Managing risk of serious harm from domestic abuse in London

Understanding the challenge

Domestic abuse is a pervasive issue in London, with complex, systemic challenges that require a coordinated, multi-agency response. The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) commissioned SafeLives to conduct an in-depth review into how the capital can better manage and prevent the risk of serious harm from domestic abuse. The findings highlight the importance of partnership working, data sharing, and a survivor-centred approach.

This research is based on extensive engagement across the safeguarding sector, with input from 308 unique professionals working in London. It identifies key barriers and opportunities for improving responses to domestic abuse, particularly through Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) and Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs).

Key findings:

MARACs are effective when well-implemented, enabling agencies to share intelligence and support survivors. However, inconsistencies across boroughs create barriers.
Data and information-sharing remain fragmented, limiting strategic oversight and the ability to allocate resources effectively.
Survivors’ voices must be central in risk management decisions, ensuring their needs shape policies and interventions.
Professionals across the system are facing high caseloads and burnout, impacting their ability to respond effectively.

London faces complex, systemic challenges in managing and preventing the risk of serious harm from domestic abuse, driven by interconnected people and data factors. It is important to look beyond the scope of the research and consider what lies beneath the tools, models, and processes.

SafeLives Research Lead

What we did

Our research was designed to build a complete picture of risk management in London. We undertook:

A comprehensive literature review to identify gaps in current approaches.
A London-wide professional survey, capturing insights from frontline staff and policymakers.
Sector-specific focus groups and professional discussions, including contributions from SafeLives Pioneers, ensuring that survivor voice shaped every stage of the review.

We examined MARACs and DHRs as critical tools in managing serious harm, while also considering broader systemic issues, including the intersection of domestic abuse with health, policing, and social care services.

What we found

1. The role of MARAC in risk management

When properly resourced and implemented, MARACs are a critical mechanism for managing and preventing domestic abuse-related harm. However, the research revealed major disparities in how MARACs operate across London:

97% of professionals rated MARAC highly as a risk management tool.
Many areas lack a shared definition of risk, leading to inconsistent decision-making.
Survivors’ voices are not always fully embedded in MARAC processes, particularly for those from marginalised communities.

MARAC meetings are very good because they bring different agencies around the table.

Professional discussion participant

2. Gaps in data and information sharing

One of the biggest challenges identified was the lack of a unified data-sharing framework between agencies. This leads to:

Missed opportunities to prevent serious harm, as risk information is not consistently shared.
Siloed decision-making, where agencies act based on incomplete information.
Variations in risk assessment approaches, affecting the consistency of responses.

3. Supporting professionals to improve survivor outcomes

The safeguarding workforce is under immense pressure:

High caseloads and insufficient resources are leading to professional burnout.
Frontline staff lack consistent training in risk assessment, particularly for complex cases.
Professionals reported feeling unheard, with systemic barriers limiting their ability to implement best practices.

The sheer volume of cases made it very difficult to effectively manage the needs of victims. Mentally, this meant work was on my mind 24 hours a day.