more of the following:|
a) An employee reports personal experience of threatening behaviour /physical assault by a person which caused the employee to have concerns for his/her personal safety.
b) Corroborated reports from other data controllers such as the Department of Work and Pensions, Housing Associations etc. of actual physical violence involving an individual or individuals who are likely to come into contact with the Council’s staff or those acting on its behalf.
c) Corroborated reports from other data controllers such as the Department of Work and Pensions, Housing Associations etc of threatening behaviour involving an individual or individuals who are likely to come into contact with the Council’s staff or those acting on its behalf.
d) Police intelligence that an individual or individuals is/are likely to exhibit violent behaviour.
e) The nature of the incident, the degree of violence used or threatened, and whether the incident indicates a credible threat of violence to staff/others in the future.
|none||n/a||Staff do not have direct access to the information contained in the database. For relevant premises they will see a message advising them to contact the Corporate Safety Manager.||see above||3 premises|
|Blackburn with Darwen||responded||yes||91||The following detail can be held per incident / person - name, address, date of incident, inputting officer, cautionary note in relation to the offender i.e. do not interview alone||Pre 2005||Typically violent behaviour / threats and where there is reasonable belief that the person may repeat the behaviour demonstrated, will trigger an individual being added to the database.||All staff and councillors have access to the database through the Departmental coordinators. We are not in a position to identify how many employees / councillors have accessed the database in the last year||All staff and councillors have access to the database through the Departmental coordinators. We are not in a position to identify how many employees / councillors have accessed the database in the last year||All staff and councillors have access to the database through the Departmental coordinators. We are not in a position to identify how many employees / councillors have accessed the database in the last year||0|
|Blackpool||responded||yes||14||name, address, mitigating circumstances and controls required||2010||an extreme incident of violence or aggression behaviour towards council employee’s|
a number of incidents of violence or aggressive behaviour towards council employee’s
|none so far||none so far||approx 686||44||0|
· Date of birth (if known)
· Brief overview of incident and pertinent information (max 250 characters)
Incidents must be entered if the incident involves any of the following criteria;
· All cases of physical assault. (with or without injury).
· Harassment, i.e. sexual, racial, disability.
· Serious verbal threats.
· Reliable information has been received that a person user has shown aggressive or violent behaviour to employees of other departments and organisations.
In the following situations, the Admin User may exercise their own judgement on whether to proceed with an application for an indicator, or to monitor the situation further before deciding whether or not to take such action.
· The behaviour displayed, although unacceptable, is considered to be uncharacteristic and occasioned by some traumatic event in their lives, e.g. the death of a close relative.
· The behaviour, although unacceptable, is not seen as intentional and has been caused by the person’s confusion, e.g. dementia or other cognitive impairment.
· Verbal abuse.
|0||n/a||160||not recorded||not recorded|
|Bracknell Forest||In progress|
|Calderdale||responded||yes||91||Name and address.|
Reason for entry on database. This is a category (no detail)- either serious threat/actual violence.
Advice to employee planning to visit that person. This is a category: either a) go in two’s b) invite to Council interview room c) do not visit.
|Approx 5 years ago||Actual violence to one of our members of staff, use of weapons, or threat to endanger life.|
The register includes people with a current ASBO, but this information is already in the public domain. As soon as the ASBO runs out they are removed from the register.
|0||n/a||224. There is a process of authorisation to be followed before access to the database is granted.||unknown||5|
|Central Bedfordshire||responded||yes - Special Interests Register (SIR)||79||Name, address and a brief description of why they are on it and any control|
measures e.g. do not visit alone.
|2010||Relevant Persons who are potentially violent in that they have used or|
threatened physical violence.
Relevant Persons who are menacing abusive, use offensive language, are
coercive, attempt to apply psychological pressure
Relevant Persons who demonstrate a racist or sexist attitude
Relevant Persons who have a dangerous animal, which is a threat to Council
Where there has been a notifiable incident in a particular area: e.g. Caravan
Anti Social Behaviour Order served
Relevant Person has a special need
|At the time of your request Councilors do not have access to the SIR.||n/a||All front facing staff have access to the register which is approximately 600 staff.||This cannot be identified as the system does not track who and when individuals|
have logged in.
|Cheshire East||responded||Yes – some Departments have their own lists and one of these is managed by the Corporate Health & Safety Team. This reply concerns the database managed by the Corporate Health & Safety Team, although it does not yet have corporate wide access or application.||43||Name, known aliases, current address of person, postcode, description of assailant, height, hair colour, eye colour, age, assailant category, whether this person has committed a similar action in the last 6 months.||The database managed by the Corporate Health & Safety Team was originally created in 2007 (under the auspices of the former Macclesfield Borough Council).||Each incident is assessed for severity and given a risk rating by the Corporate Health & Safety Manager. Examples of behaviour which would result in a person being added onto the PVA register include where customers commit or attempt to commit a physical assault on a CEC employee regardless of whether the member of staff is injured, make a threat of violence either face to face, over the telephone or in writing to a CEC employee, threaten or assault another person in the presence of a CEC employee or where aggressive dogs are involved at properties being visited. NB: this list is not exhaustive||0||0||252||3||0|
|Cheshire West and Chester||chased 23/05|
|City of Birmingham||responded||no|
|City of Bradford||flagged|
|City of Coventry||responded||no|
|City of Leeds||responded||no|
|City of Manchester||chased 23/05|
|City of Newcastle upon Tyne||responded||no|
|City of Salford||chased 23/05|
|City of Sheffield||responded||no|
|City of Sunderland||responded||no|
|City of Wakefield||chased 23/05|
|City of Wolverhampton||responded||no|
|Cornwall||responded||The Council is in the process of procuring a corporate register to record the details of individuals who are considered to be violent. A purchase order has been issued and the system is due to be in place by the end of June 2011|
|County Durham||responded||yes - have 2 lists||1525||name, DOB, address, telephone number, plus details of the warning indicator||Yes, we have two lists and we are currently reviewing our approach to the use of Potentially Violent Person registers. The lists refer to (i) warning indicators which are operated by Adults Wellbeing and Health (AWH) and Children and Young Peoples Service (CYPS) and a (ii) Corporate Incident Database (CID).|
‘Warning Indicators’ can be held on individual case records to identify individuals who could pose a risk to members of staff who come into contact with them. This enables staff to be forewarned and take any precautionary measures in advance of a visit. The service also use warning indicators for other purposes e.g. to identify service users who may have potentially aggressive/dangerous animal, to identify when a service user refuses to have a male or female worker for example.
NB: Warning indicators are only accessed on an individual case level by those staff with a need to know. There is no index or register of all warning indicators which can be routinely accessed by staff.
The other list is the Corporate Incident Database. A new policy is being developed that brings together these issues and harmonises them across all frontline staff within the County Council. We expect that to be in use within the next 12 months.The AWH/CYPS list has been operating since the introduction of SSID the electronic records management system in the mid 1990s.
The Corporate Incident Database has been in operation since June 2009 after we became a new unitary authority.
|For AWH/CYPS: The decision about whether to record a warning indicator on an individual’s record is taken following discussion with a team manager about the nature of the threat and risk posed. If a warning indicator is recorded, it will be selected from an agreed set of codes which have been agreed for the purpose.|
For CID: Currently, a Principal Officer will assess the situation and add someone if they present a risk to a member of Durham County Council staff. This is a temporary process until the new procedure is approved and implemented.
|There is only one council member locality officer who has access to the database warning indicators.|
The warning indicators are notified as and when updates are recorded and these would be checked by the locality officer and if any of these new updates were for residents, the locality officer would inform the elected member for that area.
|0||2190 staff across our Adults, Wellbeing & Health and Children and Young Peoples Services have access to warning indicators.|
In Customer Services, there is approximately 450 frontline staff that have access to the CID list.
|Warning Indicators' are recorded as an integral part of the electronic records management system for adults and children’s social care. Consequently, most staff provided with access to the electronic system (see question 8) will have accessed warning indicators in the last year.|
Also, the 450 frontline staff have access but as to who, how many and when they access it , this information is not recorded.
|353 warning indicators have been removed in the last 12 months|
|Doncaster||responded||yes||46||Name and other person information (Appearance, DOB etc)|
Address (with telephone contact numbers)
Description of Incident (including date, time)
Location of Incident (address, individuals relationship to Location)
|Original Version 2001, Upgrade 2007||Person needs to pose a potential danger to an employee of the council, or someone acting|
on behalf of council (contractor or other third party). Data sharing protocols need to be in
place to enable the sharing of this information with other parties.
|0||0||Staff Access Level 1: 160|
Access to check whether name or address is a potential risk, no incident or person details
Staff Access Level 2: 65
Read only access to incident details (manager/supervisor access) to decide on the
appropriate response after a positive Level 1 search.
|Leve1 2: 25 active users|
Level 1: We restrict access to named individuals, 160 of whom have regular access at
|26 individuals have been removed in year 2010/2011 (April – March)|
|Dudley||responded||yes||37||Name, address and brief generic details of the incident that has resulted in their inclusion.||The system became functional in January 2008.||see ews procedure.doc||All persons with access to Dudley's internal IT systems have access however there must be a legitimate need for an individual to access it.||22||All persons with access to Dudley's internal IT systems have access however there must be a legitimate need for an individual to access it.||The system has been accessed 2050 times in the last 12 months. This includes multiple accesses by individuals. Breaking this down into the number of individuals would take a significant amount of time. 1665 unique users have accessed the system in total.||10|
|East Riding of Yorkshire||responded||no|
|Gateshead||responded||We do not have a corporate violent warning marker database at the moment although we are currently thinking about introducing one and are looking at the Information Commissioner's guidance about violent warning marker systems|
|Halton||responded||yes||82||The person’s name and address and the nature of threat, e.g. verbal, or physical||2006||The individual should pose a genuine risk and the decision must be made on objective and clearly defined criteria taking into account:|
· The nature of the threat
· The degree of violence used or threatened: and
· Whether or not the incident indicates a credible risk of violence to staff
Information held will relate to potentially violent clients and includes behaviour that may pose a risk or environmental risks such as dangerous dogs.
|0||N/a||202||8/2/10 to 9/8/10 - 153||23||(in 2010)|
Date of Birth
Narrative detailing Incidents
Dates of Incidents
Category of Incident (Verbal Abuse, Physical Abuse, Enviromental Threat)
Status (awaiting approval, approved etc)
|2008||When an incident has occurred and is deemed to be relevant under the councils Violence against staff policy||0||0||about 750 currently have log ins||230||We remove incidents not actual individuals as such from the database. When individuals are removed a letter informing them will be sent|
|Kingston upon Hull||responded||yes - however it is a list of risks to staff at specific addresses which can include dangerous dogs/premises as well as individuals at any given site.||189||Name and address and classification e.g. threatening behaviour.||2008||Officers must complete a request form and obtain their manager's agreement prior to a property being flagged and details being placed on the list. The manager must decide whether there are sufficient grounds for the property to be flagged as one where visiting staff must be alerted of a risk to their safety in accordance with the requirements of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Where an individual is entered onto the list they are notified in writing.||0||0||Only 2 administrators of the database can access the central list. Individual events/risks are entered against the appropriate address on the Public Protection case management system meaning staff only access such data when it happens to be recorded against an address they are due to visit.||2||0|
|Kirklees||responded||yes||348||Self evident from guidance pack (specifically refer to V1 form)||Circa 1998||Refer to guidance pack||No direct access, a nominated officer can provide relevant information on request||None – councilors do not have direct access to the database||1681 authorised users – currently being reviewed (21/04/2011)||42855 enquiries were made (21/04/2010 – 24/04/2011)||180 records have been removed|
D.O.B if known
Other known alias or addresses:
Details of the nature of the incident:
Details of known associations with other registered entries: People or Incidents
Details of vehicles where relevant and known: Make, model, registration.
|2002||Commit an act of violence against an employee either verbal or physical or be a person whose details are provided to the Council from Merseyside Police as someone who poses a threat to employees who may come into contact with them during the course of their duties||0||0||We have 30 licenses’ available for direct read only access to the database. However, at present only 8 staff use the system and only 3 of the 8 staff have security permissions to enter/edit details on the system||5||0|
|North East Lincolnshire||responded||The Council also has an embryonic “Risk Alert System”. This is not a register as such, rather a procedure designed to protect Council Employees and others from immediate and continuing threat of violence or personal injury. A record is kept of those alerts issued under this arrangement.||0||Date entered onto the spreadsheet,|
Originating directorate and risk assessor,
Risk and Location,
Nature of risk,
Individuals/Groups at Risk,
Recommended Control Measures,
Date When Risk Champions/Directorates Were Notified,
Dates Perpetrator Notified/Review Due
|There has been a form of this system in place since 2004||Action will be initiated where an employee encounters a serious risk which might also provide a serious continuing risk of personal injury to others and can be evidenced. An assessment of the risk posed will be made by a trained risk champion who will contact those at risk with advice of the precautions needed.||Any, but only where there is a need for their protection, or it is a governance enquiry.||None||Initially one beyond the individual at risk and the line manager. The directorate risk champion will then make an assessment and advise any key groups at risk via the risk champion in their directorate. It will vary therefore between 3 and 40 depending on the nature of risk.||It is not available for access generally but is a record of action taken by risk champions. There are 6 directorate risk champions and a Risk Manager who have access at any one time.||There are no current entries on the record of risk alerts issued. There have been 6 records over the past 3 years, all now removed.|
|Wakefield||responded||yes||84||Name, Address, Department and name of member of staff that reported the incident and the date of the incident and also indicating which category the incident fits into as described in the attachment||2001||The criteria is whether they have been violent, aggressive or abusive to a member of Council staff in such a way as it is considered that they are a potential threat to other members of staff and as indicated in the attachmen||0||0||339||not held||0|