Research and evidence strategy (SAFER Programme)

Procedures for publication are defined by the relevant research disciplines (Scottish Government social research: protocols and guidance, The AQuA Book) .  Distinct research projects and analysis that have been commissioned for the SAFER programme will be published as standard, following a rigorous peer review and quality assurance process.

Those involved in the quality assurance process will be selected based on the specific activity and expertise required. To support this process, it may be appropriate to establish an expert panel comprising both internal and external colleagues to FSS. Membership of this panel will be determined by subject matter expertise to ensure robust and informed decision-making throughout the process. This will ensure transparency, promptness and an evidence base that promotes public trust.

Decisions regarding publication and presentation to the Programme Board will rest with the Programme Manager. In line with research and analytical profession principles and standards , each research outputs will be published as a stand-alone paper. Outputs will include peer reviewed reports, executive summaries and, where applicable, raw datasets.

Each Delivery Manager will compile a comprehensive report for their respective pillar required outputs, consolidating all evidence aligned with the research questions.

These reports will serve as the foundation for the options analysis. SAFER programme output and evidence reporting will be subject to a quality assurance process which will involve a multi-stage review designed to ensure accuracy, integrity, and consistency. The process is as follows:

• The process begins with the Analytic Team developing the initial evidence package, which underpins the pillar reports prepared by Delivery Managers.
• These reports are then returned to the Analytic Team for rigorous quality checks, focusing on the correct use and interpretation of the evidence package.
• Once refined, and where appropriate, the Delivery Manager, working in collaboration with the relevant Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs), will seek their peer review to strengthen assurance.
• Following this, the Programme Manager or Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) validates the quality-checked reports to confirm alignment with programme objectives.
• The final stage involves submission to the SAFER Programme Board for approval of the fully quality-assured pillar reports. 

Throughout the process, feedback loops enable continuous improvement and iterative refinement, ensuring that all outputs are robust, reliable, and fit for decision-making.