SAFECHAIN™

Policy Brief for the Domestic Abuse Commissioner

Strengthening Safeguarding Infrastructure for Survivors of Domestic Abuse

SAFECHAIN™

Policy Brief for the Domestic Abuse Commissioner

Strengthening Safeguarding Infrastructure for Survivors of Domestic Abuse

Prepared by
Samantha Avril-Andreassen
Founder – SAFECHAIN™© 2026 Samantha Avril-Andreassen. All rights reserved.

Executive Summary

Survivors of domestic abuse frequently interact with multiple public institutions simultaneously, including courts, housing services, police, healthcare providers, and social services. While these institutions operate within established safeguarding frameworks, the systems themselves often function independently.This fragmentation can create circumstances where safeguarding context is not fully visible when critical decisions are made.SAFECHAIN™ is a proposed safeguarding interoperability framework designed to support institutions in recognising vulnerability indicators when individuals are temporarily unable to advocate for themselves due to trauma, psychological distress, or crisis.The framework does not alter legal authority or statutory safeguarding duties. Instead, it explores how a privacy-protected infrastructure layer could improve coordination between institutions responsible for protecting vulnerable individuals.This briefing note outlines the structural safeguarding challenge SAFECHAIN™ seeks to address and presents the concept as a contribution to broader policy discussions on improving institutional responses to domestic abuse.

The Structural Safeguarding Challenge

Domestic abuse survivors frequently encounter a complex network of institutional processes following abuse. These may include:• family court proceedings
• housing disputes or relocation needs
• police reporting and safeguarding assessments
• healthcare support for trauma and injury
• social services engagementAlthough each institution operates within safeguarding frameworks, coordination between systems is often limited.As a result, survivors may experience:• repeated disclosure of traumatic experiences
• inconsistent recognition of vulnerability indicators
• procedural escalation during periods of psychological crisis
• difficulty communicating safeguarding needs across agenciesThese challenges can create additional administrative and emotional strain for survivors already navigating recovery.SAFECHAIN™ seeks to address this systemic coordination gap.

The SAFECHAIN™ Concept

SAFECHAIN™ proposes a safeguarding interoperability framework designed to support institutions in recognising safeguarding context more consistently.The concept is based on three core principles.

Survivor-Centred Safeguarding

Individuals retain control over how their safeguarding preferences and communication needs are recorded. Survivors may document:• communication preferences during crisis
• trauma triggers that may affect engagement
• preferred safeguarding contacts
• accessibility and support needsThis information may assist professionals responding to safeguarding events.

Privacy-Protected Infrastructure

Sensitive safeguarding information is encrypted and only accessible when safeguarding triggers are met and authorised professionals require context to respond appropriately.The framework incorporates:• strong encryption protections
• tiered institutional access controls
• audit logging of safeguarding access eventsThese safeguards ensure that privacy and survivor autonomy remain central to the system.

Institutional Accountability

SAFECHAIN™ emphasises transparency and accountability.All safeguarding activations and access events are recorded through audit logs, ensuring that any access to sensitive safeguarding context remains proportionate and reviewable.

Potential Safeguarding Functions

SAFECHAIN™ explores several mechanisms that could support safeguarding coordination.

Safeguarding Preference Records

Survivors may securely record communication preferences and safeguarding needs.

Contextual Non-Engagement Recognition

The framework recognises that temporary withdrawal or missed engagement may reflect trauma-related crisis rather than unwillingness to cooperate.

Safeguarding Activation Signals

Where predefined conditions are met, institutions may receive a notification indicating that safeguarding context should be considered.These signals do not alter legal authority but support professional decision-making.

Cross-Agency Awareness

The system seeks to improve awareness between institutions while maintaining strict data minimisation and privacy protections.

Policy Relevance

SAFECHAIN™ aligns with broader efforts to strengthen institutional responses to domestic abuse and vulnerability.The concept reflects principles associated with:• trauma-informed governance
• survivor-centred safeguarding
• cross-agency coordination
• procedural fairness
• privacy-preserving digital infrastructureThe framework seeks to contribute to ongoing policy discussions on improving how institutions respond to vulnerability.

Purpose of This Brief

This briefing note is shared with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s office as part of a broader effort to contribute insights drawn from lived experience and research into safeguarding coordination challenges.While the Commissioner’s role does not include intervention in individual cases, the development of SAFECHAIN™ reflects a commitment to exploring how safeguarding systems might operate more cohesively to better support survivors.

Contact

Samantha Avril-Andreassen
Founder – SAFECHAIN™samantha@safe-chain.org
safe-chain.org

Purpose of This Brief

This briefing note is shared with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s office as part of a broader effort to contribute insights drawn from lived experience and research into safeguarding coordination challenges.

While the Commissioner’s role does not include intervention in individual cases, the development of SAFECHAIN™ reflects a commitment to exploring how safeguarding systems might operate more cohesively to better support survivors.

The Role of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner

The Domestic Abuse Commissioner for England and Wales is an independent statutory office established under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. The Commissioner’s role is to lead efforts to improve the national response to domestic abuse, promote best practice, and ensure that the voices of victims and survivors are reflected in policy and system reform.

The Commissioner does not intervene in individual cases or influence operational decisions made by courts, police, or other public authorities. Instead, the role focuses on systemic oversight and reform, working across government, the justice system, and support services to identify structural issues affecting survivors.

Key responsibilities of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner include:

Monitoring and Oversight

The Commissioner monitors how public bodies respond to domestic abuse and assesses whether institutions are meeting their obligations to protect and support victims and survivors.

Research and Evidence

The office commissions and publishes research to better understand survivors’ experiences across systems such as policing, housing, healthcare, and the family courts. These studies help identify where institutional practices may unintentionally create barriers to safety and justice.

Policy Influence

The Commissioner works with government departments, Parliament, and public institutions to recommend improvements to laws, policies, and operational practices that affect survivors.

Amplifying Survivor Voices

A central part of the role is ensuring that victims and survivors’ lived experiences inform policy decisions. This includes conducting consultations, focus groups, and research projects involving survivors and support organisations.

Promoting Best Practice

The Commissioner highlights effective safeguarding approaches and encourages institutions to adopt practices that improve survivor safety, dignity, and access to support.

Relevance to SAFECHAIN™

Because the Domestic Abuse Commissioner focuses on systemic improvement rather than individual casework, policy concepts such as SAFECHAIN™ are most appropriately framed as contributions to broader safeguarding reform discussions.

SAFECHAIN™ explores how improved coordination between institutions—such as courts, housing services, healthcare providers, and police—might help ensure that safeguarding context is recognised when survivors interact with multiple systems simultaneously.

In this context, SAFECHAIN™ aligns with ongoing efforts to examine how institutions respond to domestic abuse and how systems might operate more cohesively to support survivors.