Multi-Agency Safeguarding Investigations: Roles, Evidence and Provider Accountability
Many safeguarding investigations sit within a multi-agency context, involving local authorities, health partners, police and advocacy services. Providers play a critical role, but confusion about responsibility, evidence and authority can undermine safeguarding outcomes.
This article supports Safeguarding Investigations, Outcomes & Learning and should be read alongside awareness of types of abuse, as different abuse types trigger different multi-agency responses and thresholds.
The provider’s role in multi-agency safeguarding
Providers are not passive participants. Their responsibilities include:
- Immediate protection and risk management
- Accurate and timely information sharing
- Participation in strategy discussions and enquiries
- Implementing agreed safeguarding actions
- Evidencing outcomes and sustained safety
Even where the local authority leads enquiries, providers remain accountable for day-to-day safety.
Clarity of roles and boundaries
Effective multi-agency working depends on clarity. Providers should be explicit about:
- What actions they are taking directly
- What decisions sit with the local authority
- What information they are providing and why
Assumptions about “who is doing what” often cause delays or gaps in protection.
Operational example 1: working with police during an abuse investigation
Context: A supported living provider identified potential physical abuse involving a staff member. The concern met safeguarding and police thresholds.
Support approach: Immediate separation of the staff member, increased support for the adult, and prompt referral to safeguarding and police.
Day-to-day delivery detail: The provider maintained clear records of welfare checks, support adjustments and staff management actions, without conducting parallel “investigations” that could compromise police processes.
How effectiveness was evidenced: Evidence included clear communication logs, safeguarding meeting records, and updated risk management plans showing continued protection during the investigation.
Information sharing without over- or under-disclosure
Providers must balance confidentiality with safeguarding duties. Good practice includes recording:
- What information was shared
- With whom and when
- The safeguarding or legal basis for sharing
This protects both the adult and the organisation.
Operational example 2: multi-agency enquiry involving mental health services
Context: A safeguarding enquiry involved an adult with complex mental health needs and frequent crisis presentations.
Support approach: The provider worked closely with community mental health services, focusing on coordinated risk management rather than isolated responses.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Joint reviews aligned crisis plans, clarified escalation routes, and ensured staff knew when and how to seek clinical input.
How effectiveness was evidenced: Reduced crisis incidents, clearer staff confidence, and multi-agency meeting notes showing shared decision-making.
Recording multi-agency decision-making
Providers should clearly record:
- What decisions were agreed
- Who made them
- What actions were allocated
- How outcomes will be reviewed
This avoids disputes and demonstrates accountability.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioner expectation: Commissioners expect providers to engage constructively in multi-agency safeguarding, share information promptly and implement agreed actions effectively.
Regulator / Inspector expectation (CQC)
CQC expectation: Inspectors expect providers to demonstrate effective partnership working, clear accountability and sustained risk reduction following multi-agency safeguarding activity.
Operational example 3: resolving organisational safeguarding concerns collaboratively
Context: A provider faced multiple safeguarding referrals indicating organisational risk.
Support approach: A multi-agency improvement plan was agreed, with clear provider-led actions and regular review meetings.
Day-to-day delivery detail: The provider introduced capacity controls, enhanced supervision and strengthened governance reporting.
How effectiveness was evidenced: Reduced safeguarding referrals, improved audit outcomes and positive commissioner feedback.
Building confidence through effective partnership working
Strong multi-agency safeguarding practice builds trust, improves outcomes and demonstrates mature provider governance. Providers who engage openly and evidence their actions consistently are far better placed during inspection and contract review.