3.5 Multi-Agency Child Protection

1. A Seamless System of Help, Support and Protection

Family Help and multi-agency child protection reforms are wholly interdependent, and it is critical that safeguarding partners implement them together as an integrated system.  Together, they will drive a fundamental rebalancing of the whole system: enabling earlier, wraparound support for families and those who work with them; preventing escalation into crisis; enabling a clear, expert focus on children who need protection from significant harm; and reducing costly and unnecessary statutory intervention in family life where child protection is not needed.

Alongside the offer of help and support, there must be strong and effective multi- agency child protection arrangements. Children who need protecting may include those who experience harm in their own family, those experiencing harm whilst living in residential, kinship or foster care and those who are harmed or exploited by others, including their peers, in their community and/or online.

It is critical that local safeguarding partners design and deliver multi-agency child protection reforms as an integrated system within Family Help.   Families will stay rooted in Family Help, including when child protection action is necessary, with Family Help Lead Practitioners (FHLPs) continuing their relationship and responsibilities for direct practice and coordinating support and input for families across the system. The Lead Child Protection Practitioner or Multi-Agency Child Protection Team will not become the lead practitioner(s) for the family at any point.

Family Help Lead Practitioners will play a crucial role in working with the Multi-Agency Child Protection Team to make sure that the daily life and experiences of the child and family are understood and inform child protection decision making. The FHLP should always be a social worker when it is agreed that a child needs a child protection plan, and/or there are concerns about actual or likely significant harm for a child not already known to Family Help. It will remain critical to have social workers with child protection expertise within Family Help to be the FHLP for children in need where needs are particularly complex, or for children on child protection plans.

Suffering or being likely to suffer significant harm is the threshold for child protection enquiries and can take different forms, including sexual, physical or emotional abuse, neglect or domestic abuse (including controlling or coercive behaviour), exploitation by criminal gangs or organised crime groups, trafficking, online abuse, sexual exploitation, and the influences of extremism which could lead to radicalisation.

An effective and strong multi-agency child protection system is one where the right decisions are made at the right time for children to keep them safe. A multi-agency, multidisciplinary child protection system is fundamental to safeguarding and protecting children from all harms. Practitioners should work collaboratively across agencies to help and protect children through strong and effective information sharing, joint decision making, shared practice, accountability, governance and quality assurance frameworks and coordinated, evidence-based interventions.

Child protection is the set of multi-agency activities and processes that follow a concern that a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, the local authority has a duty to make enquiries when this is the case and to take decisive action when needed to protect a child from abuse, neglect, and exploitation.

Statutory safeguarding partners should make arrangements to promote cooperation between the relevant agencies and organisations, and ensure local multiagency child protection aligns with local demographics, needs, and patterns of harm to help and protect local children and their families. This should include understanding and responding to sexual abuse and extra-familial harm and the needs of all age groups from unborn children to teenagers.

Actual or likely significant harm should be assessed through an anti-racist, anti-discriminatory and culturally aware framework, applying knowledge of faith, beliefs and family cultures that can positively and negatively impact on children, whilst maintaining a core focus on the safety and wellbeing of the child.

Practitioners across agencies responsible for child protection decision-making should come together as an integrated team to support the local authority to discharge this duty. They should be skilled, experienced and have the right expertise and influence to seek, collate, share, analyse and distil complex information, and make decisions with partners in a changing context.

Multi-agency child protection should also engage, empower and work in partnership with parents and carers, family networks and others in a transparent and compassionate way to care safely for their children, wherever this is possible.

Child protection activity should be led and overseen by expert, skilled and experienced social workers supported by multi-agency practitioners with child protection expertise.

Whatever the form of abuse, neglect and exploitation, practitioners across agencies should:

• put the needs of children first, understanding their experiences and responding to their needs when determining what action to take;
• speak to and observe the child at the earliest opportunity to understand what is happening in their daily life, recognising that the child may express this nonverbally through their actions and behaviour. Practitioners should ask questions sensitively, interpreting non-verbal cues and applying professional curiosity;
• understand that children can experience more than one type of harm simultaneously;
• be responsive to the needs of children who have harmed as well as been harmed, including referring to other agencies where there is a risk of continued harm to others;
• work with the family to build trusting and co-operative relationships with parents and carers, in line with the principles for Working with Parents and Carers;
• use their skills and experience to recognise circumstances where parents or carers are reluctant or unable to engage and seek to understand and address the factors that might underly this. These could include issues such as: language, technology or working patterns; parental special educational needs or disabilities; mental ill health and/or substance misuse; being a victim of domestic abuse (including emotional abuse and coercive or controlling behaviour); prior experience of services, including previous removals of children; or abuse arising from ‘honour’, faith- or belief-based abuse which limits the parent or carer’s capacity to engage;
• speak to and gather detailed information about the child and, where appropriate, their siblings, through engaging with the family network and those who know the child well, such as those working in the child’s education or childcare setting;
• in the case of children who are home educated, or whose parents are considering home education, speak to the local authority elective home education team/home education service;
• consider a wide range of evidence from many sources, including other practitioners and agencies working with the family;
• recognise and respond to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of children with SEND; • understand the impact of poverty. Practitioners should be skilled at recognising the distinction between poverty and neglect and respond accordingly;
• be inclusive, anti-discriminatory and responsive to the needs and experiences of children and families of different ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds. Practitioners should remain alert to any bias in practice that may adversely impact particular groups or communities and consider children foremost in terms of their vulnerability to harm. For instance, care should be taken to ensure children of particular ethnic backgrounds are not treated as older than they are;
• where the child is already known to services, assessments should build on existing information, activity, assessments and plans, including those completed in Family Help under section 17 of the Children Act 1989, at or at targeted early help, and in community-based early help;
• recognise that looked after children can experience actual or likely significant harm. Where a child is looked after, child protection activities should align with care planning processes and decision making, working with relevant carers and practitioners.

Where the child is known and receiving services and child protection concerns are raised, the lead practitioner in Family Help should continue to work with the child and their family. The Family Help lead practitioner will hold vital information about the child and should be involved in decision making about any protective activity that is required. Social workers with child protection expertise should lead and oversee child protection activities with input from multi-agency partners.

Where the decision is taken not to proceed with a section 47 enquiry or child protection plan, or to discharge a child protection plan, the lead practitioner should consider the ongoing support that the child requires, which might include Family Help support including under section 17 of the Children Act 1989 or support from universal or early help services. Where it is decided that no further action is necessary, the reasons for this should be recorded and shared with the child, family and practitioners involved with the family.

The Families First Programme Guide sets out that, to keep children safe and support families, child protection knowledge and skills will continue to be needed across the whole system of help, support and protection.  Highly experienced multi-agency child protection teams (MACPTs) with embedded, Lead Child Protection Practitioner (LCPP) social workers will bring an expert focus to child protection decision making. They will lead all child protection decision-making – from convening and chairing strategy discussions to overseeing the development, delivery, review and closure of child protection plans and informing decisions about moving into pre-proceedings and the Public Law Outline (PLO) process. These teams will enable a consistent and robust application of the significant harm threshold, acting as a local centre of excellence on child protection issues.

Multi-agency child protection teams will come alongside and support Family Help Lead Practitioners (FHLPs) throughout child protection activity. FHLPs will retain the primary relationship with and overall responsibility for supporting the child and their family. The MACPT will focus on identifying and responding to significant harm, ensuring a clear emphasis on the child’s daily life, voice and safety and drawing on input from the wider MACPT and Family Help service. Through accessible consultation, MACPTs will be available to Family Help practitioners, and others, who need a fresh, expert pair of eyes to consider concerns about actual or likely significant harm.

This system design is intended to improve the experience for families that want help and where child protection action is not needed, whilst also allowing the system to swiftly identify and act decisively in response to concerns about significant harm.

2. Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams

2.1 Overview

Safeguarding Partners should establish expert-led Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams to support the local authority to discharge its duties under section 47 of the Children Act 1989 (duty to investigate). Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams will work closely with Family Help teams to ensure support is brought around the child and family in one integrated system.

Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams will lead child protection decision making and functions. Expert social worker Lead Child Protection Practitioners (LCPPs), embedded within Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams, will make child protection decisions drawing on the expertise and knowledge of the wider multi-agency practitioners in the team. The teams will carry out these functions in line with Working Together to Safeguard Children and the National Framework for Children’s Social Care and build on learning from the Families First for Children Pathfinders.

Throughout the multi-agency child protection process, the Family Help Lead Practitioner will continue to hold the primary relationship with and coordinate wider support around the family. Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams will bring a clear, expert focus to child protection, emphasise the best interests of the child, build a robust understanding of the child and family’s needs and wider context, and determine what is needed to prevent, reduce or stop significant harm and support recovery.

2.2 Expectations

The Families First Programme Guide sets out the following expectations.

2.2.1 Safeguarding Partnerships should:

• have (an) operational MACPT(s) leading on child protection decision making and functions across their local authority area(s). MACPT police and health provision can be delivered across multiple local authority footprints if safeguarding partners agree and are satisfied the MACPT can operate effectively;
• appoint and train a minimum, dedicated MACPT membership of appropriately qualified, skilled and experienced social worker Lead Child Protection Practitioners, police representatives, healthcare professional/s and persons with education experience
• identify additional practitioners to respond to local need and harm profiles (for example child and adult psychologists, probation, domestic abuse, mental health, substance misuse, contextual safeguarding, child sexual abuse and exploitation, child criminal exploitation, modern slavery and human trafficking specialists);
• agree, allocate and transparently set out shared, equitable and sustainable multi-agency resourcing arrangements for their MACPT(s);
• enable physical MACPT co-location wherever possible. This is shown to improve multi-agency information-sharing and decision-making;
• develop, agree and implement a shared MACPT practice framework including decision-making, accountability, quality assurance, governance, monitoring, training and individual and group supervision arrangements; and
• establish or expand an information, advice and support (which can include representation or advocacy) offer for all parents and carers involved in child protection activity.

2.2.2 MACPTs should:

• act as a centre of excellence for the wider system on child protection concerns;
• convene and lead strategy meetings;
• lead section 47 enquiries;
• convene and chair child protection conferences and forums;
• lead the development, implementation and closure of child protection plans;
• keep child protection plans under review;
• provide consultation and advice for practitioners who need MACPT expertise;
• maintain an understanding of patterns of significant harm in the local area and agency responses; and
• consider and set out the MACPT’s role in supporting transitions out of child protection (including pre- and court proceedings, reunification and into wider services.

2.2.3 MACPT members should work together to:

• promote a sense of collective responsibility among agencies and the wider system to protect children;
• provide child protection advice and expertise across the local multi-agency system;
• build upon or conduct thorough assessments of children’s needs by considering various perspectives and expertise from across the team, as well as the wider system;
• ensure that interventions are prompt, evidence-based, tailored to and focused on the child’s best interests and needs, proactively addressing issues before they escalate;
• use resources efficiently by pooling expertise and services from various agencies; and • facilitate better communication and information sharing among practitioners and involved agencies.

2.2.4 Local flexibility

The Families First Programme Guide sets out that safeguarding partners can:

• decide the location, number of teams and staffing arrangements for local MACPTs;
• determine how the MACPT(s) will deliver the above functions within their specific local contexts;
• determine the most appropriate way for MACPTs to link with the integrated front door and MASH, as well as Violence Reduction Units (VRUs), local Youth Offending Teams, multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) strategic management boards where an offender is a risk to the child, domestic abuse local partnership boards and multiagency risk assessment conferences (MARAC) for domestic abuse;
• set out reporting requirements aligned with the requirements in Working Together for Safeguarding Partner Yearly Reports; and
• develop MACPT roles and responsibilities in line with wider local workforce development plans.

2.2.5 Other agencies and expertise

Safeguarding Partners should determine the other practitioners, agencies and organisations to be involved in MACPTs beyond the minimum members. This should align with local demographics, needs, and patterns of harm to best support and protect local children and their families.

Examples include:

• prison and probation;
• mental health practitioners (children and young people and adult services/specialisms, including maternal and perinatal);
• paediatricians, designated nurses and doctors with expertise in child protection;
• health visitors and midwives;
• school and/or public health nurses;
• sexual health practitioners, Independent Sexual Violence Advisers (ISVAs) and Child Independent Sexual Advisers (ChISVAs) and paediatric Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs);
• domestic abuse services, including Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs) and Children and Young People IDVAs;
• forensic physicians;
• disabled children’s teams;
• substance misuse services;
• contextual safeguarding, child criminal exploitation and child sexual exploitation specialists;
• housing and homelessness teams;
• youth justice;
• youth work;
• virtual schools/heads/teams and/or local authority education teams;
• education psychologists;
• voluntary sector organisations;
• family/children and young people engagement leads and groups;
• multi-cultural community organisations;
• victim support services; and
• Independent Child Trafficking Guardians (ICTGs).

This is not an exhaustive list.

2.2.6 Knowledge and skills

The knowledge and skills required for MACPT members will include:

• knowledge and understanding of the statutory child protection framework;
• an applied understanding of what constitutes actual or likely significant harm;
• contributing effectively to assessment of needs, understanding the indicators of abuse, neglect and exploitation;
• building an accurate and comprehensive understanding of the child’s daily life and wider family context to establish the likelihood of significant harm;
• the ability to assess information for effective and reliable decision-making;
• respecting and constructively challenging multi-agency perspectives to reach the best intervention and outcome for the child;
• ensuring interventions are prompt, evidence-based and tailored to the child; and
• listening to what children tell them to help them and their family.

Having an appropriate level of seniority or decision-making authority will also be critical, so that MACPT members are able to effectively:

• navigate their agency;
• access and collate relevant information;
• mobilise input from the practitioners within their agencies; and
• have the authority to make decisions about child protection intervention.
• have the authority to make decisions about child protection intervention.

3. Social Work: Embedding the Lead Child Protection Practitioner Role

Lead Child Protection Practitioners (LCPP) are social worker roles, embedded in Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams. LCPPs will make statutory child protection decisions, drawing on the expertise and perspectives of the wider MACPT and practitioners in Family Help. They will need to have significant frontline child protection knowledge and skills.  In addition to the above, LCPPs should:

• have an in-depth knowledge of the statutory and legislative framework;
• be skilled at identifying and responding to all types of significant harm, including intra and extra-familial harm, and harm that occurs online;
• know how to work skilfully and confidently with families and parents in child protection, including those who have demonstrated resistant, hostile and/or deceptive behaviour;
• consult with, guide and advise multi-agency practitioners on child protection concerns; and
• oversee multi-agency decision-making and activity relating to child protection plans, drawing on evidence-based insights and consultations with the MACPT, FHLPs and other practitioners, agencies and organisations.

Examples of the requirements included in LCPP role descriptions include:

• knowledge of legislation, statutory guidance and safeguarding best practice;
• leading investigations, chairing multi-agency meetings and navigating high-risk;
• supporting other practitioners through complex assessments and casework;
• clear communication and ability to collaborate with partners under pressure;
• applied analytical approaches;
• making decisions independently and managing risk effectively.

A practitioner with sufficient child protection experience and knowledge about the day-to-day life of the family should chair the conference. In line with Working Together to Safeguard Children, LCPPs can chair child protection conferences given they are not in the line management chain for the lead practitioner (in Family Help). Where possible, the same person should also chair subsequent child protection review conferences.

4. Health

Health leads should be appointed from a range of registered health professions and with suitable qualifications, knowledge and experience of child health and safeguarding. This is likely to be a nurse, midwife or health visitor within the Agenda for Change (pay) band of 8a or 8b. Grade 8a/b/c professionals have the required level of accountability and decision-making. This is the equivalent of a Named Safeguarding Professional in an NHS Trust. This role would fall within the level 4 specialist role in the RCN Intercollegiate document. Cross disciplinary competencies alongside qualifications, grading and post titles will be important. The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) Intercollegiate document provides a helpful framework of competencies required for the workforce. The competencies prescribed at grade 8a/b/c appear appropriate for the MACPT health professional. Examples of the requirements of the health practitioner in role descriptions include:

• the ability to interpret and analyse health information from a range of sources to provide a clinical view;
• knowledge of safeguarding children legislation;
• knowledge and experience of multi-agency working.

5. Police

Police may appoint a range of professionals from the police to MACPT roles, including police sergeants and police staff. The police representative needs a sufficient level of seniority or decision-making authority.

Examples of the requirements of the police practitioner in role descriptions include:

• knowledge of the statutory framework including Working together to Safeguard Children;
• experience of working in child protection;
• clear understanding and management of section 47 joint investigations;
• experience of decision-making and risk assessment in child protection investigations;
• experience in managing the investigation of serious, complex and priority crime.

6. Education

The education practitioner role may be filled by a range of practitioners including local authority education progress coordinators and designated safeguarding leads (DSLs). The education lead for the MACPT should:

• have some past and direct experience working in a school setting (although not necessarily as a teacher);
• be skilled and experienced in school safeguarding at a senior level;
• understand the wider multi-agency safeguarding landscape.

DSLs might have the most relevant expertise for this role. Examples of the requirements of the education MACPT member in role descriptions include:

• extensive safeguarding expertise, with significant experience working with children and families in education, focusing on wellbeing and child protection;
• proven ability to make critical decisions in complex child protection and ensure statutory responsibilities are met;
• ability to audit and review schools’ safeguarding systems, ensuring compliance and resolving issues effectively;
• in-depth knowledge of multi-agency safeguarding, including key legislation and guidance such as Keeping Children Safe in Education, Working Together to Safeguard Children and section 175 of the Education Act 2002 (duties in relation to welfare of children).

7. Responding to Local Needs and Harms

It is critical that MACPTs are equipped to identify, understand and respond effectively to all significant harm, inside and outside of the home and online. Abuse and exploitation can take many forms and children can experience more than one type of harm simultaneously. It will be important for MACPTs and the wider system to recognise this and consider how they identify, understand and respond to extra-familial harm alongside intra-familial harm.

Data consistently shows that babies in the home and teenagers outside of the home are the highest risk groups when it comes to serious incidents. MACPTs should therefore ensure that they understand and respond effectively to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of all children from pre-birth onwards, including these groups. MACPTs will also need to consider that for some children, a safe and loving family environment is not enough to protect them from harm outside the home (‘extra-familial harm’). For others, problems which exist within the home, such as abuse and neglect, could increase a child’s vulnerability to extra-familial harm. Consideration should also be given to forms of significant harm which may disproportionately affect specific cohorts of children, including female genital mutilation, forced marriage, ‘honour’ based abuse and group-based child sexual exploitation. It will be important to MACPTs to explore how the child’s experiences within their families and networks, including their friends and peer groups, interplay with the risk of extra-familial harm. Recognising and responding to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of children with SEND will be critical. The impact of poverty should also be understood, with practitioners skilled at recognising the distinction between poverty and neglect and responding accordingly. Practitioners should also be curious about harm which children may not disclose. This is particularly the case for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation. Most children who are being sexually abused do not tell anyone about it at the time. Practitioners need the knowledge, skills and confidence to recognise when children might be showing them that something is wrong through, for example, emotional, behavioural and physical signs and indicators of their abuse.

Practice should be inclusive, anti-discriminatory and responsive to the needs and experiences of children and families of different ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds. Practitioners should remain alert to any bias in practice that may adversely impact particular groups or communities and consider children foremost in terms of their vulnerability to harm. For instance, care should be taken to ensure children of particular ethnic backgrounds are not treated as older than they are.