Social work recruitment and retention

Strategic
Briefing
Social work recruitment
and retention
www.rip.org.uk

The nature of the issue
The provision of high quality social work services relies
upon a well-trained, supported and motivated workforce.
However, a shortage of experienced child and family social
workers is evident - both in England and in the USA, Canada
and Australia.
Heavy caseloads, burnout, poor pay and conditions,
dysfunctional organisations, and low levels of training
and support have all been found to explain this
exodus... it is how these combine and interact… that
result not only in the departure of weaker workers but
also committed and excellent practitioners.
(Baginsky, 2013)
Child and family social work is challenged by high turnover
and vacancy rates and a heavy reliance on agency staff (Collins,
2008; Tham, 2007) and demand for permanent, experienced
workers significantly outstrips supply (with children’s social
work now on the national occupational shortage list).
Experimental statistics published by the Department for
Education (DfE) for the year ending 30th September 2014
- see www.gov.uk/government/statistics/childrens-socialwork-workforce-2013-to-2014
- show the regional averages
for vacancy, agency worker and turnover rates (see below) with
individual local authority rates ranging between 0 and 56 per
cent. Turnover (the frequency at which workers are leaving) is
the more accurate indicator of the stability of a workforce and
hence of retention (Baginsky, 2013).
Number of CiN 1
per social worker
Vacancy rate
(%)
Agency worker
rate (%)
Turnover rate
(%)
Absence 2 rate
(%)
England
North East
North West
Yorkshire and the Humber
East Midlands
West Midlands
East of England
London
Inner London
Outer London
South East
South West
16 15 15 17 4
15 6 8 12 5
16 11 12 15 5
13 8 8 14 4
20 15 13 15 4
18 17 18 16 5
17 18 17 16 3
16 22 22 21 3
14 16 18 21 3
17 27 26 22 2
16 18 16 19 3
16 11 12 15 4
1
Children in need (CiN)
2
Absence rate includes long-term sickness
(Department for Education, 2015)
2 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Despite well-documented pressures, there are positive
developments in child and family social work in England. The
current refocusing of professional practice on direct work with
children and families has been widely welcomed, is endorsed
by research and (for reasons explored below) is likely to impact
positively on staff retention. Professional structures generated
through social work reform are widely felt to be contributing
to a higher quality of newly qualified staff entering the
profession. If these workers are to develop into the experienced
practitioners that are currently in such short supply, employers
need to build the organisational cultures required to support,
retain and reward workers to stay in this emotionally and
intellectually challenging profession.
The sustained rise in referral rates and reduction in public
sector resources since 2009 create huge workload issues
for children’s social care. We know that recruitment and
retention are strongly influenced by organisational practice.
In a competitive market there is a good deal that managers
can do to maximise their chances of recruiting and
maintaining a stable and healthy workforce.
This briefing aims to:
Provide an overview of pertinent research about the factors
that influence workers’ decisions to leave or to remain
within an organisation.
Introduce tools to assess and monitor ‘workforce health’
- an essential step in understanding where an organisation
needs to focus its recruitment and retention efforts.
Provide examples of national and local initiatives in
workforce development and planning.
Research on staff retention
The average working life for social workers is under eight
years, compared to 16 for a nurse and 25 for a doctor
(Curtis et al, 2010). Data from other countries show average
length of employment for child welfare workers of one to
three years (Baginsky, 2013) 3 . Clearly this represents a low
return on the investment in training and real challenges for
building and retaining professional expertise.
The strongest single predictor of actual turnover is intention
to leave. The most accurate predictors of intention to leave
are: organisational commitment, professional commitment,
burnout and job satisfaction (Mor Barak et al, 2001; cited in
Baginsky, 2013).
Experienced social workers leaving the profession impacts
on the quality of services since it is through experience that
workers develop the expert knowledge and analytical skills
that are vital elements of complex child protection work
(Ericsson et al, 1993). Definitions of ‘experience’ are not
about years of service per se. In Baginsky’s (2013) research
for the DfE, informants identified the following qualities:
depth and breadth of experience; an excellent understanding
of social work theory and messages from research; personal
and interpersonal skills, and professional humility based on
deeper feelings of competence and confidence.
Since new practitioners learn through interaction and
peer support, a shortage of experienced staff reduces the
quality of the ‘community of practice’ for those entering the
profession. A lack of skilled workers reduces service users’
and other agencies’ confidence in social workers (Buckley,
2008; cited in Baginsky, 2013) and the gaps left by those who
leave cause additional pressure for remaining workers.
Continuity of relationships for service-users is
compromised by high staff turnover. This instability cuts
through the core of relationship-based practice and is
likely to exacerbate the issues children and young people
face. Research shows qualitative differences between the
case work carried out by experienced and novice workers
(Forrester, 2000) and there is a strong correlation between
children achieving permanency and turnover rates amongst
their caseworkers (Baginsky, 2013).
High thresholds for referral mean that the nature of social
work with children and young people is increasingly
complex and focused on the most complex child protection,
often with children and young people who have experienced
trauma from their earliest years (Caw and Sebba, 2014).
Inducting NQSWs into this context requires mentoring,
supervision and collaborative and co-working approaches.
Use of agency staff is hard to avoid when trying to recruit
experienced staff but can further destabilise teams, since
agency workers have the apparent flexibility to leave difficult
situations. Those workers who remain can become more
unsettled and may look to leave themselves, sometimes then
reappearing as either agency workers or as self-employed
with the commensurate risk to employers of breach of HMRC
IR35 compliance. Recent research into why social workers in
adult services ‘go agency’ found flexibility to be a key issue,
alongside ‘the debilitating effect of office politics and the
influence and perceptions of inadequate managers and to
restricted opportunities [for direct work] (Cornes et al, 2013;
cited in Baginsky, 2013).
3
The DfE’s Children’s Social Work Workforce statistical return commenced in
2013 and will start to provide sector specific data on turnover and vacancy
rates not currently available.
www.rip.org.uk
3

Research on staff retention continued
Agency workers’ peripatetic career paths may undermine
the development of experience. As one London Principal
Social Worker noted in commenting on this briefing: ‘In
recruiting for child protection Chairs I see increasing
numbers of workers who have had twelve jobs in the last
two or three years. This raises concerns for me in assuring
the quality of practice I need in a CP Chair’.
While agency take home pay rates are higher than local
authorities’, authorities could do more to make explicit the
many benefits included in permanent staff contracts which
agency workers do not access.
Practitioners start by following the rule book, and
need coaching and encouragement to reflect on
practice. Yet it is this reflective practice that we are
expecting from even newly qualified social workers,
some of whom are in teams with those who have
little more experience than they do.
(Baginsky, 2013)
There are a range of factors that contribute to decisions to
stay or leave an employer or the profession itself. These are
categorised as ‘push’ or ‘pull’ factors.
4 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Push factors (factors that can result
in workers leaving their current
role/profession)
A culture of blame
Negative media representations of social work with children
and families increase anxiety in a profession where holding
risk is a constant and difficult reality to manage. Where
there is perceived to be a negative organisational culture - a
command and control ethos where fear and blame are rife
– workers experience feeling vulnerable and lacking trust
in management (Healy et al, 2009; Baginsky, 2013). Leaders
need to actively counter this by building systems to support
collective accountability; developing shared commitment
to supervision and support, and promoting a culture of
continuous learning and development.
Lack of clarity about roles
A risk-averse culture often inadvertently results in case
decision-making being pushed upwards. Managers take on
tasks that should rightly sit with frontline practitioners, leaving
practitioners disempowered to exercise their own professional
judgement. This kind of micro-management leads to low job
satisfaction but cannot be instantly reversed (Searle and Patent,
2013). Returning decision-making to the appropriate level
needs to go hand-in-hand with professional development to
improve the confidence and skills of individual workers, as
social workers’ decisions must be informed by a breadth of
knowledge if they are to be consistently reliable (Ward, 2014).
High levels of stress/burnout
Social workers tend to report higher levels of work-related
stress than most other professions (Collins, 2008; Johnson
et al, 2005). Organisational factors contribute significantly
to burnout. When vacancy and turnover rates are high,
caseloads rise and inexperienced workers may be required
to take too much responsibility at an early stage. Where this
continues over an extended time period, emotional burnout is
likely (Gibbs, 2009; Martin and Healy, 2010).
Overly bureaucratic systems
Direct work with children and families is the core reason social
workers enter the profession and is central to job satisfaction
(Eborall and Garmeson, 2001; Stalker et al, 2007). Inefficient
and overly bureaucratic systems reduce the amount of time
practitioners are able to spend in direct work. Layers of
bureaucracy can accrete over time as repeated responses to the
management of risk, while lack of administrative support leads
to inappropriate use of qualified professionals’ capacity on
administrative work. Unwieldy electronic recording systems are
a major irritant and are often cited as a precipitating factor in
a worker’s decision to leave. Service leaders need to challenge
local practices – simplifying and integrating procedures where
possible or investing smartly in administrative support to free
up practitioner time and expertise.
A negative Ofsted judgement
Staff turnover and interim appointments to management and
leadership roles can increase following a negative inspection
judgement, exacerbating organisational instability. A single
word judgement of ‘Inadequate’ generates anxiety and
is often the only information retained about the complex
picture of achievements and challenges of local services. A
poor Ofsted outcome may then trigger increased workloads
and staff turnover as well as a reduction in consistency for
children and families (Kelly, 2015). Service leaders are thus
required to strike a careful balance between acknowledging
and challenging practice shortcomings, whilst recognising
that feeling over-criticised may compel staff to leave at the
very time they are most needed.
There is a growing body of literature that explores how stress
impacts on judgement and an ability to perform tasks in
general (Hammond, 1995; Blaug et al, 2007; cited in Baginsky,
2013). Organisations need to be proactive in their attempts
to promote and protect the well-being of staff. There may
also be a valuable role for national bodies representing
social workers (such as BASW and TCSW) to advocate with
employers on workload/caseload issues.
www.rip.org.uk
5

Pull factors (factors that encourage
workers to stay)
The ability to ‘make a difference’
Most social workers have a high level of commitment to
their work. They are motivated by contact with families and
the difference they can make to the lives of young people by
providing high quality services (Stalker et al, 2007; Faulkner
and Borah, 2008). Loss of job satisfaction is one of the major
reasons why social workers leave the profession. There is also a
strong link between the motivation of a workforce and levels of
productivity (The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, 2000).
Services structured to maximise worker time with families
are therefore likely to be more productive and more attractive
places to work. Research has shown the linkages between
the positive organisational culture and lower staff turnover,
improved quality of service and outcomes for service users
(Hemmelgarn et al, 2006), as well as with increased job
satisfaction (Ellet et al, 2007; Johnson and Mcintyre, 1998).
High quality supervision and opportunities for
staff development
Where workers feel supported by both their supervisor and
peers this is a strong predictor of an intention to remain
within an organisation; it follows that low support is related
to the intention to leave (Dickinson and Perry, 2002; Nissley
et al, 2005). High quality supervision and opportunities for
development are highly valued and help to mitigate the
stresses and pressures of the work. There is a strong link
between the quality of management and good organisational
outcomes, including the service users’ quality of experience.
(Glisson, 2007).
The key components of effective supervision are set out in
a briefing by the Social Care Institute of Excellence - www.
scie.org.uk/publications/guides/guide50/files/guide50.pdf
Also look out for the new resources on reflective supervision,
forthcoming from Research in Practice in 2015.
Peer support
Further reading
Support from colleagues and a sense of ‘team’ appear to play
a vital role in the well-being of social workers who express a
preference for working as part of a team of like-minded and
skilled individuals, sharing knowledge and support (King et
al, 2010; Collins, 2008). Attention to the team unit, changes
to organisational structure (see below) and a variety of peer
support initiatives can help to achieve this end.
Opportunities for career progression
Recognition and career development pathways are an
effective means of retaining experienced practitioners (Burns,
2010). The Professional Capabilities Framework and the
three levels of child and family social work professionals and
accompanying Knowledge and Skills Statement announced by
the DfE in November 2014 both provide structures to support
career development. Progression pathways should include
opportunities for management as well as case-holding senior/
advanced practitioner type roles and ‘practice educator’ posts
supporting students or NQSWs.
Further reading
The Professional Capabilities Framework - www.tcsw.org.
uk/ProfessionalCapabilitiesFramework
Knowledge and Skills Statement - www.gov.uk/
government/consultations/knowledge-and-skills-for-childand-family-social-work
Organisational support for emotional well-being
At an individual level, there are approaches that appear to
support social workers to develop greater resilience and to
manage the emotional aspects of their work. Mindfulness is
one approach with a growing body of research evidence to
support its efficacy. If offered in isolation such strategies may
be seen as placing responsibility for coping with stress with the
individual rather than addressing organisational factors and
should therefore be one part of a programme of organisational
commitment to promoting staff well-being (Russ et al, 2009).
Further reading
Guardian newspaper article Self care for social workers:
how mindfulness can help - www.theguardian.com/
social-care-network/2015/may/11/self-care-socialworkers-mindfulness
6 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

The Mental Elf, a summary review of mindfulness research
- www.nationalelfservice.net/treatment/mindfulness/
the-evidence-for-mindfulness-mental-health-awarenessweek-mhaw15
Feeling valued
The need to feel valued is a strong theme in research on
social work retention and is cited as a significant factor in the
decision to leave or stay by public sector staff more widely. Pay
may be one aspect of this but is actually rarely cited by social
workers as a reason for leaving a job. Social workers generally
speak about value in broader terms, citing the way in which
they are treated and spoken of by managers as well as wider
stakeholders including the government and the general public
(Audit Commission, 2002).
Although some aspects of this are outside the control of any
employer, services that are proactive in managing internal
and local media and communications are likely to engender a
greater sense of loyalty amongst their staff. Positive campaigns,
like The College of Social Work’s (TCSW) Real Social Work
or Community Care’s Stand up for Social Work, and robust
advocacy by senior leaders and professional bodies can
support workers to feel valued and challenge negative
media representations.
Further reading
www.tcsw.org.uk/get-involved/RealSocialWork
www.communitycare.co.uk/stand-social-work-2015
Research on staff recruitment
Recruitment of experienced workers is a significant problem
which is likely to be exacerbated if more NQSWs choose
an early career as a peripatetic agency worker. Overseas
workers meet some demand in the immediate term but
many are likely to return home in the longer term, taking
their experience with them.
One outcome of high turnover rates is that social work
is delivered by a significant proportion of NQSWs and
workers with less than five years’ experience. High
numbers of graduate social workers in recent years have
allowed employers to be discriminating and, with the
right support in place, retaining and developing these
high quality NQSWs will build excellence and experience.
Newly qualified workers require learning and mentoring
investment on the part of employers (Holmes et al, 2013)
and the frameworks introduced in recent years built
positive structures for this support.
One of the key determinants of whether a newly qualified
worker is deemed ‘ready to practise’ is the quality of their
practice placements, yet placements in statutory services are
in short supply and employers and universities must work
together to improve the provision of statutory placements.
Where students have a positive experience in their
placements (particularly final placements) they often stay on
to work for that authority. However, their decision to do so
is based not just on the placement itself but on experiencing
a positive working environment and good support from
colleagues (Horner et al, 2002; Dinn, 2003).
Employers are developing recruitment processes to test
candidates’ skills and knowledge in the complex range of
activities required for high quality direct work with children
and families – including writing and analytical skills;
critical reasoning; empathy (Baginsky, 2013). Psychological
screening for emotional resilience may also be appropriate
(Kinman and Grant, 2011). There are some early indications
that high scores on measures such as emotional intelligence,
emphatic concern and reflective ability are predictors of
resilience, serving as protective factors in a social care role.
The Step up to Social Work programme provides an example
of how the investment of employers and strong links
with education providers can yield positive results. The
programme places emphasis on candidate selection and
education providers and employers work together to design
a curriculum that balances practice and academic learning.
An evaluation of the programme demonstrated good
outcomes in terms of completion rates, levels of achievement
and the skills and knowledge of workers (Holmes et al, 2013).
As part of the Government’s broader strategy on practice
learning and CPD for social workers, from September 2015
the DfE Social Work Reform Unit will launch new teaching
partnerships intended to become ‘the key delivery vehicle
to address the recommendations made by the 2014 Narey
and Croisdale-Appleby reviews of social work education’.
Teaching partnerships are defined as: ‘an accredited
collaboration between higher education institutes (HEIs)
and employers which deliver high quality training for social
work students and qualified practitioners and equip them to
practise to specified standards in statutory settings’ (DfE DoH
invitation of expressions of interest, accessed 22 May 2015).
www.rip.org.uk
7

Research on staff recruitment continued
Further reading
British Association of Social Workers, information
regarding teaching partnerships - www.basw.co.uk/
news/article/?id=871
Some local authorities have improved recruitment by
giving high-profile publicity to their flexibility as an
employer (Eborall and Garmeson, 2001) and promote
‘family-friendly practices’ such as part-time, job share
and term-time working. These opportunities require
attentive management to ensure the needs of service user
families are not compromised. Offering opportunities
for secondment appears to be a positive factor in both
recruitment and retention; moving role within an
organisation can be a positive means of preventing
emotional burnout (Chiller and Crisp, 2012).
Whilst pay is very rarely cited by social workers as a reason
for leaving a job, it is inevitably a factor when experienced
workers move between employers (Local Government
Association, 2015). Social workers (like most other
employees) want ‘fair pay’ - a level of pay that accurately
reflects their responsibilities and demonstrates the value
attached to their work.
Assessing the health of an organisation or service
As we have seen, there is no single answer to recruitment and
retention issues - a whole systems approach is required. The
most successful organisations appear to be those who engage
their staff in an open and honest dialogue and involve them
in helping to explore solutions. There are a variety of selfassessment
tools and approaches that will support this work.
The Local Government Association (LGA) Standards
for Employers
Eight standards published by the Social Work Reform Board
(SWRB) in 2009 and now hosted by LGA outline the support
social workers should expect from employers and managers:
Clear Social Work Accountability Framework
Effective Workforce Planning
Safe Workloads and Case Allocation
Managing Risks and Resources
Effective and Appropriate Supervision
Continuing Professional Development
Professional Registration
Effective Partnerships.
Further reading
www.local.gov.uk/workforce/-/journal_
content/56/10180/3511605/ARTICLE
To underpin development towards these standards the SWRB
developed a ‘health check’ process covering five areas:
Effective Workload Management (managing workloads
and vacancies)
Proactive Workflow Management (strong processes and
effective tracking of cases)
Right Tools (including IT, mobile working, access to research)
Healthy Workplace (frequent and high quality supervision,
accessibility of managers)
Effective Service Delivery (effective feedback mechanisms).
The health-check can be ‘an important barometer of
workflow and barriers to effective practice…[and] an
important part of an employer’s retention and recruitment
strategy. ‘The SWRB recommended that the tool is not a
check-list, but a mechanism to promote debate to be used
at team, service and organisation level as the basis for
discussion at each of these levels, ‘with a requirement in
place that staff have been involved in the response at each
level and a mechanism for recording areas of disagreement’
(LGA, 2014).
Further reading
LGA social work ‘health check’ - www.local.
gov.uk/documents/10180/6188796/L14-
697+Social+work+healthcheck_06.pdf
8 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

It’s important to look at the things you can do almost
instantly, like an audit of printers and photocopiers; stuff
that can make people’s lives much easier very quickly.
You must not underestimate how important these things
can be to people. We have to communicate what we can
do or the reasons why we can’t do something.
Early adopters of the SWRB Health check
The Health and Safety Executive Tools on Stress
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Management Standards
define the characteristics of an organisation where the risk
of work-related stress is managed effectively. Each of the six
standards focuses on a key source of workplace stress. When
poorly managed, each of these six aspects of work is associated
with poor health and well-being, lowered productivity and
high levels of sickness. The standards therefore provide
a model of good practice and an aspirational level of
achievement for organisations or services seeking to manage
stress effectively. There are strong links between the HSE
standards and the push/pull factors already outlined.
The six standards relate to the following aspects
of work:
1 Demand: Feeling able to cope with your workload.
2 Control: Having a say about the way in which you carry
out your work.
3 Support: Feeling supported by managers and colleagues.
4 Relationships: Working in an environment free of bullying
or intimidation.
5 Role: Having clarity over your role.
6 Change: Receiving sufficient information to manage
necessary organisational change.
The HSE Management Standards provide a good starting
point for discussion within an organisation seeking to
manage stress more effectively. Forming an accurate local
picture requires collating existing data (for example on
staff sickness) and staff consultation. The HSE Management
Standards Indicator Tool is designed for this purpose.
It comprises a set of 35 questions (based around the six
standards) that can be distributed as a survey; there is also
an analysis tool freely available on the HSE website.
When survey responses are entered, the tool provides a
summary of performance in each of the six areas and helps
to identify aspects of concern. It can be used to inform and
develop action plans. The tool also allows trends to be
analysed over a three year time frame for services committed
to monitoring the longer term impact of any actions taken.
The HSE suggest that survey results be discussed in staff focus
groups where solutions to issues identified can be explored.
Survey returns might usefully be analysed at the level of team or
role type to help develop a clearer analysis of workforce health.
As support provided by managers is recognised to be a key
aspect of preventing and managing stress, the HSE also
produces a Line Manager Competency Indicator Tool which
allows managers to reflect on their own behaviours and skills
and how these have an impact on those they line manage.
The tool is based around four aspects of behaviour that
research indicates are important in preventing and reducing
the stress of those being managed:
1 Being respectful and responsible: Managing emotions
and having integrity.
2 Managing and communicating existing and future work.
3 Managing the individual within the team.
4 Reasoning/managing difficult situations.
The competency indicator tool can be used as part of an
online learning package which encourages managers to seek
feedback from colleagues about their skills and behaviours,
supports them to reflect on this feedback alongside their own
responses and then takes them through material about the
four key themes of manager behaviour.
Further reading
To access all the HSE standards/tools or for further
information visit www.hse.gov.uk/stress
www.rip.org.uk
9

Organisational self-assessment against the
push-pull factors
The two columns below organise the influences on staff
retention identified in the previous pages into ‘scales’
against which a service may be rated. These scales might
be incorporated into a staff survey as a means of assessing
perceptions about the organisation. Using the scale annually
may support benchmarking issues and progress over time,
as well as the impact of organisational change.
Organisational factors
Negative indicators
Positive indicators
A strong and pervasive culture of blame.
Roles very unclear. Micro-management.
High workloads/caseloads.
Highly bureaucratic/unnecessary form-filling.
Poor resources and support.
Low pay. Low perception of value by staff.
Poor quality, infrequent supervision.
Training and development opportunities few or cancelled.
Little support from peers/professional isolation.
Few development opportunities.
Little attention paid to the well-being of staff.
Little opportunity for direct work with families.
A learning organisation: sense of collective responsibility.
Clear Roles. Decisions taken at an appropriate level.
Manageable workloads/caseloads.
Proportionate and necessary level of administration.
Resources provided to support the social work role.
Competitive rewards, highly valued group of staff.
High quality and frequent supervision.
Training and development available and prioritised.
Culture of peer support and teamworking.
Good opportunities for career development.
High level of commitment to physical and emotional well-being of staff.
Adequate opportunity for direct work with families.
Individual factors
Negative indicators
Positive indicators
A low level of professional commitment to the role.
Low levels of resilience.
Very high level of commitment towards children and families.
Emotionally resilient.
10 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Innovative social work programmes and pilots
Since the Munro review of child protection (2011) there has
been a growing focus on ‘systems thinking’ in children’s
services - the redesign of organisational culture and structure
in order to facilitate direct work with children and families;
build social workers’ professional confidence and ownership
of their practice and better manage bureaucratic and
administrative pressures.
Evaluation data on this work is not extensive; nevertheless,
a measured analysis of UK and international research and
evaluation identifies elements and principles (such as multidisciplinary
units, shared decision-making, greater opportunity
for reflection and stronger administrative support) that support
improved local practice. There are a number of large scale
projects funded by the DfE Innovations Programme which will
be of interest as evaluation findings emerge. Some key themes
relating to staff retention are outlined below.
There is no formula, practice model or system that will
provide a ‘magic bullet’ for social work and blindly following
a trend in adopting new models with insufficient planning for
implementation leads to significant difficulties.
Baginsky records an informant in her 2013 research
who had left her previous post:
Staff had been overwhelmed by the pressures that
resulted when a pod structure had been adopted
too rapidly without due attention to the high volume
of referrals they were receiving. In her opinion the
transition process had not been thought through
thoroughly, caseloads ‘went through the roof’ and
the old structures had to be partly reassembled.
She felt that social workers had been misled into
thinking things could improve by distortion of facts
and exaggerated promises which she described as
‘smoke and mirror tactics’.
(Baginsky, 2013)
Further reading
Spring Consortium: Delivering the children’s social care
innovation programme – www.springconsortium.com/
projects-being-funded
Community Care: Stand up for social work
- www.communitycare.co.uk/stand-social-work-2015
Social Work Practices (SWP)
The imperative to build workers’ sense of ownership and
professionalism underpins the social work practice model (Le
Grand, 2007). A pilot of five SWPs in 2009-2010 moved statutory
social work support for looked after children and young people
from the public to the private or independent sector for the
first time. Each SWP had a different status (private, community,
etc) but all were small, autonomous organisations who were
independent of (but had a contract with) a local authority. For
the purposes of the evaluation, each pilot was ‘matched’ with
a similar local authority-based service so that data and the
experiences of staff/service users could be compared.
The results of the pilots were mixed. SWP staff experienced
many of the same stresses as social workers in local authority
teams (frustrations of IT systems, form filling) as well as a
greater sense of job insecurity in the context of relying on one
contract. However, there were some interesting findings in
relation to staff morale:
The teams benefitted from ring-fenced caseloads (individual
staff caseloads of fewer than 18 in most SWPs). This, along
with good administrative support and an exclusive focus
on looked after children/care leavers, increased capacity for
direct work. Workers in SWPs were more likely to report
spending the right amount of time with young people and
families. This is obviously a positive for families but also
gives staff a greater sense of accomplishment.
Being part of a small team with a defined cohort of looked
after children helped staff to feel recognised and valued.
They reported greater peer and supervision support.
Service-users also gave positive feedback about interacting
with a small service where they were able to ‘know and be
known’. What the report describes as ‘user-friendly spaces’
(local, accessible venues where families felt able to drop-in)
had a positive impact on family engagement.
www.rip.org.uk
11

Further reading
Social work practices: report of the national evaluation
- www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-workpractices-report-of-the-national-evaluation
‘Remodeling
Social Work’
‘Remodeling Social Work’
This model for organisational redesign was initiated in Hackney
in 2010 where it was led by Isabelle Trowler (then an AD at
Hackney and now Chief Social Worker for children and families)
and Steve Goodman (now Director at Morning Lane Associates).
A ‘systemic practice’ model replaces traditional team structures
with ‘social work units’, each headed up by a Consultant Social
Worker with administrative support from a unit coordinator.
Families are known to all members of the unit and direct work
is undertaken by everyone, with the Consultant Social Worker
holding overall case responsibility. The evaluation (by Eileen
Munro) identified some significant positive changes:
The shared approach to case management was found to
support reflective learning and skill development.
The burden of paperwork for social workers was reduced
by much strengthened administrative support, allowing
workers to spend more time on direct work.
Practice in the units was of a consistently higher standard
than other areas of service in Hackney.
There was a fall in the number of looked after children
during the lifetime of the project which, in financial terms,
equated to a 4.9 per cent reduction in costs.
There was a 55 per cent reduction in staff sickness days.
Workers in the units still suffered stress relating to high
workloads but reported having greater structural and
emotional support at critical times.
Social workers in the units were more likely to report
having the autonomy needed to carry out their role.
12 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Organisational factors supporting staff
retention in Innovation Programme
(IP) projects
Increased capacity
A number of IP projects include funding for additional social
work capacity during the period of organisational change the
project entails, in recognition of the additional pressure on
social workers at this time. Additional capacity is planned to be
temporary in light of predicted reductions in demand over time
due to the new ways of working (for example Stockport).
Workforce development
Supporting social workers to develop skills and confidence
using new approaches to working with children and families
is a core component of a number of projects. Examples include
training in restorative practice in Leeds and a network of peer
learning in projects implementing Signs of Safety. In North East
Lincolnshire and Newcastle, partnerships with local universities
will support ongoing training and skills development across
the workforce. In the Tri-borough authorities, among others,
a system of observation, feedback and coaching is being
established to support practice development.
Shared caseloads and increased opportunities
for reflection
A number of authorities are seeking to implement structures
similar to that used in the Remodeling Social Work project
described above. As well as those authorities working with
Morning Lane Associates to formally adopt the Hackney
model, a number of authorities are introducing shared
caseloads and team case discussions within their projects
(for example Newcastle and Hertfordshire).
Career progression
The creation of senior practitioner roles to allow experienced
social workers to continue working directly with families
while sharing their expertise with others is a feature in
Stockport, Reclaiming Social Work and the Tri-borough
authorities. In other projects, social workers are being given
opportunities to develop specialist skills by focusing on
work with families with specific needs, including work with
adults experiencing domestic violence and substance misuse
(Hampshire and the Isle of Wight) and young people with
mental health difficulties (Wigan).
Reforming IT systems
Some authorities are considering how recording processes
might reduce the social work time required and increase
the focus on outcomes in assessments and plans. The Signs
of Safety IP is exploring how the framework can be used to
guide recording which is in line with Ofsted expectations.
Other authorities (for example Hertfordshire) are developing
electronic case management records that can be accessed
remotely, reducing travel time and ensuring case notes are
always up-to-date.
www.rip.org.uk
13

Examples of local practice
Managing agency costs through regional
agreements
Directors of the 14 local authorities in the West Midlands
have joined forces in a regional initiative -
www.wmadcs.org.uk/our-activities/social-work-agencyworkers-project/
- to gain greater control over spend on,
and to improve the quality of, agency staff. The geography
of the region means that agency workers have considerable
freedom to move between authorities. From January
2015, all 14 local authorities in the region have signed an
agreement that sets out:
The maximum hourly rate they will pay for five different
levels of agency worker. The impact of this salary ‘cap’ will
be monitored, with a view to reducing rates over time.
A new process for references. One of the local authorities
will administer a regional registration process. A ‘Quality
Record’ that sets out the employment history will be
compiled for each agency worker. References for each
placement will be stored alongside this record on a
central database and will therefore only have to be
supplied once by the placement manager.
A regional commitment not to recruit NQSW agency
staff routinely but to seek evidence of ASYE.
The support that will be provided to agency workers
(induction, supervision and training) to ensure they have
the knowledge and skills required to carry out their role.
The authorities have engaged social work agencies in
this process. Their reactions have been positive; agencies
are enthusiastic about the ‘Quality Record’ as a means of
improving their own reputation. Evaluation processes are
in place but it is currently too early to assess the impact.
11 local authorities in the Eastern Region have signed a
similar ‘Memorandum of Cooperation’ which sets out
common minimum standards of referencing as well as
standard rates of pay for temporary staff. The authorities
have also committed to working together in a regional
approach to workforce planning.
Training NQSWs in Hertfordshire
In 2009 Hertfordshire County Council implemented a ‘Social
Work Academy’ programme exclusively for Child Protection
Social Workers. This has allowed them to recruit from
the pool of NQSWs whilst maintaining a high standard
of practice. Each team within the Academy consists of six
NQSWs, a Team Manager and a Senior Social Worker. The
NQSWs are linked with an Assessment Safeguarding Team
and take cases from them. However, the Academy Manager
has overall responsibility for these cases as well as the
training and development of the new workers.
New recruits spend six months in the Academy Team,
the first month of which is induction and basic training
activity. For the next five months they undertake further
training on one day a week and spend one day with their
Assessment Team, shadowing more experienced workers
and being involved in more complex work. They work
their own caseload on the remaining three days.
Action Learning Sets are mandatory in year one and
take place every six weeks.
Work produced by those within the Academy is scrutinised
to ensure good practice standards are upheld.
If workers successfully complete their six month
probationary period they join one of the safeguarding
teams, though continue with the Academy development
programme.
The selection process is rigorous and includes a personal
interview, a competency interview, an interview with
service-users and a written exercise.
All NQSWs in Hertfordshire complete their ASYE during
their first year of employment.
The expectation for workers who have been through the
programme is that they will remain with Hertfordshire for
two years and many have gone on to senior social work
posts within the authority. Managers are very positive
about the standard of practice of these workers and the
subsequent impact this has on the wider team. For this
reason, they are keen to appoint staff from the Academy
after the six month probation. The programme has been
greatly beneficial for recruitment and retention.
14 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Ensuring career pathways for workers in Surrey
Recognising the advantages of the ‘grow your own’
approach to recruiting social workers, whereby workers
bring local and organisational knowledge and have
established relationships with professionals and
communities, Surrey County Council offer five places a
year for Family Support Workers (FSW) wanting to become
social workers. The successful applicants remain on their
FSW salary and continue to do some work for their FSW
team. Under this arrangement, the organisation finances
their training via the Open University and provides workers
with sufficient time to undertake the study. Placements
required as part of the training are undertaken in-house.
Once qualified, the workers are committed to work in
Surrey for a further two years.
Surrey also has clearly documented career pathways for
social workers. The pathways look at progression within
a role through the development of skills and additional
responsibilities, and at progression to management or
advanced practitioner roles. The aspiration is to link these
pathways with the appraisal process, the setting of targets
and performance-related pay.
Generating new initiatives in Walsall
Walsall Council has a well-established working group on
recruitment and retention that includes representation from
frontline staff. A number of initiatives have emerged from
this group. Some of these have been progressed and others
are in the development process. They include:
The creation of a pathway that allows a social worker
within adult social care to move across to children’s
services. This pathway consists of a tailored and
extended induction period as well as inclusion
within the ASYE programme.
A more creative approach to recruitment, raising
the profile of the service by generating a following
on social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc). The service
also holds breakfast and evening drop-in sessions for
those interested in finding out about working for the
authority. These have been very well attended and
generated TV coverage.
An attractive relocation package allows a payment of up to
25 per cent of a starting salary. These payments come with
a two year commitment to remain with the authority.
Twilight development sessions for managers.
Market supplements for specific ‘hard-to-recruit-to’
areas of the service.
www.rip.org.uk
15

Offering new routes in to social work in Cornwall
Cornwall Council has developed a successful trainee
scheme for social workers. Trainees are taken on at the
grade of family support worker and start by undertaking
this role for nine months, after which they go to university
with their social work degree fees and expenses fully
funded by the council. The trainees are full-time students
during term time but return as family support workers
over the summer vacation.
Trainees are committed to Cornwall for two years postqualification
in the first two years, there were a few
difficulties with trainees for whom relocation to Cornwall
was challenging. This year Cornwall has therefore
encouraged applicants from across the council and
appointed five trainees who were previously working as
teaching assistants, children’s centre workers and social
work assistants. The council sees the scheme as a positive
means of investing in the local workforce.
Back to basics in Central Bedfordshire
In 2014 Central Bedfordshire embarked on a strategy
to attract new permanent staff, with a strong focus on
achieving high quality social work. The structure of the
service has been redesigned, creating smaller teams and
smaller caseloads. The new teams have a manager, four
or five workers and a team clerk. There are also non-case
holding consultant social workers (each one working
across about four teams) who provide advice, guidance and
challenge. At present, agency workers are employed to help
keep caseloads down; in the longer term, it is envisaged
that the improved confidence and competence of workers
will reduce case numbers and that this reduction (as well
as a reduced reliance on agency staff) will ease budget
pressures. The restructure of teams has gone hand-in-hand
with the development of a Social Work Academy which
provides a high level of support to NQSWs and continuous
development and career progression opportunities.
In the past year Central Bedfordshire has seen a significant
shift in the ratio of permanent to agency staff (50/50 in April
2013 to 70/30 in March 2015). Staff turnover has dramatically
decreased and the percentage of cases graded as ‘Good’ or
‘Outstanding’ within the internal audit programme has risen
from 30 per cent to 70 per cent. The number of looked after
children and children subject to child protection plans has
also decreased. A Staff Board was established to guide the
developments and frontline workers continue to be involved
in overseeing and shaping change within the service.
16 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Next steps
By looking at research, examples of innovative practice and the
findings of some nationally funded system redesign projects;
this briefing provides some clear messages for managers of
children’s services. In supporting some of the most vulnerable
people in society, local authorities are committed to developing
the social work workforce. The health of a workforce is a major
determinant of the quality of work it produces and, therefore,
the impact it has on children’s lives.
Key points for managers and leaders of
children’s services
Workers make the decision to stay at or to leave
an authority by weighing up a variety of factors. In
recruitment and retention terms, these can be thought
of as ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors. These factors and the
need for a ‘whole systems’ approach to workforce
development needs to be understood by the managers
and leaders of an organisation.
In order to maximise the chances of recruiting and
retaining high quality staff, organisations need to start
with an honest appraisal of where they are in relation to
these factors, understand staff perceptions and plan to
address areas of concern.
Staff recruitment and retention strategies are most
successful when frontline workers are involved in their
development and delivery. Engagement at all levels
is critical in the context of workforce development
and planning.
In order to build the pool of experienced workers,
organisations need to make a commitment to the
training and development of newly qualified staff.
Social Work Academies are providing promising
results in this respect.
Some authorities have radically reshaped their services
to create different working conditions (maximising pull
and minimising push factors). It may not be appropriate
to implement these models across the board, as attention
must be paid to local context. However, authorities will
benefit from gathering learning points from service
redesign activity elsewhere in order to inform their
own discussions and planning.
Although early in their development, regional
agreements between authorities look to be a positive
means of managing spiralling agency costs and ensuring
high standards are maintained. Authorities should
consider whether the development of collaborative
agreements across their region would be beneficial.
www.rip.org.uk
17

References
Audit Commission (2002) Recruitment and Retention. A
public service workforce for the twenty-first century. London:
Audit Commission.
Baginsky M (2013) Retaining Experienced Social Workers in
Children’s Services: The challenge facing local authorities in
England. London: Department for Education.
Blaug R, Kenyon A and Lekhi R (2007) Stress at Work.
London: The Work Foundation.
Buckley H (2008) Service users’ perceptions of the Irish Child
Protection System. Dublin: Office of the Minister for Children
and Youth Affairs.
Burns K (2010) ‘Career Preference, Transients and Converts.
A Study of Social Workers’ Retention in Child Protection and
Welfare’. British Journal of Social Work 41(3), 520-538.
Caringi J, Strolin-Goltzman J, Lawson H, McCarthy M,
Briar-Lawson K and Claiborne N (2008) ‘Child welfare design
teams: An intervention to improve workforce retention and
facilitate organisational development’. Research on Social
Work Practice 18 (6), 565-574.
Casey A (2005) Factors Influencing Retention of Child Welfare
Staff: A Systematic Review of Research. Washington: Institute for
the Advancement of Social Work Research.
Chiller P and Crisp B (2012) ‘Sticking Around: Why and How
some Social Workers Stay in the Profession’. Practice: Social
Work in Action 24(2), 211-224.
Caw J and Sebba J (2014) Team parenting for children in foster
care: A model for intergrated therapeutic care. London: Jessica
Kingsley Publishers.
Collins, S (2008) ‘Statutory social workers: Stress, job
satisfaction, coping, social support and individual differences’.
British Journal of Social Work 38 (6), 1173-1193.
Cornes M, Manthorpe J, Moriarty J and Hussein S (2013) ‘The
experiences and perspectives of agency social workers in
England: Findings from interviews with those working in adult
services’. Social Work and Social Sciences Review 16, 1, 67-83.
Cross A, Hubbard A and Munro E (2010) Reclaiming Social Work.
London Borough of Hackney Children and Young People’s Services.
London: The London School of Economics and Political Sciences.
Curtis L, Moriarty J and Netten A (2010) ‘The expected working
life of a social worker’. British Journal of Social Work 40(5),
1628-1643.
Dickinson N and Perry R (2002) ‘Factors influencing the
retention of specially educated public child welfare workers’.
Child Welfare 15(3/4), 89-193.
Dinn GA (2003) Students’ Experience of Practice Learning
in Social Work Training. MA dissertation (Unpublished).
Luton: University of Luton.
Eborall C and Garmeson K (2001) Desk Research on Recruitment
and Retention in Social Care and Social Work. London:
Department of Health.
Ellett AJ, Ellis JI, Westbrook TM and Dews D (2007) ‘A qualitative
study of 369 child welfare professionals’ perspectives about
factors contributing to employee retention and turnover’.
Children and Youth Services Review 29, 2, 264-281.
Ericsson KA, Krampe RT and Tesch-Roemer C (1993) ‘The role
of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance’.
Psychological Review 100, 363-406.
Forrester D (2000) ‘Parental substance misuse and child
protection in a British sample: A survey of children on the child
protection register in an inner London district office’. Child
Abuse Review 9(4), 235-246.
Faulkner M and Borah E (2008) ‘Influence of Workplace
Features on Child Welfare Service Quality’. Professional
Development: The International Journal of Continuing Social Work
Education 11, 3, 35-49.
Gibbs J (2009) ‘Changing the cultural story in child protection:
Learning from the insider’s story’. Child and Family Social Work
14, 289–99.
Glisson (2007) ‘Assessing and changing organisational culture
and climate for effective services’. Research on Social Work
Practice 17(6), 736-747.
Hammond KR (1995). The Effects of Stress on Judgement and
Decision-making: An Overview and Arguments for a New
Approach. Boulder, Colarado: United States Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Healy K, Meagher G and Cullin J (2009) ‘Retaining novices to
become expert child protection practitioners: creating career
pathways in direct practice’. British Journal of Social Work 39,
1, 299-317.
Hemmelgarn AL, Glisson C and James LR (2006) ‘Organisational
culture and climate: Implications for services and interventions
research’. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 13,1, 73-89.
18 Research in Practice Social work recruitment and retention

Holmes E, Miscampbell G and Robin B (2013) Reforming
Social Work: Improving social worker recruitment, training and
retention. London: Policy Exchange.
Horner N, Conant N, Byrne J and Salisbury E (2002) Social
Work Practice Learning: Do ‘good’ placements produce ‘willing’
employees? An exploration of the experiences of students who
have subsequently taken up practitioner posts in the authorities
where they undertook an assessed practice placement.
Nottingham: Nottingham Trent University Social Work
Programme Partnership.
Houston S and Knox S (2004) ‘Exploring workforce retention
in child and family social work: Critical social theory, social
pedagogy and action research’. Social Work & Social Sciences
Review 11(2), 36-53.
Johnson S, Cooper C, Cartwright S, Donald I, Taylor P and
Millet C (2005) ‘The experience of work-related stress across
occupations’. Journal of Managerial Psychology 20, 178-187.
Johnson JJ and McIntyre CL (1998) ‘Organizational culture and
climate correlates of job satisfaction’. Psychological Reports 82,
3, 843-850.
Kelly A (2015) Breaking the Lock. A new preventative model
to improve the lives of vulnerable children and make families
stronger. London: Impower Consulting Ltd.
King R, Lloyd C and Chenoweth L (2010) ‘Social work, stress and
burnout. A review’. Journal of Mental Health 11(3), 255-265.
Kinman G and Grant L (2011) ‘Exploring Stress Resilience in
Trainee Social Workers: The Role of Emotional and Social
Competences’. British Journal of Social Work 41, 261-275.
Le Grand J (2007) Consistent care matters: Exploring the
potential of social work practices. London: Department for
Education and Skills.
Local Government Association (2015) LGA/PPMA member guide.
Recruiting and retaining qualified social workers. London: Local
Government Association.
Mor Barak MC, Nissly J and Levin A (2001) ‘Antecedents to
retention and turnover among child welfare, social work
and human service employees. What can we learn from past
research? A review and meta-analysis’. Social Service Review
75, 4, 625-661.
Munro E (2011) The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report.
A Child-Centred System. London: Department for Education.
Nissly J, Mor Barak M and Levin A (2005) ‘Stress, support and
workers’ intentions to leave their jobs in public child welfare’.
Administration in Social Work 29(1), 79-100.
Parker J, Doel M and Whitfield J (2006) ‘Does Practice Learning
assist the Recruitment and Retention of Staff?’ Research Policy
and Planning 24(3), 179-195.
Russ E, Lonne B and Darlington Y (2009) ‘Using resilience to
reconceptualise child protection workforce capacity’. Australian
Social Work 62(3), 324-338.
Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health (2000) Finding and Keeping.
Review of recruitment and retention in the mental health
workforce. London: Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.
Searle R and Patent V (2013) ‘Recruitment, Retention and Role
Slumping in Child Protection: The Evaluation of In-Service
Training Initiatives’. British Journal of Social Work 43, 1111-1129.
Smyth M (1996) Qualified Social Workers and Probation Officers.
A Social Survey. London: Office for National Statistics.
Smith R, McLenachan J, Venn L, Weich H and Anthony D (2013)
Step up to Social Work Programme Evaluation 2012: The Regional
Partnerships and Employers Perspectives. London: Department
for Education.
Social Care Institute of Excellence (2013) Effective supervision in
a variety of settings. London: Social Care Institute of Excellence.
Stalker C, Mandell D, Frensch K, Harvey C and Wright M (2007)
‘Child welfare workers who are exhausted yet satisfied with
their jobs: How do they do it?’ Child and Family Social Work
12, 182-191.
Stanley N, Austerberry H, Bilson A, Farrelly N, Hargreaves K,
Hollingworth K, Hussein S, Ingold A, Larkins C, Manthorpe J,
Bidley J and Strange V (2010) Social Work Practices: Report of
the National Evaluation. London: Department for Education.
Tham P (2007) ‘Why are they leaving? Factors affecting
intention to leave among social workers in child welfare’.
British Journal of Social Work 37(7), 1225-1246.
Ward H (2014) ‘Making wise decisions about care’. Promoting
the well-being of children in care: messages from research,
Rahilly T and Hendry E (eds). London: NSPCC.
Webb C and Carpenter J (2012) ‘What Can Be Done to Promote
the Retention of Social Workers? A Systematic Review of
Interventions’. British Journal of Social Work 42, 1235-1255.
www.rip.org.uk
19

Authors: Susannah Bowyer and Alison Roe
With grateful thanks to: Diane Calverley,
Ros Garrod-Mason, Rebecca Godar, Chris Hogan,
Paula Jones, Polly Reed, Marion Russell,
Anna Titmus, Rachael Wardell and Sue Woolmore.
Photograph: Marcus Crouch
Research in Practice
The Granary, Dartington Hall
Totnes, Devon, TQ9 6EE
tel: 01803 867 692
email: ask@rip.org.uk
© Research in Practice July 2015
Research in Practice is a programme of The Dartington Hall Trust
which is registered in England as a company limited by guarantee
and a charity. Company No. 1485560 Charity No. 279756 VAT No.
402196875 Registered Office: The Elmhirst Centre, Dartington Hall,
Totnes TQ9 6EL
www.rip.org.uk