Chapter 7 Multi-professional Perspectives

Multi-agency working Palaiologou (2012, p117) identifies three models of multi-agency working: Multi-agency panel, where members meet regularly though they are not permanent and remain with their own agencies. Multi-agency teams, where members are more permanent and where there is more of a sense of team identity with a team leader. Integrated Services, where ‘the team is co-located, usually part of a community-based service providing inter-disciplinary services to children and families’.

Safeguarding Safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility (DfE, 2015). All those who work with children – be they teachers, GPs, nurses, midwives, health visitors, early years professionals, youth workers, police, accident and emergency staff, paediatricians, voluntary and community workers and social workers – have a responsibility for keeping children safe. No single professional can have a full picture of a child’s needs and circumstances and if children and families are to receive the right help at the right time, everyone who comes into contact with them has a role to play in identifying concerns, sharing information and taking prompt action, in effect, working together. In order that organisations and practitioners collaborate effectively, it is vital that practitioners are very clear about the functions and parameters of their own roles as well as those of other professionals with whom they are working.

Safeguarding In the green paper, Every Child Matters it was proposed that there should be a common assessment framework (CAF). This was due to concerns at the time that arrangements for identifying and responding to children’s needs were failing to achieve the outcomes detailed in the Every Child Matters proposal. The CAF is a tool that enables early and effective assessment of children who need additional services or support from more than one agency. It offers a basis for early identification of children’s additional needs, sharing of this information between organisations, and co-ordinated service provision. It is a four step process whereby practitioners can identify a child or young person’s needs early, assess those needs holistically, deliver coordinated services and review progress.

Safeguarding It is important that there are clear criteria for taking action and that effective support can be provided by all relevant agencies. Effective sharing of information between professionals and local agencies is essential for effective identification, assessment and service provision. Early sharing of information is key to the provision of effective early help where problems are arising. Sharing information can be essential to putting in place effective child protection services. Serious case reviews (SCRs) have highlighted how poor information sharing has contributed to serious injuries in children and even, in some cases, death, as was the case with Victoria Climbié (Laming, 2003). Fears about information must not prevent the promotion of children’s welfare and their protection. The issue of consent, however, can be a complex one; in worst case scenarios, lack of understanding on the part of professionals could mean that they may assume, incorrectly, that no information can be shared.

Safeguarding Ofsted (2015) published The Report of her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2013–14 Social Care, in which they commented on how the demand for children’s services has been continually rising over the last seven years. In 2013–14 the number of referrals to children’s social care services made by someone who had concerns about a child increased by over 10 per cent with the number of child protection investigations rising by 12 per cent and the number of children and young people being classified as ‘looked after’ rising by 1 per cent.  The report emphasised how most of the resources available to local authorities that was allocated for spending on the social care of children, was in fact spent on high cost services, helping children and young people and their families when concerns about their safety and welfare had risen to such a point that the statutory duty to assess and then investigate had been triggered. It was estimated that for each £1 spent on preventative early intervention services by local authorities, a further £4 was being spent on ‘reactive child prevention work’. Of particular concern was the finding by Ofsted that its inspections of early interventions and neglect had found compelling evidence that children and young people growing up in complex and damaging circumstances, were frequently having to wait far too long for support. Even more concerning was the finding by Ofsted of evidence indicating that when high thresholds for further investigation into concerns failed to be met, it was frequently the case that families received no help at all.

References Department for Education (DfE) (2015) Working Together to Safeguard Children: A Guide to Inter-agency Working to Safeguard and Promote the Welfare of Children. DfE. Laming, Lord (2003) The Victoria Climbié Inquiry: Report of an Inquiry by Lord Laming. London: TSO. Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) (2015) The Report of her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2013–14 Social Care, Manchester: Ofsted. Palaiologou, I. (2012) Ethical Practice in Early Childhood. London: Sage.