Assessment framework for local authority assurance

Leaders provide bold, system-wide strategic leadership and maintain genuinely collaborative long-standing relationships with a broad range of partners.  

Shared objectives are embedded in joint, system-wide strategies that have a strong impact in preventing future need for care and support and delivering improved outcomes for people. There is a well-established joined-up approach to cross-system planning, which is informed by data, policy and research. 

The information shared about an individual person is detailed and up-to-date, and provided through assured digital care records, which enables seamless pathways for people. Strong, shared governance and accountability arrangements have delivered sustained impact. 

Highly effective partnership working is evident through a multi-agency approach to developing joint pathways, processes and use of resources. This consistently delivers positive outcomes for people. There is system-wide evidence that sharing learning and best practice at all levels between the local authority and partners has made a strong impact. 

There are multiple examples of effective multi-agency initiatives that are co-produced and designed around specific local needs, with each incorporating early impact measures to track outcomes from the outset.

The Health and Wellbeing Board has a shared vision and strategic direction. It takes a proactive approach to ensure national priorities are reflected alongside a response to local need. The Health and Wellbeing Board is highly effective, with full commitment and engagement from a broad range of relevant partners. 

Leaders build strong, collaborative relationships across a wide range of partners, including care providers, community and voluntary organisations, housing partners and people with lived experience. They bring smaller organisations together to work collaboratively, share resources, and work more effectively as a collective. 

Shared objectives are grounded in a collective understanding of local needs and national priorities. Local strategies reflect a strong partnership commitment to working collaboratively, supported by thorough local needs analysis, which improves people’s outcomes and experiences. 

Information sharing systems are well embedded and used effectively, with open communication across health and care partners to facilitate smooth pathways. Sustained joint work strengthens transitions so people are not lost when they move between services. Shared targets are monitored effectively, with improved outcomes evident. There are rigorous mechanisms and governance arrangements to evaluate the impact of partnership working. 

The local authority is focused on improving outcomes and reducing inequalities across all services, supported by up-to-date and reliable data that informs shared objectives. Strong partnerships with the voluntary and community sector are underpinned by embedded co-production. There are multiple examples of co-designed, innovative approaches that meet local needs, including those of people who are less likely to engage and groups whose voices are seldom heard. Communication between partners and the local authority is open and two-way. 

The impact of joint working in small scale interventions and wider partnership approaches is demonstrated through positive outcomes for people with complex and multiple needs. 

The Health and Wellbeing Board takes a clear leadership role in setting the strategic direction to improve health and wellbeing. Other local place-based partnerships include representatives from the local authority who contribute in a meaningful and influential way. 

The local authority has begun to take a leadership role in ensuring effective delivery of local and national priorities, fostering collaboration with partners based on openness, respect and trust. This approach is developing and not yet embedded across the system.  

Some joint working and engagement with local partners to deliver local and national objectives, but this is inconsistent, with variable efforts by the local authority to engage strategically. While some joint initiatives exist with shared goals, strategic priorities remain unaligned. 

Communication between the local authority and partners is unclear, with key decisions not consistently shared, limiting effective partnership working. Slow responses to partner feedback undermine trust and collaboration. Although formal partnership groups exist, they are not embedded and lack clear governance, accountability and quality assurance. 

Collaborative working is not embedded across the system, with some teams and partners operating in isolation. This limits progress in improving outcomes and reducing inequalities. Partnership working has not been prioritised in commissioning or in developing new models of care, and the impact of change on communication is not fully considered. Engagement with the voluntary and community sector is inconsistent, with limited involvement in decisions about funding and contracted services. 

There are limited examples of coproduced multiagency initiatives designed around local need, and while some include early impact measures, their effectiveness is mixed. 

Improvements are needed to ensure the Health and Wellbeing Board takes a clear leadership role in setting the strategic direction to improve health and wellbeing.  

The local authority has not established a credible leadership role in delivering local or national objectives. Partnership working is ineffective in aligning strategic priorities, plans and responsibilities for people. Collaborative working, openness, respect and trust are not demonstrated across the system. 

There is no effective joint working or engagement with local partners in developing or delivering processes and pathways, which leads to confusion for people and professionals. The local authority has not taken a leadership role in this work. 

Communication between the local authority and partners is ineffective, and key decisions are not shared, which limits meaningful partnership working. A culture of blame persists instead of trust and collaboration. Partnership Boards, where they exist, are ineffective and lack clear governance. Leaders make no proactive effort to engage with external partners. 

Partnership working across the system is minimal, with teams operating in isolation and creating disjointed pathways that mean people have to repeat their stories. Key social care considerations and strengths-based practice are not well understood to support joint hospital discharge planning. The local authority does not engage effectively with voluntary or community groups to support equitable delivery of statutory duties. 

There is little evidence of any positive impact from partnership working at either strategic or operational levels. Multi-agency initiatives (where they exist) are ineffective, with no clear processes to learn from feedback. 

The Health and Wellbeing Board is ineffective in setting the strategic direction to improve people’s health and wellbeing. The local authority is not represented in other local place-based partnerships, which has a negative impact on opportunities to improve outcomes and address inequalities.