Key statistics 

• the study included 67 newly qualified social workers within two years of completing their social work degree in England 

• participants were drawn from multiple routes into social work: bachelor’s degree (31), postgraduate programmes (22), and fast-track routes such as Frontline, Think Ahead and Step-Up 

• the majority were employed in local authorities (58 participants), with others working in the NHS or other settings 

• the sample included 28 white participants and 24 Black participants, with others identifying as mixed race, Asian or other ethnic backgrounds 

Key messages 

• newly qualified social workers report limited preparation during training for dealing with racism in practice 

• racism occurs in multiple parts of the system, including interactions with colleagues, people who draw on care and support and partner agencies 

• social workers from minoritised ethnic groups experience racism from people who draw on care and support and colleagues but often feel unsupported by management 

• fear of being labelled “angry”, “problematic”, or “unprofessional” discourages practitioners from raising concerns about racism 

• organisational cultures sometimes prioritise maintaining service delivery over addressing racist behaviour directed at staff 

• the absence of practical frameworks or guidance leaves newly qualified practitioners uncertain about how to challenge racism 

• barriers to anti-racist practice occur across several stages of the professional pathway, including education, placements and early employment 

Policy implications  

• social work education programmes should provide explicit training on recognising and challenging racism 

• employers should create organisational policies that clearly support staff who challenge racism 

• managers should provide supervision and support for practitioners experiencing racial abuse from people who draw on care and support 

• greater representation of ethnic minorities in leadership and academia may improve organisational awareness of racism 

• organisations should facilitate open discussions about racism in supervision, training and team meetings 

Commentary 

This study examines how newly qualified social workers experience and respond to racism in practice during the early stages of their careers. Through focus groups with 67 practitioners, the authors identify significant gaps in training and organisational support for addressing racism within social work and related health and social care contexts. 

Participants widely recognised that racism exists within social work systems, including in interactions between professionals, in organisational decision-making and in experiences from people who draw on care and support. However, many reported feeling unprepared to challenge racism due to limited training during their degree programmes and early employment support programmes such as the Assessed and Supported Year in Employment. 

The research highlights structural barriers within organisations that limit practitioners’ ability to challenge racism. These include fear of professional consequences, lack of managerial support and workplace cultures where discussions about race are avoided. Some participants reported witnessing discriminatory treatment of people who draw on care and support or colleagues but feeling unable to intervene effectively due to uncertainty about organisational procedures or fear of repercussions. 

For practitioners from minoritised ethnic backgrounds, racism directed at them personally was a common concern. Several participants reported that cases were sometimes reassigned when people who draw on care and support refused to work with a Black or Asian social worker, without the behaviour being challenged. This approach prioritised service delivery but left practitioners feeling unsupported and exposed to further discriminatory behaviour. 

The authors also describe a “layering” of barriers across the professional pathway. As illustrated in the framework presented in the paper, obstacles can emerge from multiple sources, including limited exposure to diversity during upbringing, training programmes that lack focus on race, placements with limited diversity, and organisational cultures that discourage discussion of racism. These combined factors reduce practitioners’ confidence and capability to address racism in practice. 

From a health and social care equity perspective, the findings suggest that failure to address racism within professional training and organisational structures may affect both the wellbeing of practitioners and the quality of services delivered to racialised communities. Strengthening anti-racist education, improving organisational accountability and supporting practitioners to challenge discrimination are therefore important steps toward more equitable health and social care practice. 

Key statistics 

• around 65% of social workers reported insufficient staffing to adequately support people drawing on care and support 

• workers aged 30-39 reported the highest sickness absence and strongest intentions to leave 

• intentions to leave were not strongly associated with region, gender or job role. 

Key messages 

• perceptions of unsafe staffing levels are widespread 

• workload and burnout negatively affect mental wellbeing 

• increased administrative demands reduce time for direct practice 

• reliance on agency staff reflects workforce instability 

• wellbeing concerns are closely linked to intentions to leave the profession. 

Policy implications 

• safe staffing standards are needed to support practice quality and worker wellbeing 

• reducing administrative burden may help retain staff 

• addressing burnout could reduce sickness absence and turnover 

• workforce planning should consider age-related risk of exit from the profession. 

Gaps 

• the sample is weighted towards respondents from Northern Ireland 
• findings rely on self-reported data 

• further research on safe staffing thresholds is ongoing. 

Commentary 
This study highlights the relationship between perceived staffing adequacy, wellbeing and retention among social workers. Many participants described feeling unable to meet the needs of people they support due to insufficient staffing, alongside growing administrative demands. 

The findings show how workload pressures translate into sickness absence and intentions to leave, particularly among mid-career workers. Dependence on agency staff was described as both a symptom and a driver of instability, adding complexity to team functioning and continuity. 

From a care equity point of view, the study illustrates how workforce shortages affect both workers and service users. Where staffing levels are inadequate, social workers have less capacity to provide timely and consistent support, increasing the risk of uneven access and outcomes for people drawing on care and support. At the same time, burnout and poor wellbeing disproportionately affect those in high-pressure roles. 

Overall, the paper highlights that safe staffing is not only a workforce issue but a care quality issue. Improving staffing levels and working conditions is essential to sustaining an equitable social care system that supports both practitioners and the people they serve.