The number of fitness to practise (FtP) cases lasting at least three years has doubled since 2023, Social Work England figures have shown.
While 150 cases had been open for more than three years as of 30 June 2023, this had grown to 294 a year later, showed data published in a report to the regulator’s July 2024 board meeting.
The number of cases open for at least a year grew from 828 to 1,052 during this time. Meanwhile, the average age of FtP cases that had a final outcome in April to June 2024 was 128 weeks – almost two and a half years – against an average of 110 weeks during 2023-24.
Hundreds of social workers ‘in limbo’
The news comes after the British Association of Social Workers (BASW), the Social Workers Union (SWU) and UNISON warned that “hundreds” of practitioners were being left in “limbo”- often unable to work – due to FtP delays, to the detriment of their mental health.
As at 31 August 2024, 113 social workers were subject to an interim suspension order, meaning they were unable to practise whilst awaiting the conclusion of their FtP case, according to data provided in a parliamentary answer by children’s minister Janet Daby.
Several others have restrictions placed on their working arrangements through interim conditions of practice orders. However, BASW, SWU and UNISON have reported that some employers are not hiring practitioners subject to an FtP case, even if there are no restrictions on their practice, a phenomenon Social Work England has acknowledged takes place.
In response to the latest data, SWU warned that practitioners and their families were “suffering as a consequence of ineffective processes”.
Social Work England said it acknowledged that “it [was] taking too long to resolve cases” and “recognised the distress this can cause to social workers and others involved”
Budget-driven limits on hearings numbers
The situation is driven primarily by limits on Social Work England’s capacity to hold final hearings, as a result of its level of funding from the Department for Education in 2024-25.
Hearings panels, which include at least a qualified social worker and a lay chair, determine whether a practitioner’s fitness to practise is impaired and, if so, what, if any, sanction should follow.
The latest data showed that social workers referred for a hearing had been waiting an average of 165 weeks (3 years and 2 months) from the point Social Work England received an FtP referral about them, as of 30 June 2024. Twelve months earlier this figure was 131 weeks.
The regulator carried out only 13 final hearings from April to June 2024, compared with 64 in the same quarter a year earlier.
And while 386 cases were awaiting a hearing as of 30 June 2024, the regulator only expects to carry out 35 hearings from April 2024 to March 2025.
The fitness to practise process
- Referral of concern: this could be from members of the public, employers, fellow practitioners or the social worker concerned themselves.
- Pre-triage: at this stage, Social Work England determines whether the case falls within its FtP remit by determining whether it relates to a statutory ground of impairment, such as misconduct, lack of competence or capability, a criminal conviction, adverse physical or mental health or not having the necessary knowledge of English.
- Triage: the regulator’s triage team determines if there are reasonable grounds to investigate the concerns and whether the concerns suggest the social worker’s fitness to practise is currently impaired. In 2023-24, 71% of cases were dropped at the pre-triage or triage stages.
- Investigation: two members of the investigations team gather evidence in relation to the fitness to practise concerns and then produce a report on their findings, which is shared with the social worker for their input, before being referred to case examiners.
- Case examiner stage: two examiners, one a professional social worker, look at the case and decide whether there is a realistic prospect that a hearing panel would find the practitioner under investigation’s fitness to practise impaired and, if so, whether a hearing would be in the public interest. If the former test is met, but the latter is not, and the case examiners decide that a sanction is appropriate, they will seek the social worker’s consent to impose this. Where the practitioner agrees, this is known as an ‘accepted disposal’.
- Interim orders: where there are serious concerns, investigators or case examiners may refer the practitioner for an interim order, if this is either in the social worker’s best interests or necessary for public protection. If a panel of at least two independent adjudicators agrees, they can impose an interim order, either suspending the person from practice or imposing conditions on their practice. Interim orders are reviewed by a panel every six months.
- Final hearings: a panel of at least two adjudicators, one a qualified social worker, hears the evidence and then determines if the social worker’s fitness to practise is impaired and, if so, whether it is in the public interest to impose a sanction. The sanctions (which are also available to case examiners through an accepted disposal) are: no further action; advice; a warning order; a conditions of practice order; a suspension order, and a removal order.
Challenges across the FtP process
As well as its limited capacity to hold hearings, Social Work England has faced challenges across the whole fitness to practise process.
The average age of cases at the triage stage was 24 weeks as of 30 June 2024, against a quarterly target of 21 weeks and up from 17 weeks a year earlier.
Social Work England has recruited to six people into new roles in the triage team and said that it expected this increased capacity to have an impact from October 2024 onwards.
Meanwhile, the average age of the investigations caseloads grew from 61 weeks in 68 weeks in the year to 30 June 2024, against a quarterly target of 60 weeks. Social Work England said this was due to a higher proportion of younger cases being concluded from April to June 2024 than usual, and a higher than average proportion of older cases being referred to the investigations team during this quarter.
It said it had undertaken targeted reviews of the 50 oldest cases, concluding 10 of them, from April to June 2024, and would continue to do this to ensure older cases were progressed appropriately.
At the case examiner stage, the average age of the caseload grew from 77 weeks to 100 weeks in the year to 30 June 2024, while the time taken to complete the process doubled from seven to 14 weeks, between April to June 2023 and the same quarter in 2024.
Social Work England said its performance in this area had been affected by long-term staff absence, one-sixth of cases being on hold pending information from the family courts and 31 cases having to be referred back to investigations in April to June 2024, compared with 23 in the equivalent quarter of 2023.
The regulator said the case examiner team was back up to full capacity and that it was looking to increase its size further “to ensure we continue to progress cases as quickly and fairly as possible”.
‘We know cases are taking too long’
Social Work England chief executive Colum Conway said the regulator handled FtP cases in line with its legal framework, which was designed “to ensure that the public remains protected, confidence in social workers is maintained and that social workers continue to meet their professional standards”.
Colum Conway, chief executive, Social Work England
He added: “We have seen improvements in the outcomes for people at the various stages of our fitness to practise process. However, we know that it is taking too long to resolve cases and recognise the distress this can cause to social workers and others involved.
“We continue to look at all options for ensuring that our resources are sufficient to carry out our responsibilities and look to make efficiencies and improvements where we can. Alongside this, we continue to hold as many final hearings as we can within our available resources and have communicated with those affected.”
Social workers ‘suffering the consequences of ineffective processes’
Social Workers Union assistant general secretary Calum Gallacher said SWU acknowledged that Social Work England was attempting to address the backlogs.
“Targeting the progression of oldest cases at the investigations stage and closing cases by way of no impairment or accepted disposal are a welcome practical step taken at present,” he said. “But what of the future? Systems in place are evidently not sustainable in the longer term.”
“Social workers and their families are suffering as consequence of ineffective processes. Little is changing to remedy the protracted delays regulated professionals are subject to,” Gallacher added. “There are damaging consequences for workforce morale and professional identity.”
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Lincolnshire County Council 
Norfolk County Council 
Northamptonshire Children’s Trust 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wiltshire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Children and young people with SEND are ‘valued and prioritised’ in Wiltshire, find inspectors 
How specialist refugee teams benefit young people and social workers 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
Podcast: would you work for an inadequate-rated service? 
Family help: one local authority’s experience of the model 
‘We are all one big family’: how one council has built a culture of support 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
If every time my manager allocated a case to me I took little to no action for up to 3 years I would be sacked. But apparently “may” is the catch all
non-appology and under resourcing the complacent get out clause for SWE. It’s time the likes of BASW which never shies from telling us it’s a tireless advocate for social work and serves interests of social workers ceaselessly actually declared it has no confidence in SWE and calls it out for not being fit for purpose rather than couching it’s responses in weasel words. It won’t of course seeing as its also complicit and compromised by its cosy tea and biscuits chats with pals.
Absolutely. The whole processes are Absolutely shocking and I have zero confidence in the skills and experience of investigators, alongside with not employing actual experienced Social Workers to conduct the investigations as well as triage.
Not saying the profession doesn’t need regulation, but Absolutely saying that the current are simply not fit for purpose.
No wonder majority of social workers are considering leaving, what is the point?
Make the hearings public, you would see pre triage and triage move much quicker and swiftly. To have disgruntled families and managers use SWE as a punishment for practitioners should simply not be allowed. And don’t get me started on things progressing to investigation without any evidence filled whatsoever.
I despair, and find this very very sad to be honest
Fitness to practise hearings are public.
That’s not the case actually Eric.
Actually Iain that is the case.
You can go on their website and ask to attend a hearing. It’s the same with the GMC and NMC. If it’s about a SWs health it’s private
Some hearings are held without public attendance ergo not all hearings are public. I know I’ve been refused attendance. The reasons aren’t that important if some are held in private are they?
Such a poor system. I was subject to FtP which started in late 2019. In May this year the process concluded that I was fit to practice, with no impairment after a 13 day hearing, although I’m still waiting for the discontinuation hearing in October. At such a time I will be removed from the SW register as I did not feel it was fair to continue paying my annual fee whilst SWE took so long to compete their investigation.
So after 5 years of sitting in limbo and being unable to work, I am now in a position to work but can’t as I need to apply for reinstatement, pay a large fee and have to complete 30 or 60 days CPD of which half needs to be supervised practice, which I can only do if I can get a job, which I can’t as a qualified worker. So I continue to be stuck, unable to do a job I have loved for 27 years all because of the slow process by SWE!
I had a similar experience, from initial referral to them letting me know it would progress beyond the triage stage took 8 months. The investigation somewhere between 2 to 3 years and next to no communication in this time. I chased of course but received nothing short of abrupt responses telling me they were still looking in to it.
I provided all of the information they requested right at the start to later receive communication that said I’d not responded, yet my final outcome clearly detailed what I had told them.
The complaint had come from a service user I was working with and they were a serial complainer which if SWE checked their records they would have known from the number of complaints they had already received.
I was exceptionally lucky, there were no restrictions placed upon me and my employers fully supported me, my career even progressed but there were of course opportunities which I didn’t feel able to pursue due to knowing I would have to tell any prospective employer that I was under investigation.
I drafted many complaints but shied away from sending them due to fear it would go against me. I love my role but there was so many occasions when I just felt like walking away.
Whilst I understand social workers frustrated at the system in place, there has to be one to protect the public and service users. I am sympathetic to social workers who are targeted by disgruntled people, but my family had a terrible experience with an assessing social worker during an.SGO application who lied about us and manipulated the report so badly the courts demanded another one be conducted which was so stressful and upsetting it almost caused me to have a breakdown and my partner couldn’t work for 6 months due to the anxiety she caused. If it wasn’t for the fact we knew she was conducted herself inappropriately and making the court aware during our assessment and cc’ing them in to all our correspondence with her, we would have lost the child in our care, completely unnecessarily and it would have destroyed the child’s life. And ours. We have mountains of evidence against her, and whilst it’s taken 2 years already, I have zero sympathy for her, and I hope she is feeling just a fraction of the fear and despair we were made to feel. The difference is, our fear and despair was caused by someone clearly unhinged with a god complex.
In reality though SWE don’t protect the public or service users. They are complacent and incompetent. Every conscientious social worker supports the need for regulation and accountability but SWE isn’t that entity.
Take your experience and skills elsewhere where they may actually be appreciated.
I am in the Aviation sector and loving it still , my social work days well and truly behind me .
I hope life improves for you now – but what shame SWE should feel for keeping you, and no doubt others as well, in such a disadvantaged state for so long. It’s stressful and unreasonable even for people who will eventually be shown to be unfit to practice, but for people who have been wrongly dismissed or suspended it is utterly unacceptable. Not only has it clearly impacted on your life, but it is a loss to social work, and the capacity of the service to care for service users when people with experience are treated like this.
I whistle blew on a L/A where I was a team manager in a CP team due to what was bullying and toxic environment from snr management. They referred me to SWE in June 2020 accusing me of inaccurate records but didn’t allow me access to the system to prove otherwise. SWE allowed me to practice without any restrictions until April this year and at the hearing imposed a 6 month COP saying I could not supervise for 6 months. In Sept this year they lifted that restriction and I’m now under no conditions of practice but because they feel I won’t admit to what the toxic L/A accused me of they want a further 6 months order of me submitting reflection. I have been fully supported by my management and director of children services throughout the last 4 and half years. Communication from SWE since June 2020 was very poor with me chasing them. They showed no concern for my mental health or emotional wellbeing and even admitted my managerial practice has shown no concerns since June 2020 or the 17 years prior to that, they just believe what the toxic L/A accused me of over 4 months at the start of 2020. I am now actively looking to leave SW after 23 years.
Let’s face it – SWE’s woeful incompetence will probably be rewarded.
To further expose the incompetence at SWE, several strategic actions could be taken to investigate and bring attention to the issues highlighted in this article:
### 1. **Conduct Independent Investigations**:
– **External Audits**: Request or initiate independent audits of SWE’s case management processes. This could involve a third-party organization assessing the delays, inefficiencies, and resource management within SWE, similar to audits conducted for other public bodies. Such reports, if made public, could provide concrete evidence of operational failures.
– **Whistleblower Testimonies**: Encouraging whistleblowers from within SWE to come forward with inside information about mismanagement or systemic issues would add credibility to any allegations. Their testimonies could be solicited anonymously to protect their identities, perhaps through established organizations that facilitate whistleblowing in public services.
### 2. **Media Campaigns and Investigative Journalism**:
– **Follow-Up Articles**: Journalists could be encouraged to continue exploring these delays by interviewing affected parties—both social workers and service users. Detailed stories showing how prolonged fitness-to-practise cases harm individuals would put a human face on the issue, making it harder for SWE to dismiss the concerns. These articles could feature case studies, showcasing delays, lack of support for social workers, or any negligence in managing cases.
– **Documentary**: A media outlet could produce an investigative documentary or special report on the state of SWE, including interviews with social workers, lawyers, and experts who can explain the broader impact of regulatory failures.
### 3. **Freedom of Information (FOI) Requests**:
– FOI requests could be used to gather internal data on SWE’s case management processes, staff turnover, workload, and budgeting. Transparency on these fronts may reveal systemic issues such as staff shortages, poor resource allocation, or financial inefficiencies. These requests can yield valuable information about timelines for fitness-to-practise cases, decision-making procedures, and any gaps in oversight.
### 4. **Public Petitions and Advocacy**:
– **Petitions**: A public petition demanding reform of SWE could gain traction among social workers, service users, and advocacy groups. It would signal widespread dissatisfaction and push for governmental scrutiny.
– **Professional Associations’ Involvement**: Organisations like BASW and unions could become more vocal, demanding accountability. Their backing could amplify concerns, particularly if they call for parliamentary inquiries or reforms within SWE.
### 5. **Parliamentary Inquiry or Government Review**:
– Engaging MPs or members of the House of Lords who focus on social work and public service reform could lead to a parliamentary inquiry or government review. The inquiry could examine SWE’s performance, its accountability mechanisms, and its overall fitness to regulate the profession.
– **Petition to the Department for Education or DHSC**: As SWE reports to these departments, advocates or affected parties could petition for a formal review of SWE’s processes, specifically addressing delays and inefficiencies.
### 6. **Legal Action**:
– **Class Action Lawsuit**: If delays in handling fitness-to-practise cases have caused harm to either social workers or service users, there may be grounds for a class action lawsuit. Legal action would bring a lot of attention to SWE’s failures and potentially uncover additional evidence of incompetence through the discovery process.
### 7. **Social Media Campaigns and Public Outcry**:
– **Hashtags and Awareness Campaigns**: Coordinated social media campaigns using hashtags like #ReformSWE or #AccountabilityForSWE could draw attention to the issues from a grassroots level. Social workers and those affected by SWE’s inefficiencies could share their stories, putting pressure on the organization to respond publicly.
– **Public Forums and Webinars**: Hosting public forums where social workers, advocacy groups, and legal experts can openly discuss SWE’s operational failures would help consolidate community concerns. Public webinars and panel discussions involving stakeholders and advocacy groups would also be useful in drawing attention to systemic issues.
### Conclusion:
Combining these efforts could create a powerful case exposing SWE’s inefficiencies. By utilising independent investigations, media attention, and advocacy, the weaknesses in SWE’s regulatory practices can be further highlighted, leading to either public reform efforts or deeper governmental scrutiny.
Good points, well made.Class action lawsuit an excellent idea.
Mental health cases are triaged as low risk. Therefore they go to the bottom of the pile. This is discriminatory as it disproportionately affects workers with mental health disorders not only in the protracted nature of the process but also in the lack of consideration of the regulator to the adverse effect upon the mental wellbeing of the registrants with a disability.
SWE should be scrapped and a restorative process instigated comprising panels of peer and service users to resolve concerns locally and in a timely way.
Let’s hope SWE go the same way as the NMC – https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/nursing-and-midwifery-council-scandal-uk-b2620449.html
The ‘toilet status’ of this EDI action plan from SWE is an absolute embarrassment – https://www.socialworkengland.org.uk/about/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/equality-diversity-and-inclusion-action-plans/equality-diversity-and-inclusion-action-plan-2024-to-2025/.
SW England are all too ready to receive and investigate referrals from Local Authority managers regarding Social Workers not keeping to timescales. Who will now investigate SWE?
Those who are members of BASW might want to ask it to do more to advocate for social workers on this. It will be uncomfortable for BASW no doubt given it has a cosy relationship with SWE but if you pay your subs to BASW their discomfort shouldn’t be your concern. The reason SWE gets away with it’s incompetence is because none of the organisations that are supposed to be representing us are independent enough to hold SWE to account.
I once had a toxic and bullying Manager who threatened to report me to the regulator. I said that was fine, I would report her to the regulator. She seemed extremely taken aback, like she had not considered this was a possibility, and thinking her managerial status made her all–powerful and un-touchable. The next day she told me things had been ‘blown out of proportion’, and she would not be making that referral, so I accepted this, and did not need to make mine either. Problem solved.
I am now retired from the profession but like to keep an interest in Social Workers work-life balance. This story of being fit to practice is alarming. What happened to commonsense? All these so called professional organisations to monitor the social workers but not a single mention of them approaching the government for a greater recognition of social work practice. It appears to be all one -way whereby the social workers are always to blame for bad practice. In 2016 I was employed by a LA and the manager did not speak to me for over 7 months. No meeetings, no supervision and no telephone contacts. Was this flagged up to Social Work England? Whwn I requested supervision I was ignored. Consequently the cases piled up ,complaints increased and I was made the scapegoat. This is no doubt a familiar story with many social workers in the UK but nothing changes. The new government must review social work practice urgently and siuspending staff for leaving a diary in a care home office etc must end . Good luck to all you SWs carrying on with a job that needs a new direction