5.2 Analyse examples of multi-agency and partnership working from own practice

This guide will help you answer 5.2 Analyse examples of multi-agency and partnership working from own practice.

Multi-agency and partnership working means different organisations and professionals cooperating to meet the needs of children, young people and families. This approach recognises that no single service can fully address every need a child might have. By working together, agencies combine expertise, resources and information to create consistent plans of support.

In practice this could involve schools, health visitors, social workers, speech and language therapists, police, youth offending teams, voluntary groups and family support workers. Each will have different skills and responsibilities but share the same aim of helping the child and their family achieve positive outcomes.

Working in partnership requires clear communication, shared goals and agreed responsibilities. It often involves formal meetings, shared documentation and joint decision-making.

Example 1 – Supporting a Child with Speech Delay

From my own practice one clear example of multi-agency working involved a child in a nursery setting who had noticeable speech and language delay. Concerns were raised by the key person who informed the Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO).

The SENCO contacted the local Speech and Language Therapy service to arrange an assessment. The parents attended the initial meeting with the therapist and gave consent for the nursery to share information. Observations were recorded over several weeks. Reports from the therapist guided activities in the nursery, such as small group language sessions and picture communication tools.

Other professionals involved included:

• Health visitor to monitor overall development
• SENCO to lead interventions in the setting
• Speech and Language Therapist for specialist input
• Parents for daily practice at home

Analysis from this example shows that joint planning improved consistency. The therapist provided strategies used both at home and nursery. The health visitor checked progress during routine appointments. The child could practise new skills across environments. Without joined-up working the child may have received fragmented support.

Communication between professionals was done through secure emails, formal reports and review meetings. Respecting confidentiality built trust with the parents and encouraged their active participation.

Example 2 – Safeguarding Concern

A safeguarding matter arose when a child disclosed worrying events at home. Staff followed the organisation’s safeguarding policy by reporting to the Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL). The DSL contacted the local authority Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH).

Within hours professionals from social care, police and education met to review the case. Each agency brought different knowledge. The police shared information about past incidents. Social care assessed the home environment and identified risks. The school provided attendance records and observations. The early years setting gave insight into the child’s behaviour and emotional state.

The joint working allowed accurate risk assessment and swift action to protect the child. Each agency had clearly defined roles. Meetings were structured with minutes recorded and actions assigned.

This case highlights how rapid cooperation between agencies can prevent harm. Working alone, staff may not have had the full picture. The partnership allowed a coordinated approach that addressed immediate safety and planned longer-term support.

Example 3 – Transition to School

Another example from personal practice involves supporting a young child with behavioural difficulties during the move from nursery to primary school.

Agencies involved included:

• Nursery staff
• SENCO from nursery and receiving school
• Educational psychologist
• Behaviour support team
• Parents

Several transition meetings were held before the child started school. The educational psychologist advised on strategies to manage anxiety and disruptive behaviour. The behaviour support team visited both settings to observe and work with staff. The SENCOs created a joint plan detailing consistent routines, calming techniques and visual supports.

Analysis of this work shows that multi-agency input reduced distress for the child. Staff in the new school knew what to expect and had tried strategies in advance. Parents felt reassured that there was a plan shared by all. This example demonstrates that collaboration can smooth transitions and reduce barriers to learning.

Communication Methods

Effective communication is at the heart of multi-agency and partnership work. It often involves:

• Clear, jargon-free language so all understand
• Agreed formats for sharing records such as secure emails and standard forms
• Regular meetings at agreed intervals
• Confidential handling of personal data
• Documented action plans with clear responsibilities

Where communication worked well in my examples, meetings stayed focused on the child’s needs and professionals respected each other’s contributions. Poor communication can lead to duplication, gaps or misunderstandings, so agreed systems are vital.

Benefits Observed

From the examples above, multi-agency working brought several clear benefits:

• Earlier identification of needs and risks
• Combined expertise leading to better planning
• Consistent strategies across settings
• Shared responsibility reducing pressure on single workers
• Improved trust between families and services

These benefits directly impact the child’s wellbeing and progress. In the speech delay case the child reached speech goals sooner. In the safeguarding case quick protection was achieved. In the transition case, there was smoother adjustment to new routines.

Challenges Faced

Multi-agency partnership work can present challenges that need managing. In my own practice these included:

• Difficulty arranging meetings to suit all professionals
• Privacy concerns when sharing information
• Differences in agency priorities or approaches
• Delays when waiting for specialist input or assessments
• Too much paperwork leading to slower action

In the safeguarding case, quick action required fast agreement among agencies, which was achieved only because policies were clear. In the speech delay case, there was a delay waiting for therapy appointments. In the transition case, agreeing strategies between settings took time but was worthwhile.

Professional Relationships

Strong relationships between agencies make joint work more effective. These relationships grow from:

• Respect for different expertise
• Clear roles and boundaries
• Listening well during discussions
• Being open to feedback
• Reliable completion of agreed actions

Positive relationships in my practice meant professionals were willing to share resources, offer help and adapt approaches. This trust improved speed and quality of support for the children involved.

Analytical Reflection on Examples

When analysing these examples, several themes stand out:

• The importance of shared goals that keep the child’s needs at the centre
• Active engagement of parents as partners in the process
• Structured methods of communication to avoid loss of information
• Awareness of each agency’s remit to avoid unrealistic expectations
• The role of agreed documentation in keeping plans consistent

In the speech delay case, the shared use of strategies made learning more effective because there was no confusion for the child. In the safeguarding case, accurate information from different agencies prevented assumptions and shaped effective action. In the transition case, advance planning meant the receiving school could prepare resources before the child arrived.

Improving Multi-Agency Working

From reflection on these examples, improvements can be identified:

• Create shared calendars to book meetings earlier
• Hold joint training sessions to align approaches across agencies
• Give parents clear written summaries so they can follow plans
• Use templates for reports to standardise information sharing
• Make sure each meeting confirms actions and timescales before closing

These steps would strengthen the cooperation shown in the examples and reduce delays in support.

The Role of Policy and Legislation

Partnership and multi-agency work is supported by laws and guidance. In England, key frameworks include:

• Children Act 1989 and 2004
• Working Together to Safeguard Children guidance
• Special Educational Needs and Disability Code of Practice
• Data Protection Act 2018

These require agencies to work together where a child’s needs span different services. Policies within individual organisations put these duties into practice through procedures for referrals, information sharing and joint meetings.

Workers need to know these frameworks and follow organisational guidance to meet both legal and professional responsibilities.

Skills Needed for Effective Partnership Work

From experience, the following skills are useful when working in multi-agency settings:

• Clear verbal and written communication
• Ability to listen without interrupting
• Respect for different professional viewpoints
• Confidence to share your own expertise
• Organisational skills to track agreed actions
• Awareness of safeguarding and confidentiality rules

These skills help maintain trust and keep work focused on positive outcomes for the child.

Recording and Reviewing Actions

In all examples from practice, recording actions was important. This means writing notes from meetings, saving emails in secure systems and updating plans regularly.

Reviewing actions keeps everyone accountable. It allows changes to be made if something is not working. It also shows progress over time. Reviews can be formal or informal but should involve all relevant professionals.

Final Thoughts

Multi-agency and partnership working in the children and young people’s workforce is an everyday reality. These examples from my own practice show how cooperation can lead to quicker identification of needs, better planning and more consistent support.

Analysis of these cases shows that success depends on clear communication, respect between professionals, involvement of families and accurate recording of actions. Challenges such as scheduling difficulties or differences in approach can be managed if relationships are strong and procedures are well understood.

Reflecting on these experiences has confirmed the value of joint working. When agencies act together with shared purpose, children receive better care and opportunities. As a worker, contributing to these partnerships is an important part of helping each child reach their potential.