Skills

Multi-Agency Working in Social Work

6 weeks · 0 milestones

Document real participation as a social work student in a multi-agency meeting, case conference, or professional network meeting. Proof requires: (a) an anonymised case summary describing the agencies involved, the nature of the multi-agency work, and the student's role — no service user identifying information whatsoever, (b) a written account of your professional contribution to the discussion or decision-making process — what perspective you brought, what you contributed, and what you learned from the multi-agency interaction, and (c) a practice educator's or supervising social worker's written confirmation of your participation and professional conduct. A multi-agency meeting record containing identifying information is a serious data protection breach — rigorously anonymise all documentation before submission. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified practice educator or registered social worker confirmation is required. Requires current DBS/background check clearance and safeguarding training completion.

Part of: Education & Social Work · Proves for: UG

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

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

Powstik Guide

A 500-word anonymised reflection on a multi-agency meeting.

Steps

Ask your educator which meeting to attend.
Note each agency's role and view.
Note what you contributed.
Write the reflection without identifying anyone.

Template

Meeting type:        Date:
Agencies present:
How the decision was reached:
My contribution:
What I learned:

What gets sent back

Any detail that could identify a service user.
No sign-off from your HCPC-registered practice educator.
Under 500 words.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

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

Powstik Guide

Anonymised records of multi-agency work you led under supervision.

Steps

Agree the piece of work with your educator.
Make the referral or set up the meeting.
Keep a dated log of contacts.
Write what worked and what didn't.

Template

Piece of work:
| Date | Agency | Action | Outcome |
|------|--------|--------|---------|
What worked:
What I'd change:
Educator sign-off:

What gets sent back

Any detail that could identify a service user.
No sign-off from your HCPC-registered practice educator.
No documentation of your coordination.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Part of

Social Work & Community Development →

Related outcomes

Milestone map

3 milestones

Map the multi-agency context of a placement case

1–2 weeks

Proof required

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Attend and contribute to a multi-agency meeting

2–4 weeks (dependent on meeting schedule)

Proof required

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

Powstik Guide

A 500-word anonymised reflection on a multi-agency meeting.

Steps

Ask your educator which meeting to attend.
Note each agency's role and view.
Note what you contributed.
Write the reflection without identifying anyone.

Template

Meeting type:        Date:
Agencies present:
How the decision was reached:
My contribution:
What I learned:

What gets sent back

Any detail that could identify a service user.
No sign-off from your HCPC-registered practice educator.
Under 500 words.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Lead a piece of multi-agency coordination

4–6 weeks

Proof required

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

Powstik Guide

Anonymised records of multi-agency work you led under supervision.

Steps

Agree the piece of work with your educator.
Make the referral or set up the meeting.
Keep a dated log of contacts.
Write what worked and what didn't.

Template

Piece of work:
| Date | Agency | Action | Outcome |
|------|--------|--------|---------|
What worked:
What I'd change:
Educator sign-off:

What gets sent back

Any detail that could identify a service user.
No sign-off from your HCPC-registered practice educator.
No documentation of your coordination.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

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

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.