Two-thirds of sexual assault support centres in England branded inadequate

[IwantToRetire]

Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs) are used by thousands of child and adult victims of sexual assault and abuse each year to offer everything from psychological and medical support to the gathering of forensic evidence for criminal prosecutions.

Most SARC centres are outsourced by the government to private firms. Twenty-five of the 43 English SARC centres assessed by the CQC are run by two firms – the security giant G4S Health Services and the private healthcare firm Mountain Healthcare. When inspected by the CQC, centres run by both companies had more problems than their NHS-run counterparts. At facilities run by G4S and Mountain Healthcare, 80% and 73% respectively were in need of improvement. For the 17 NHS-run centres the figure was 70%.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/aug/06/two-thirds-of-sexual-assault-support-centres-in-england-branded-inadequate

I had not idea any of these centres have been out sourced. Its just scandalous that this instance that private companies can do it cheaper, without asking what has been cut to make it cheaper, is grotesque in so many situations, but this one when victims of rape and sexual assualt are in need of help is disgusting.

.
And in the same week there was this:

A domestic violence charity is facing accusations some staff bullied and neglected vulnerable shelter residents.

The Hestia charity took over the shelter, in south London, from Refuge in November 2021 after the council put the contract out to tender.

Some women claim care at the shelter declined after Hestia took over.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66372491

Hestia is primarily a housing association, and again this drive to go for the cheapest option leads to situations like this.

All the campaigning and struggling for women's services (even without the trans issue) is being completely eroded by the open tendering process, when any one with a convincing low budget sheet can be handed the care of vulnerable women.

Thanks for highlighting this. Depressing reading but important that these sorts of failings are made public and pressure put on the government and providers to make improvements.

This is really concerning but I also think the article is a tiny bit misleading / wrong as SARCs - so I thought - don't really do psychological support. They're more for gathering forensic evidence and then they signpost to that kind of support. But I may be wrong. Still, if the concerns are about things to do with forensic evidence, then that's indeed worrying.

don't really do psychological support

I thought they were meant to do emotional support, as part of a neutral process to help someone decide if they just wanted medical help and provide forensic evidence, but not actually work with the police. And then signposted to RCCs?

The idea that a private company has been given this brief in unbelievable. Bean counters cant be allowed to just decide on a cost basis. It undermines the whole point of SARCs. Unfortunately we would need thousands of JKRs to even begin to fund support services for women that are run by and for women. (Women=biological female).

How could anyone have thought a security firm like G4S who have a list of failures would be appropraite to provide this type of service.
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/sexual-health/help-after-rape-and-sexual-assault/

And as to refuge provision, the shocking lack of understanding for a properlyl funded secure place for victims of DV has been brushed aside by so many councils, who for instance have said as there is hostel provision in their area why do they need to fund a refuge? Let alone the use of unregulated housing.