Men's violence against women is an ever-increasing societal issue. The social services bear the responsibility of supporting and protecting women who are victims of violence seeking help. This responsibility has been delegated to social workers based on municipal autonomy. To ensure the safety placements of these women, social workers are guided by standardized assessment tools implemented across municipalities. Previous research suggests that safety assessments might differ depending on where in the country women seek support and protection. The study focuses on investigating the basis upon which social workers ground their safety assessments and whether circumstances exist that cause variations in these assessments across different municipalities. Data from social workers is gathered through eight semi-structured interviews. This empirical data is processed and analyzed using the theoretical concept of scope for action. The study reveals that social workers base their safety assessments on FREDA and conversations with the victims of violence. It discusses the significance of the victim's narrative and how deficiencies in resources and evaluation can lead to discrepancies in assessments. The choice of assessment tools and the scope for action of social workers are questioned.