Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Map the multi-agency context of a placement case
1–2 weeks
Select one anonymised case from your placement and map all the agencies involved (health, education, housing, police, voluntary sector) and their respective roles. A multi-agency network diagram or table is the artefact. All identifying information must be anonymised — agencies may be named, individuals must not be.
Proof required
Submit: (1) anonymised multi-agency map or table for one case showing agencies, their roles, communication channels, and how decisions are made; (2) 200-word note on the gaps or tensions in this specific multi-agency arrangement.
What gets checked
- Case is anonymised to role descriptors — agencies named, individual workers and service users anonymised
- Map identifies at least 3 agencies and their distinct roles
- Note on gaps demonstrates analysis — not just listing what each agency does
Common mistakes
- Using a hypothetical or textbook case rather than a real placement case — defeats the purpose of applied learning
- Describing a case where only one or two agencies are involved — this does not demonstrate multi-agency complexity
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Check all individual names are anonymised — agencies may be named, individuals never
- Verify at least 3 agencies with distinct roles are identified
- Confirm analysis in the note goes beyond description
Attend and contribute to a multi-agency meeting
2–4 weeks (dependent on meeting schedule)
Attend at least one multi-agency meeting (child protection conference, MARAC, MDT, professionals' meeting) during placement. Contribute at least one substantive comment or piece of social work evidence. Write a reflective account of the meeting documenting the decision-making process, your contribution, and what you observed about role dynamics between agencies. All individuals must be anonymised.
Proof required
Submit: (1) anonymised reflective account (500+ words) of the multi-agency meeting covering your contribution, decision-making observed, and inter-agency dynamics; (2) practice educator confirmation that the meeting attendance took place.
What gets checked
- Reflective account covers all three elements: contribution made, decision-making observed, inter-agency dynamics
- Reflection goes beyond description to critical analysis of how and why decisions were made
- Practice educator confirmation is signed and identifies the meeting type
Common mistakes
- Attending but not contributing — passive attendance does not demonstrate the skill
- Writing a descriptive account of the meeting rather than a critical reflection on practice
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm practice educator attestation identifies the meeting type (e.g. CPC, MARAC, MDT)
- Verify all individuals in the reflection are anonymised
- Check that reflection is critical analysis, not just meeting minutes
- Practice educator must be HCPC-registered — peer confirmation is not acceptable
Lead a piece of multi-agency coordination
4–6 weeks
Under supervision, take the lead on coordinating a specific piece of multi-agency work — initiating a referral to another agency, convening a professionals' meeting, or writing a contribution to a multi-agency plan. Document the coordination process, the challenges encountered, and the outcome for the service user (anonymised). Practice educator attests to the supervision and the quality of the coordination.
Proof required
Submit: (1) anonymised documentation of the multi-agency coordination you led (referral letter, meeting notes, or plan contribution — redact all names); (2) 500-word critical reflection on what you learned about effective multi-agency working through this coordination; (3) practice educator written attestation of your leadership and the outcome.
What gets checked
- Documentation shows you as the initiating or leading role — not just a participant
- Critical reflection addresses challenges and what you would do differently
- Practice educator attestation is specific to this piece of work
Common mistakes
- Claiming to 'lead' when you observed rather than initiated — practice educator attestation will clarify this
- Submitting documentation without redacting all identifying information
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm student is documented as the initiating or leading role
- Check all identifying information is redacted from documentation
- Verify practice educator attestation is for this specific coordination, not generic
- HCPC-registered practice educator required — peer verification never acceptable