Understanding extremism in Scotland: public sector practitioner perceptions and views

6. Understanding the Prevent duty

6.1. Introduction

This section will address the following research question:

• To what extent are public sector practitioners aware of the Prevent duty, and how well do they feel they understand it?

In the qualitative discussions, participants were asked about their familiarity with the Prevent duty and their understanding of it. Participants were prompted with a definition of the Prevent duty if they were not aware of it.

Towards the start of the survey, respondents were asked to choose one or more options (or ‘none of the above’) from a list of possible aspects of their role and responsibilities:

• Working directly with the general public to deliver frontline services
• Working directly with vulnerable members of the general public to deliver frontline services
• Managing or supporting colleagues who work directly with the general public to deliver frontline services
• Reporting safeguarding concerns (e.g., those at risk of abuse or neglect)
• Reporting Prevent concerns
• Managing or coordinating a response to safeguarding concerns made by colleagues
• Managing or coordinating a response to Prevent concerns made by colleagues

Respondents were later shown a definition of the Prevent duty:

Prevent is the first of the four ‘P’s of the UK Government’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy, known as CONTEST; Prevent, Pursue, Protect, Prepare. The purpose of Prevent is to ‘stop people becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism’.

Public sector practitioners working within certain sectors have a duty to pay due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism, which is called the ‘Prevent duty’.

Following this, they were asked to what extent they think it is part of their job and its level of importance to their job, with the option to say that they had never heard of Prevent.

This section will cover initial awareness and understanding of safeguarding and Prevent duties as part of public sector practitioners’ roles followed by awareness after being prompted with an explanation of the Prevent duty. Then perceived importance of the Prevent duty as part of public sector practitioners’ roles will be explored, followed by understanding of the Prevent duty after being prompted with the explanation, before turning to conclusions for the section.

6.2. Initial awareness and understanding of safeguarding and Prevent

Initial awareness of Prevent amongst public sector practitioners in the quantitative sample varied greatly, from those who had never heard of Prevent, through to those who had designed and delivered Prevent training to colleagues. A significant minority (16%) of respondents reported never having heard of Prevent.

Q3. Which of the following, if any, are part of your role and responsibilities?

Base: All respondents, n=492; Police Scotland, n=74; Scottish Prisons Service, n=85; Local authorities and social work, n=99; Education, n=93; Health and social care, n=141.

As shown in Figure 11, over three quarters (78%) of public sector practitioners listed reporting or managing safeguarding concerns as part of their role. In contrast, just over half (54%) of all public sector practitioners saw Prevent concerns as part of their role before having been prompted with an explanation of the Prevent duty.

Public sector practitioners in the prison and education sectors (66% and 68% respectively) were significantly more likely to consider reporting or managing Prevent concerns as part of their role than public sector practitioners working in the police and health and social care sectors (51% and 39% respectively).

In the qualitative research, when asked about their day-to-day role and responsibilities, the Prevent duty did not spring to mind for most people unless it was central to their role. For example, when asked to outline their job role, around half of those with Prevent-related roles mentioned Prevent without being prompted, while none of those without a Prevent-related role spontaneously mentioned extremism or Prevent.

Similarly, safeguarding duties more broadly were not felt to be a key part of most public sector practitioners’ day-to-day roles, but instead something that comes into play if a concern comes up. The difference was that public sector practitioners were more likely to see safeguarding as part of their role, even if not a key part, than Prevent.

However, the extent to which public sector practitioners were likely to prioritise safeguarding depended on their job sector and interaction with the public. Education practitioners were most likely to see safeguarding as part of their role (95%), compared with police (68%), health and social care (72%), prisons (79%) and local authority (79%) practitioners. Safeguarding was considered to be a more key aspect of roles by public sector practitioners who were working with vulnerable children or adults.

[How does Prevent fit into your role?] “It doesn’t. It’s an extracurricular responsibility. It’s alongside any other mental health, safeguarding, plagiarism concerns. Ok, just add that to the list. It would not be given any separate weighting or importance.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Further / Higher education, Mini focus group)

6.3. Prompted awareness of how the Prevent duty fits into their role

Following the provision of a description of the Prevent duty, a greater proportion of respondents saw Prevent as part of their role. Before being shown the definition, half (54%) of respondents said that they thought Prevent was part of their role, compared with eight in ten (80%) respondents after being shown the definition. This was higher than the proportion of those considering safeguarding part of their role (78%).

Q10. To what extent do you think that the Prevent duty is a part of your job?

Base: All respondents, n=492.

Just over one in five (21%) respondents said they consider the Prevent duty closely in their day-to-day work, with a larger proportion (35%) not considering it much day-to-day. As has been noted in relation to safeguarding, an obligation can be seen as part of a practitioner’s role, even if it does not form a central aspect of their day-to-day work.

In the qualitative research, public sector practitioners with roles that did not involve managing safeguarding or Prevent concerns were much less likely to have heard specifically about Prevent in the context of their work and some were uncertain exactly what the Prevent duty entailed.

Practitioners in the health and social care and prison sectors were less likely to have heard of Prevent (23% and 19% respectively), with other sectors ranging from 10-14%. This reflects findings from the qualitative discussions, in which health and social care workers without Prevent-related roles were least likely to be aware of Prevent or recall having taken part in Prevent training. There was also a sense that it was not an important priority in their roles.

Just over one in five (21%) respondents said they consider the Prevent duty closely in their day-to-day work. More broadly, eight in ten (80%) felt the Prevent duty applied to their job, while just over half (56%) saw it as an important part.

Q10. To what extent do you think that the Prevent duty is a part of your job?

Base: All respondents, n=492; Police Scotland, n=74; Scottish Prisons Service, n=85; Local authorities and social work, n=99; Education, n=93; Health and social care, n=141.

The biggest discrepancy between awareness that the Prevent duty applies to their role and its perceived importance was in the health and social care sector, with approximately seven in ten (72%) being aware that it applies to their job, but less than half (40%) seeing it as an important part of their role. This again mirrors qualitative findings that public sector practitioners in this sector were least aware of Prevent, and felt it was not an important priority in their roles.

Meanwhile there were substantial differences between those in Prevent managerial roles (i.e., with a responsibility for managing or coordinating a response to Prevent concerns) compared with Prevent non-managerial roles with regards to the perceived importance of the Prevent duty in their role. As displayed in Figure 14, almost all respondents who held Prevent managerial roles felt Prevent was an important part of their role (81%).

In contrast, while three quarters (76%) of respondents in Prevent non-managerial roles said that Prevent applied to their role, only 46% felt it was an important part of their role.

Q10. To what extent do you think that the Prevent duty is a part of your job?

Base: All respondents, n=492; Practitioners with Prevent managerial roles, n=142; Practitioners with Prevent non-managerial roles, n=350.

This was also reflected in the qualitative research, where public sector practitioners without a responsibility for managing safeguarding or Prevent concerns occasionally understood that Prevent was part of their job role and responsibilities, but did not view it as priority in their day-to-day work or give it any greater weighting relative to other similar tasks, such as safeguarding.

[Are you familiar with Prevent?] “Not really, I just saw from the information pack, I’ve not looked it up. It’s important to be aware of and have training on it. Day-to-day, probably not really part of my role. I need to be aware, but it doesn’t need to be at the front of my daily role.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Scottish Prisons Service, In-depth interview)

“We are all aware of Prevent to varying degrees. I’ve had limited Prevent training and done bits and pieces. But because you don’t use it very often, you have it in the background.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)

6.6. Conclusions

A significant minority (16%) of respondents reported never having heard of Prevent, with public sector practitioners in the health and social care sector (23%) and public sector practitioners in Prevent non-managerial roles (20%) most likely not to be aware of Prevent.

There were a wide range of starting positions when it came to public sector practitioners’ understanding of Prevent, although the majority were aware of the Prevent duty. However, before seeing an explanation of the Prevent duty, fulfilling the Prevent duty tended not to be seen as a key part of public sector practitioners’ roles.

In contrast, public sector practitioners were more likely to see safeguarding as part of their role. They tended to be more familiar with safeguarding duties, and saw them as more directly relevant to their work, particularly those working with vulnerable adults.

After being shown a description of the Prevent duty, a greater proportion of respondents saw Prevent as part of their role. After seeing this description, eight in ten (80%) respondents said that they thought Prevent was part of their role, compared with 54% before, bringing the proportion up to over the level of those considering safeguarding part of their role (78%).

6.5. Prompted understanding of delivering the Prevent duty

In the qualitative research, public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles had a far clearer sense of how to deliver the Prevent duty than those without Prevent-related roles. This high level of understanding was due to the Prevent-specific aspect of their roles, rather than being exposed to extremism naturally in their day-to-day work. For example, some admitted knowing nothing about Prevent before taking on their Prevent-related role.

While public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles clearly understood the stages involved in a Prevent referral, not all of them had experienced one. They were also able to name specific roles within their sector or organisation who would respond to a referral.

Even amongst these public sector practitioners, there was a scale of involvement in Prevent from being aware and having it on their radar, but it not being their entire role, to being hired into a role because of their knowledge of and experience with Prevent.

“My build up to Prevent was all part and parcel of when I joined [redacted]. […] One of the reasons I was employed in this job was because I knew about Prevent.”

(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Primary / secondary education, In-depth interview)

In contrast, public sector practitioners without a Prevent-related role who had heard of Prevent tended to have done so through general safeguarding training and were typically not able to describe the specifics of the Prevent duty. They knew they had a responsibility to be broadly aware of extremism issues and who to raise these with, but were unclear of their exact level of responsibility and what would happen following a Prevent referral.

In general, public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles were not aware of the process of a Prevent referral, or what would happen once someone else in the organisation took the concern on. There was a broad sense of what to do, for example, ‘we call social work for guidance’, or ‘my role is to make sure the next step is in place’, but participants did not have a clear understanding of what would happen next, apart from one practitioner in social work who worked more closely with Prevent. Although public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles are not expected to have an understanding of the referral process as part of the Prevent duty, for some this contributed to a lack of clarity around the specifics of the Prevent duty, leading these practitioners to feel less confident about their own knowledge and ability in this area.

“I think I would be listened to [if reporting a concern] but whether any action would be taken, I don’t know. Sometimes I feel we’re less likely to challenge, so you might raise an issue but you never feel it’s been resolved, and you certainly don’t get any feedback.”

(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Primary / secondary education, In-depth interview)

Most public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles were able to identify another person or role within their organisation or sector who they would approach for help as a first port of call in the event of a safeguarding or Prevent concern. Among many such public sector practitioners, this was the extent of their knowledge of what to do following a Prevent concern.

“If it sounds like a possible Prevent incident, we pick up the phone and always have guidance there, because there are departments that that’s all they deal with.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)

Within schools, these roles included student guidance councillors, who the public sector practitioners felt would follow a safeguarding protocol (not specifically related to Prevent) and have a more informal conversation with the individual about their general wellbeing, mental health etc.

Those working in the police sector mentioned the counter-terrorism police department, which, along with school link officers, they felt would be more likely to deal with extremism. However, some public sector practitioners, particularly in Further / Higher education, were unaware of who to approach, while some others said they would defer to ‘more experienced staff’ as opposed to being able to name specific roles that would deal with Prevent. Health and social care workers without Prevent-related roles were particularly uncertain who would deal with the concern, as they felt a referral could sit in a number of different areas, such as adults with incapacity, children and families, and mental health services. They therefore viewed the system as complicated.

“I would imagine it [the referral process] working in the same way as referring a student about mental health. Referring to someone with the expertise and qualifications to help someone with what they’re dealing with, whether it’s mental health or extremism.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Further / Higher education, Mini focus group)

“I don’t know the official process, but anything at all we notice, there is an intelligence process to go through which is our first point of call.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Scottish Prisons Service, In-depth interview)

[Who would deal with a referral?] “Probably just experienced, older staff. There’s enough experienced staff to keep an eye on it. […] They have a general overview of who prisoners are talking to.”

(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Scottish Prisons Service, Mini focus group)