Black representation has risen among directors of children’s services (DCSs) in England but lags well behind that in the wider workforce, data has revealed.
As of autumn 2024, 5% of directors identified as black, up from 2% the previous year, with 88% white (down from 90% in 2023), revealed the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) annual report on the statutory leadership role. The rest were Asian or of mixed/multiple ethnicities, the proportions of which remained the same year on year.
While the proportion of black directors is broadly in line with the English population, as measured by the 2021 Census (4.2%), it is well below the level of black representation among children’s social workers in England’s councils and children’s trusts (15.2%).
Declining black representation at higher levels of workforce
The Department for Education has previously shown that black representation falls the further staff rise up the organisational hierarchy, from 20.5% among case-holding practitioners, to 13.1% among senior social workers and 10.2% for managers in 2024.
Among Asian and mixed-heritage staff, there is a similar, though smaller-scale, drop-off.
Asian staff accounted for 6.5% of the whole workforce, 6.9% of case holders, 6.3% of senior practitioners and 5.3% of managers, while mixed-heritage social workers were 3.6% of the workforce, 4% of case holders, 3.7% of senior practitioners and 3% of managers.
Concerns over DCSs’ lack of diversity
The lack of ethnic diversity among DCSs – relative to both their workforces and the population of families coming into contact with children’s social care – is a longstanding concern.
A 2023 report by leadership training body the Staff College warned that this was likely to reflect experiences of racism among staff from minority ethnic groups and said it needed to be tackled by targeted leadership development.
The ADCS’s autumn 2024 survey of directors also found that:
- 17% identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual, up from 16% in 2023.
- 14% identified as having a health issue and/or disability, up from 11% in 2023.
- 21% were aged over 60, up from 17% in 2023.
- 48% professed to have no religion or belief, down from 51%.
More directors are women but representation lower than at front line
The ADCS’s annual report also showed that, as of 31 March 2025, 103 of the 153 directors (67%) were female, up from 102 in 2024.
However, this is also below the representation of women in the children’s social work workforce in England, which was 87.5% as of September 2024.
Commenting on the figures, ADCS president Rachael Wardell said: “Improving equality, diversity and inclusion within the association, and across children’s services, so that we can reflect and respond to the communities we serve is an ongoing priority in my presidential year.”
Rachael Wardell (photo supplied by ADCS)
She added: “While the DCS cohort is still not as diverse as we want it to be, this latest data shows that there was a slight increase in diversity of race/ethnicity amongst DCSs, continuing the upwards trend of the previous year, which is welcome.
“However, there is still more to do in terms of translating our words and commitment to improving diversity, in its widest sense, into actions that our workforce, and our communities, will recognise.”
Reduction in DCS turnover
The ADCS annual report also showed a year-on-year decline in the turnover of directors, with 51 changes of post in 2024-25, down from 62 in 2023-24, and in line with the annual average (49).
The changes took place across 39 councils, 25% of the total, though almost half (22) occurred in just 10 councils, largely due to short-term interim appointments.
There were 25 interim appointments in 2024-25, compared with 28 in 2023-24, but above the annual average of 19. While 15 of these appointees were still in post as of March 2025, the other 10 were not, with tenures ranging from one to six months.
Of the 18 permanent appointments made in 2024-25, 16 were given to serving assistant directors, most of whom (12) had moved authority in the process.
Among current DCSs, average time in post was 38 months, up from 33 months last year: 42 months for permanent appointees and seven months for interims.
Meanwhile, the number of DCSs who also held the statutory post of director of adult social services (DASS) fell to a record low of 11, down from 13 in 2024 and a high of 61 in 2015.
Additional support offered to help reduce churn in director role
Prior to this year, turnover of DCSs had increased for three consecutive years.
Reducing turnover was among the aims of an extension last year to a national training scheme for new directors, funded by the Department for Education and delivered by a consortium led by the Staff College.
New directors now receive a second year of coaching beyond an initial 12 months of training under the new directors’ programme.
Wardell added: “The role of DCS is both unique and challenging and we need to pay more attention to how we support current DCSs to ensure we retain valuable skills, expertise, and experience within the sector.”
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Oxfordshire County Council 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Providing a lifeline for social workers who want to get back into the sector 
The highs and lows of a children’s services’ transformation journey 
Embedding learning in social work teams through a multi-agency approach 
The family safeguarding approach: 5 years on 
Harnessing social work values to shape your career pathway 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Join our team to help technology enabled care transform lives in Nottinghamshire 
Free CPD on Parkinson’s for health and social care staff 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
Apologies, I find it hard to believe there is a rise in black Asian,and minority workers in senior positions representing the minority children,parents and young people we say we are here to safeguard and support. Can I ask where are they?
If you do not have representation of the workforce and service users how do you address those who have more of a voice to those who do not? Are we not going over the same issue time after time without any changes? No matter how much the wording changes nothing has changed why is this? Is it opportunities for some but not others.Is it familiarity,biases,discrimination some are only expected to reach a certain level no more.
How can anti -discrimination practice be addressed? Will the fear not be those who are less visible be the target? Anti- discriminatory practices and biases are emotive, in my view is a necessary part of the role social workers should acknowledge.Is it not worrying there is a clear lack of diversity in plain sight in such a profession.Is it not worrying how difficult it is for some to knowledge some are more visible than others?.
In my opinion anti-discriminatory practice is a fundamental requirement!! has is recognising compliance because it affects our decision making and how we treat others.How we address these important areas in our work is important is it not?
How does a manager who is not representative of the work force and or children and families we work with address anti-discriminatory practice and compliance.This area is emotive requiring sensitive communications,fair balanced approach in a safe environment where you are able to reflect,analyse,use critical thinking to inform one’s own thinking/ assessment all of which are relevant to understanding why we have reached a certain conclusion does it not?
Discussions on bias and critical thinking may lead to anxiety about our personal and professional mind set.Supervision in my opinion does not provide a safe place where you may feel safe for honest and open dialogue with managers. Conversations may expose our thoughts,our mistakes,questionable beliefs,biases and rationalisation. Supervision does not in my opinion provide time and space to explore, some will receive meaningful time and investment some will not.
That may result in compliance behaviour/learn the buzz word.
More referrals to fitness to practice for some.
Avoidance behaviour.
Ennis (2011)”Critical thinking is reasonable,reflective thinking that is founded on deciding what to belive or do”.As social workers we are subconsciously critically thinking.
Deweg (1910) suggest that Critical thinking requires reflection, honesty,humility in the end leads to the judicious and responsible use of power and not it’s abuse.
My point is how can you have a balance of fair management decision making for vulnerable children and the work force when there are imbalances of representation for some and not others.
These are my experiences based on my years of practice.Some may not relate because they may not have the same experiences.This does not mean these experiences do not exist.
I am able to expand further but will not do so.
I have had three black female managers:
One was excellent. I learned a lot from her. One of the best managers I have ever had.
One I had a very good relationship with but as a manager I can’t say I rated her much.
One was a bully. It’s not a word I use lightly. People would leave supervision in tears.
I want a good manager. I want to be represented by people of good values. Who are excellent. Who care.
Apologies, I find it hard to believe there is a rise in black Asian,and minority workers in senior positions representing the minority children,parents and young people we say we are here to safeguard and support. Can I ask where are they?
If you do not have representation of the workforce and service users how do you address those who have more of a voice to those who do not? Are we not going over the same issue time after time without any changes? No matter how much the wording changes nothing has changed why is this? Is it opportunities for some but not others.Is it familiarity,biases,discrimination some are only expected to reach a certain level no more.
How can anti -discrimination practice be addressed? Will the fear not be those who are less visible be the target? Anti- discriminatory practices and biases are emotive, in my view is a necessary part of the role social workers should acknowledge.Is it not worrying there is a clear lack of diversity in plain sight in such a profession.Is it not worrying how difficult it is for some to acknowledge some are more visible than others?.
In my opinion anti-discriminatory practice is a fundamental requirement!! has is recognising compliance because it affects our decision making and how we treat others.How we address these important areas in our work is important is it not?
How does a manager /senior manager who is not representative of the work force and or children and families we work with address anti-discriminatory practice and compliance.This area is emotive requiring sensitive communications,fair balanced approach in a safe environment where you are able to reflect,analyse,use critical thinking to inform one’s own thinking/ assessment all of which are relevant to understanding why we have reached a certain conclusion does it not?
Discussions on bias,reflective practice and critical thinking may lead to anxiety about our personal and professional mind set.Supervision in my opinion does not provide a safe place where you may feel safe for honest and open dialogue with managers. Conversations may expose our thoughts,our mistakes,questionable beliefs,biases and rationalisation yet it an important part of social work. Supervision does not in my opinion provide time and space to explore, some will receive meaningful time and investment some will not.
That may result in compliance behaviour/learn the buzz word.
More referrals to fitness to practice for some.
Avoidance behaviour.
Ennis (2011)”Critical thinking is reasonable,reflective thinking that is founded on deciding what to belive or do”.As social workers we are subconsciously critically thinking.
Deweg (1910) suggest that Critical thinking requires reflection, honesty,humility in the end leads to the judicious and responsible use of power and not it’s abuse.
My point is how can you have a balance of fair management decision making for vulnerable children and the work force when there are imbalances of representation for some and not others.
These are my experiences based on my years of practice.Some may not relate because they may not have the same experiences.This does not mean these experiences do not exist.
I am able to expand further but will not do so.
Directors make decisions with eyes on a number of factors, their local councillors, the Governmet, their budgets, their peers, their future enoblement even. I used to believe that increasing ethnic representation would magically improve my experiences as a social worker and enable better and more appropriate services to clients. Not anymore. Every single Director could be black and the dire state of social work wouldn’t improve. Why? Because just like us mere social workers Directors too are functionaries. They too are biddable, susceptible to political influence, there to discharge ‘duties’ as instructed. Not one single Director functions independently. They are the face that doesn’t reflect in the mirror. I’ve worked in 4 LA’S in North and south England and all I’ve seen and see now too is noise, promises and careers being built. It has nothing to do with ethnicity but everything to do with structures, edicts, budgets. Representation matters they say but when ‘representatives’ don’t improve user and worker experiences then it is just conscience salving smoke and mirrors. At least Dorothy learnt something from the illusionary wizard. We just plod on. Same arguments, same stagnation, same old regurgitation.
Tahin,your comments are absolutely right in my opinion.
Those who make senior levels have no real power /voice to make changes for the workforce and or service users.
Those who make senior position and even managers in the field struggle to have any real credibility from other professionals or even their own team.
The figures above in my opinion confirms there are those who are seen and those who are not,nothing has changed in my years of pratice.Therefore how can a profession claim to be inclusive or anti-discriminatory when it comes to safeguarding of all children.The fiqures above confirm this,attitudes in the work place confirm this you can walk in to an organisation and observe those who have the power and those who stay in the background.
So now every time I read about or hear something from ADCS and ADASS the image of the “face that doesn’t reflect in the mirror” and Dorothy and the Wizard of Oz will pop in to my brain though it does sum up the poverty of ideas, lack of advocacy and the shameful absence of leadership in our profession. That we’ve reached the point where even black social workers no longer have confidence in or take strength from black leaders and directors is perhaps the next survey that needs doing
This is the reality, unless those want to bring about change are truly supported and not left to (sink or swim )nothing will change.To be balanced this is the reality for most managers,however those who are from minority groups who attempt to progress has is the right of all face greater challenges.
Fact not fiction I can give ample examples.However you are right not encouraging is it.Therefore how does the profession move on to represent the children we safeguard and the workforce?
A child who enters the care system or who’s life we intervene in does not know what will happen,what they may face when placed, be traumatised,they may be placed in an enviroment not reflective of their cultrual norm imagine how that child must feel.
Children need to see their cultural identity represented in the workforce and those who make decisions reflect them.
The child who thinks social workers are their to safeguard/ support them but can be removed because the parents do not want a black worker, what message does this then send the child who thought you has a professional had some credibility but really do not unless supported in your role.
We all have skills and knowledge but the devide still remain.
There needs to be acknowledgment and discussions about what is really taking place if change is to happen.
This is not about a lack of confidence in black, Asian and or minority managers or those in senior positions.There are wider challenges/issues at play.
Black, Asian or Minority Managers or those in Senior positions are part of the wider challenges/issues at play. They are not some spectre floating above those. They have seniority, they have power, they have “authenticity”. So if nothing really changes year on year, if Black, Asian and Minority Managers rise to positions where they can make impact but none of it equates to empowering practicioners from those backgrounds I say it is all about lacking confidence and worse having no belief in that cohort. Reminds me of the time when I pranged my mam’s car and blamed it on an imaginary puppy running into the lane. I had the tools, I had my hand on the steering wheel and I had the choice of driving safely or being distracted. When it went bang I said “nowt to do with me it was the dogs fault, the dog made me do it”. Even though there was no dog. Directors are the system, they perpetuate the system, they control parts of the system, they even benefit from the system. That’s it.
I understand what you are saying. In my opinion, there are some elements of truth, all be it uncomfortable to hear and is not about not having the skills,knowledge, and ability but rather wider issues at play.
This could also apply to anyone wanting to progress / make changes inorder that all can benefit in the future.We recognise the issues,do we therefore say what is the point and continue has we are and nothing changes for the profession and society,everything has a riple affect does it not?
In my opinion social workers recognise the issues as do Directors, mostly. Difference is we want change, we want opportunities, we want fair treatment, we want help to do a good job etc. Directors on the other hand have a different set of priorities and in my experience are good at pretend outrage, honey dripping words and jam tomorrow promises. They can have all the skills, knowledge and ability but if they allow themselves to be constrained by the ideology of budget driven focus, which they do, they are useless for all social workers not just black, Asian or those from global majority ethnicities. The point is to do. Do the work that recalibrates social work away from bureaucracy. Do the work that actually recognises the realities and the needs of people who use services. There’s nothing fatalistic about saying any of this. To progress you have to recognise deficits. To progress you have to commit to change however hard that might be amongst like minded peer Directors. To progress you have to be honest about how destructive micro management is. To progress you have to have a vision, a commitment, a determination to make decisions that have actual positive consequences. I say again, if every year we hear the same rhetoric, if every year we bemoan that not enough ‘diversity’ targets have been met, if every year we crook our necks and get misty eyed about how all will be well if only a mythical quota of black directors were in place all we have is just more word upon more words. Social work is riddled with guilt and the supposed commitment to be better yet all I know is that I have had black managers and my experienced were actually more frustrating because I was suppose to buy into the “us” narrative when actually all I saw was “you”. When Directors allow organisational ideology to shape their ‘leadership’ ethnicity, sexual orientation, “lived experience” count for nothing. That is all I see and that is all I hear from colleagues across practically the whole country. The numbers game is a distraction from what needs to really happen. Start by reclaiming social work values. Start by seeing the purpose of why we get into people’s lives. The path to a healthy profession with high morale practitioners making an actual difference is not really that rocky. Leave numbers to actuaries.
There is a lot that needs to change. From tokenism to real disruption of systemic racism. Even if there is one manager promoted since 2023, it’s not good enough. There are ongoing problems with racism and anti racist practice. These two papers highlight the real problems with this issue.
– Cane, T. C., & Tedam, P. (2022). ‘We didn’t learn enough about racism and anti-racist practice’: newly qualified social workers’ challenge in wrestling racism. Social Work Education, 42(8), 1563–1585. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2022.2063271
– Tedam, P., & Cane, T. (2023). “We started talking about race and racism after George Floyd”: insights from research into practitioner preparedness for anti-racist social work practice in England. Critical and Radical Social Work, 10(2), 260-279. Retrieved May 25, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1332/204986022X16547711540394
Tahin,your comments are relatable and to the point .Until we have open honest discussions and acknowledgement of the issues nothing will change,the very few who make senior positions have certain constraints do they not? I believe those who want to reach senior positions shive to make change to represent all who come into contact with the profession and is not necessarily for their own benefit.
The challenges to bringing change is complex,uncomfortable,generational societical beliefs.
Therefore ask how do we change uncomfortable , unhelpful assumptions and beliefs which impacts how society views the service we deliver to all.Society is multicultural to safeguard ,understand and provide an inclusive service we need to acknowledge and have respectful discussions.
A few promotions can not bring about change.We remain in the same position with the finger pointing (they do not have the skills ,knowledge,confidence of the workforce so on and so on ).As stated before the issues are wider.