Safe workloads for children's social workers urgently needed, major study finds

The government must act urgently to identify safe workloads for children's social workers in England, a two-year long government-commissioned study has found.

The call comes from a high-level group set up to find ways to reduce administrative and bureaucratic burdens on children and families’ social workers in England.

The National Workload Action Group (NWAG) also recommended a national workforce strategy is produced focused on retention.

In its final report, the NWAG said: “Serious concerns have been raised about the pressures on social workers because of high workloads.

"High workloads can lead to increased stress, burnout and turnover. Social worker retention impacts on children, young people and families as changes of social worker can make it more difficult for families to develop and sustain positive helping relationships.” 

The NWAG also stressed the “context of practice” on workloads – such as increased child poverty, lack of housing and rising cost of living – could not be overlooked.

The NWAG was set up by the government in response to the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care.

Its final 77-page report makes 19 recommendations across five priority areas: workload/caseload management, managerialism/administrative support, supervision, hybrid working/digital practice and the use of artificial intelligence (AI). 

Workload and case management

A supporting paper by Research in Practice (RiP) says: “Surveys examining the challenges faced by the social work profession highlight that social workers have high caseloads, work excessive hours, experience reduced wellbeing, and have intentions to leave the profession.”

It says evidence indicates that reducing caseloads can help practitioners build better relationships with people, enabling them to “anticipate problems rather than only react to crisis”.

The final report recommends: “The DfE [Department for Education] should work with the sector to identify safe workload limits to enable a systematic approach to sufficiency and retention.”

It adds: “Urgent activity should be commissioned to determine ‘safe workload’ levels for social workers.”

Workload management models should be tested and a strategy created to “inform national workforce planning, focusing on retention of the existing workforce”. This should also look at career pathways into non-social worker support posts and pathways to social work from other social care roles. 

Managerialism and administrative support

A supporting paper by RiP says: “More than two decades of standardisation and accountability associated with managerialism and New Public Management has resulted in high demands for paperwork and procedural compliance in social work.”

On top of this, austerity cuts reduced back-office administrative support. Social workers, it warned, have become “deskilled” in the face of increased bureaucracy and having to navigate IT systems “not designed for social work practice”.

This has impacted on social workers’ wellbeing, retention and recruitment and levels of burnout.

Time spent on “unnecessary administrative activities” can reduce time spent doing relationship-based practice, reflection and critical thinking.

Guidance is needed, says the final report, which “clearly differentiates” between administrative tasks social workers must do and those that can be done by others or automated. 

The NWAG also called on the DfE to research whether time saved “genuinely translates” into more direct work with children and families.

Evidence should be gathered from local authorities to see how AI can improve efficiency, while being mindful of the “ethical complexities”.

Supervision

A RiP supporting paper says: “Since the first social work textbook was written, reflective supervision and support have been recognised as important for both social workers and the families with which they work.”

However, funding pressures prioritising other work and the increase in hybrid working away from offices are identified as barriers to good supervision.

The final report shies away from creating national quality standards for supervision, saying they are “unlikely” to make a difference a shift to a “good error culture” that accepts mistakes. 

It says the DfE should revise and test the safety attitudes questionnaire developed by the aviation industry to promote healthy work cultures.

The DfE should also test the STAR tool for assessing the quality of supervision.

Hybrid working and digital practice

A RiP supporting paper highlights the impact of the pandemic in accelerating both hybrid working and digital practice.

Hybrid working has evolved alongside moves by councils to reduce costs through hot desking and ‘call centre’ solutions.

New laws enabling flexible working have also changed working practices. The paper says: “It seems unlikely that social work, which has been more ‘hybrid’ than many other professions, will return to being wholly office-based, particularly in local authorities which have moved to hot-desking and other cost-saving solutions which may not be easily changed.”

However, the long-term impact on professionals, particularly among those early in their careers, is “unknown”.

The report therefore calls for more research into the workforce impact of hybrid, flexible working and hot desking on professional identity.

In relation to digital practice, the report says the DfE, regulator Social Work England and Ofsted should explore how this is taught on pre-qualifying courses and its implication to fitness to practice cases.

The DfE should review standards for employers in relation to anti-racism, increased use of technology and employer responsibility to hybrid workers. 

AI

A RiP supporting paper says AI in case recording has "shown significant potential to transform social work practices in children's social care". 

It adds: "The key benefits in case recording relate to reducing process, communication and retrieval overheads (unnecessary workload) and making better use of information.”

The paper says local authorities are currently in the “discovery and experimental phases” with AI. However, there are risks and ethical challenges. These include algorithmic biases resulting in discriminatory practice which can impact most on marginalised communities.

Data protection risks are also highlighted, with lack of transparency over what AI models do with information gathered. There is also a risk of “deskilling and over-reliance” on AI by social workers, while digital poverty could exclude some communities and widen inequalities.

The report calls on the DfE to “urgently” produce national guidance on the use of AI in social work. This should be informed by consultation with children and families.

See BASW England's 80:20 campaign for relationship-based practice

See BASW and SWU's campaign for better working conditions

See BASW's guidance and resources on AI in social work