Multi-Agency Working, Information-Sharing & Record-Keeping
Share
🧩 Blog 5 of 7 in our Expanded Safeguarding Series
Multi-Agency Working, Information-Sharing & Record-Keeping
Links to all 7 blogs in this series are at the bottom of this post.
🌐 Why Safeguarding is Always Multi-Agency
No single organisation can safeguard effectively in isolation. Multi-agency working is at the heart of effective safeguarding, ensuring risks are identified early, decisions are made collaboratively, and people supported receive joined-up care.
Commissioners expect providers to demonstrate how they work with local safeguarding adults boards, health professionals, advocacy services, and the police when needed. The Care Act 2014 makes multi-agency collaboration a statutory requirement, and CQC inspectors will expect to see it reflected in governance, case examples, and staff training.
📤 Effective Information-Sharing
One of the most common failings in safeguarding is poor information-sharing. Providers sometimes hesitate due to GDPR concerns, but the law is clear: safeguarding overrides data protection where there is risk of harm. Good practice involves:
- Clear policies — outlining when and how information should be shared.
- Staff training — giving frontline workers confidence to escalate concerns appropriately.
- Recording rationale — documenting why decisions to share (or not share) information were made.
- Secure systems — using encrypted emails, restricted access care systems, and role-based permissions.
Demonstrating these practices in a tender method statement helps commissioners see that you understand the balance between confidentiality and safeguarding duty.
🗂️ Record-Keeping as Safeguarding Evidence
Accurate, timely, and detailed records are the backbone of safeguarding. Inspectors and commissioners often judge safeguarding culture by reviewing case files, logs, and audits. Providers should ensure records are:
- Comprehensive — capturing concerns, actions, decisions, and outcomes.
- Accessible — available to authorised staff and regulators on request.
- Consistent — aligned across teams and locations to avoid gaps or duplication.
- Reviewed — included in governance cycles to identify trends and learning opportunities.
For example, a domiciliary care provider can evidence safeguarding strength by showing how electronic systems flag repeat concerns, triggering earlier intervention. A learning disability service might show how records capture people’s own views, demonstrating a person-centred approach.
💡 Practical Example
Case Study: A domiciliary care service notices repeated missed visits by a GP. Rather than logging this in isolation, staff escalate through multi-agency safeguarding procedures, involving the local safeguarding adults board. Records clearly document the pattern, action taken, and family engagement. Commissioners praised the provider for not only protecting the individual but also strengthening local partnership working.
📊 Evidencing Multi-Agency Working in Tenders
Commissioners award higher scores to providers who can show:
- Examples of joint working with safeguarding boards, advocacy services, or police.
- Clear information-sharing protocols aligned with GDPR and safeguarding law.
- Robust systems for record-keeping and governance oversight.
- Evidence that staff are trained and confident in multi-agency safeguarding practice.
These elements should be embedded in your safeguarding strategy and captured in bid strategy training so that responses are clear, detailed, and persuasive.
📚 Catch up on the full Expanded Safeguarding Series:
- 📘 Why Safeguarding Matters in Social Care
- 🧭 Recognising Abuse, Neglect & Self-Neglect (Including Modern Slavery & Domestic Abuse)
- 🔔 Thresholds, Referrals & Section 42: Getting the Response Right
- 🤝 Making Safeguarding Personal (MSP) & Advocacy in Practice
- 🧩 Multi-Agency Working, Information-Sharing & Record-Keeping
- 🧯 Building a Speak-Up Culture: Whistleblowing, Supervision & Debriefs
- 📄 Evidencing Safeguarding in Tenders & Inspections