“We have a policy” isn’t the same as “we have a policy that works”
Most housing associations and council housing teams can point to a lone working policy somewhere in their document library. Far fewer can say with confidence that it was actually risk-assessed against the visits their officers do, reviewed since Awaab’s Law and the RSH Consumer Standards came into force, or built with anything beyond a phone number to call if something goes wrong. UNISON’s Housing Worker Survey 2024–25 found that 45% of housing workers say they lack the training they need for their job, and almost 1 in 5 have gone more than three years without any health and safety training at all. A policy nobody has been trained on isn’t doing the job a policy is meant to do.
This isn’t a compliance nicety, and it isn’t just about lone worker safety in the abstract. Under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (sections 2 and 3) and regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, employers must assess and manage relevant lone-working risks before a visit, not just react after an incident. Below is a practical framework for what a housing-specific policy should contain; it is not a downloadable policy document or a substitute for your own risk assessment.
The eight sections every policy needs
1. Scope: which roles and visit types it covers. Name the roles explicitly: housing officers, ASB case officers, repairs and voids surveyors, income officers. A policy that just says “staff working alone” without naming roles tends to get applied inconsistently.
2. Risk assessment method: by visit type, not just by address. A single annual risk assessment of “high-risk addresses” misses the reality that a notice-serving visit, an ASB warning, or a first-contact welfare check carries a different risk profile even at the same address, on the same day, from a routine repair appointment. Build risk tiers around the purpose of the visit as well as the property’s history. Our guide to ASB visits and eviction notices looks more closely at those higher-risk encounters.
3. Pre-visit checks. What the officer confirms before setting off: known history at the address, whether the visit involves delivering unwelcome news (a notice, a warning, a decision), and whether it should be a two-person visit instead of a lone one.
4. Communication and check-in protocol. How the officer confirms they’ve arrived and finished safely, and who is watching for that confirmation. HSE guidance calls for appropriate contact and supervision arrangements based on the risks; a mobile phone may be part of the arrangement, but relying solely on the worker to call for help can leave a gap if they are unable to use it.
5. Escalation procedure. What happens, and how quickly, if a check-in is missed. Name who is responsible for acting on a missed check-in (a named role, not “the office” in general) and what they do first.
6. Incident reporting. A route for reporting an incident, a near-miss, or an uncomfortable visit that doesn’t require going through the same manager who scheduled the visit, since that can be a barrier to honest reporting.
7. Training and refresher schedule. Given the training gap UNISON’s data shows, specify a regular refresher interval appropriate to the risk (for example, annually) and what the training covers: de-escalation, when to abandon a visit, and how to use whatever monitoring or alarm system the policy relies on.
8. Review cycle. A date-stamped commitment to review the policy at a fixed interval, and after relevant changes in law, guidance or visit risks, with Awaab’s Law’s phased rollout being an example for this sector.
Making the policy an RSH evidence source, not just a safety document
The Regulator of Social Housing’s Consumer Standards, in force since 1 April 2024, require registered providers to hold an accurate, up-to-date, property-level record based on physical assessment as part of the Safety and Quality Standard. A lone working policy that generates timestamped visit and incident records can support an audit trail showing when staff attended a property and how their safety was managed. But a staff safety visit log is not itself a physical assessment of the home’s condition and cannot replace the property-level record the standard requires. To make the two useful together, link visit records to the separate, appropriately assessed property record and ensure the findings and follow-up are captured there. Large landlords with 1,000 or more homes face regular RSH inspections, so it is worth designing those record-keeping processes together without conflating their purposes. See our wider compliance overview for the employer safety obligations alongside these housing-specific requirements.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Treating the policy as a one-off document. It needs a review date and an owner, not a publish-and-forget status.
- Relying on the officer to remember to call in. Check-ins can get missed under pressure; a timed reminder and a defined escalation if a check-in is missed can reduce that gap.
- Writing the policy around the office, not the visit. A policy drafted without input from officers doing notice-serving visits alone tends to under-specify the moments that matter.
How The Sentry helps
The Sentry gives housing teams a practical way to run the policy above, not just write it. Officers set a check-in timer before a visit; if they don’t check in on time, the app escalates to their nominated contacts with their last known location. A one-touch panic alarm on the home screen, without opening the app or reaching a login screen first, covers the moment things go wrong mid-visit, recording video as evidence. Timed check-ins and incident reports can help document how the team followed its staff safety procedure. They do not, on their own, establish the physical condition of a property or satisfy the RSH’s property-record requirement. It runs from a phone, with no dedicated hardware to issue or maintain. Teams doing local authority social work visits can apply the same visit-specific safety controls.
Reviewing or rewriting your lone working policy this quarter? Book a demo and we’ll show you where check-ins and alarms fit against the eight sections above.
Review and roll-out
- Audit your current policy against the eight sections above and flag any that are missing or outdated.
- Rebuild the risk assessment around visit type, not address history alone.
- Set a training refresher date if your current schedule does not reflect the risks your officers face.
- Confirm your review cycle includes a trigger for regulatory change, not just a fixed annual date.
Frequently asked questions
Is a lone working policy a legal requirement? There’s no standalone “lone working law,” but the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 require employers to assess and manage risks to lone workers. A written policy can help communicate and demonstrate how those controls work, alongside a suitable and sufficient risk assessment.
What should a lone working policy for housing staff include? At minimum: scope of covered roles, a risk assessment method that accounts for visit type, pre-visit checks, a communication and check-in protocol, an escalation procedure for missed check-ins, incident reporting, training requirements, and a review cycle.
How often should a lone working policy be reviewed? Set a regular interval appropriate to your risks (annual review is a practical starting point) and review sooner after incidents, material changes to the work or relevant regulatory changes. Awaab’s Law’s phased rollout is an example for this sector.
Is a mobile phone enough for lone worker safety? That depends on the risk assessment and the wider system of supervision and contact. A phone can be useful, but a procedure that relies only on the worker making a call may not work if they cannot reach or use it during an incident. Assess what further controls each visit type needs.
Can a lone working policy help with RSH inspections? Yes, as supporting evidence of how staff visits are managed. Timestamped visit logs can be useful, but the RSH’s Safety and Quality Standard separately requires an accurate, up-to-date, property-level record based on physical assessment. The visit log cannot replace that assessment or record.
This article was written by Stuart Evans.