Social Work England’s watchdog has praised improvements in the speed of its response to overseas practitioners seeking to register to work in the country.
The comments came in a generally positive report on its performance in 2024 by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), which monitors Social Work England and nine health professional regulators.
For the second year running, Social Work England met 17 of the 18 standards it was assessed against, covering its general processes, approach to registration, oversight of social work education and fitness to practise (FTP) system.
The exception was standard 15, on the fairness and efficiency of its FTP process, which it did not meet for the third year running, due to chronic delays in processing cases*.
Sharp rises in overseas applications and processing times
The number of applications from overseas social workers applying to register in England annually almost trebled from 2020-23, from 659 to 1,866.
This triggered a sharp increase in the time Social Work England took to process cases, from less than 10 days on average for most of 2021, to over 50 days in 2023.
The regulator met the relevant standard (11) in the PSA’s 2023 performance review. However, the watchdog said then that, though the regulator was taking “reasonable steps” to address the issue, it expected to see performance improve.
Watchdog praises faster handling of overseas cases
The number of overseas applications fell by 19% to 1,520 in 2024, and, after peaking at 75 days in March 2024, the average handling time fell to less than 25 days in every month from August to December of last year.
“Whilst it is likely that the decrease in the volume of applications contributed to this, it also seems likely that the action taken by Social Work England has significantly contributed to this improved performance,” said the PSA, in its 2024 report.
This included updating guidance for overseas applicants, making the process more efficient, increasing resources for the relevant team and meeting with councils recruiting overseas to gain insight into their processes, said the watchdog.
Equality, diversity and inclusion standard
The PSA also praised aspects of Social Work England’s approach to equality, diversity and inclusion (standard 3), highlighting, in particular, the role of its National Advisory Forum, which comprises experts by experience and social workers.
The PSA said that the forum “co-produces a significant amount of work with Social Work England” and its role underlined the regulator’s commitment to co-production.
It also positively highlighted the fact that Social Work England had eight different equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) related themes for categorising corporate feedback or complaints. When these were identified, the information was shared with the head of EDI, and any actions or learning monitored by the internal quality and improvement team.
Rachel Meade case
The PSA review was the first to take place since an employment tribunal found Social Work England had committed a “serious abuse of power” in allowing its FTP processes to be “subverted to punish and suppress” social worker Rachel Meade’s protected gender critical beliefs.
After finding the regulator had harassed Meade on account of her beliefs through the FTP process, the tribunal imposed exemplary damages on it, a measure generally designed to “punish conduct that is oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional”.
It also recommended training in freedom of expression and belief for Social Work England’s fitness to practise staff, which the regulator said it would implement, alongside other measures designed to respond to the tribunal’s findings.
Social Work England’s response to concerns
Following the case, the PSA said it would monitor how Social Work England responded to the judgment. In its 2024 report, it said Social Work England had “explained what it is doing to address the concerns raised with it”, in relation to the Meade case and the issue of FTP delays.
“Its response appears reasonable and we will continue to monitor its progress,” the PSA added.
As such, it said the regulator had met standard 4, which involves “[addressing] concerns identified about it and [considering] the implications for it of findings of public inquiries and other relevant reports”.
Regulator aiming to meet all standards
In response to the report, Social Work England chief executive Colum Conway said: “We are confident in our performance and have once again met 17 out of 18 of the Standards for Good Regulation.
“However, we know this is not good enough and will never be good enough until we meet all 18 standards.
“While timeliness in our fitness to practise process continues to be a challenge, we do have a pathway to achieving standard 15 which requires additional funding over time. The delays in case progression are unacceptable for us and for everyone involved.”
Social Work England’s performance in 2024
- The regulator provides accurate, fully accessible information about its registrants, regulatory requirements, guidance, processes and decisions (met).
- The regulator is clear about its purpose and ensures that its policies are applied appropriately across all its functions and that relevant learning from one area is applied to others (met).
- The regulator understands the diversity of its registrants and their patients and service users and of others who interact with the regulator and ensures that its processes do not impose inappropriate barriers or otherwise disadvantage people with protected characteristics (met).
- The regulator reports on its performance and addresses concerns identified about it and considers the implications for it of findings of public inquiries and other relevant reports about healthcare regulatory issues (met).
- The regulator consults and works with all relevant stakeholders across all its functions to identify and manage risks to the public in respect of its registrants (met).
- The regulator maintains up-to-date standards for registrants which are kept under review and prioritise patient and service user centred care and safety (met).
- The regulator provides guidance to help registrants apply the standards and ensures this guidance is up to date, addresses emerging areas of risk, and prioritises patient and service user centred care and safety (met).
- The regulator maintains up-to-date standards for education and training which are kept under review, and prioritise patient and service user centred care and safety (met).
- The regulator has a proportionate and transparent mechanism for assuring itself that the educational providers and programmes it oversees are delivering students and trainees that meet the regulator’s requirements for registration, and takes action where its assurance activities identify concerns either about training or wider patient safety concerns (met).
- The regulator maintains and publishes an accurate register of those who meet its requirements including any restrictions on their practice (met).
- The process for registration, including appeals, operates proportionately, fairly and efficiently, with decisions clearly explained (met).
- Risk of harm to the public and of damage to public confidence in the profession related to non-registrants using a protected title or undertaking a protected act is managed in a proportionate and risk-based manner (met).
- The regulator has proportionate requirements to satisfy itself that registrants continue to be fit to practise (met).
- The regulator enables anyone to raise a concern about a registrant (met).
- The regulator’s process for examining and investigating cases is fair, proportionate, deals with cases as quickly as is consistent with a fair resolution of the case and ensures that appropriate evidence is available to support decision-makers to reach a fair decision that protects the public at each stage of the process (not met).
- The regulator ensures that all decisions are made in accordance with its processes, are proportionate, consistent and fair, take account of the statutory objectives, the regulator’s standards and the relevant case law and prioritise patient and service user safety (met).
- The regulator identifies and prioritises all cases which suggest a serious risk to the safety of patients or service users and seeks interim orders where appropriate (met).
- All parties to a complaint are supported to participate effectively in the process (met).
*Community Care will be reporting on the PSA’s verdict on Social Work England’s fitness to practise process separately.
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Oxfordshire County Council 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Webinar: building a practice framework with the influence of practitioner voice 
‘They don’t have to retell their story’: building long-lasting relationships with children and young people 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
How managers are inspiring social workers to progress in their careers 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
Nothing like a watchdog looking after its own interests by flim flam use of data to look after it’s regulator pals. The big picture here is the conflicts of interest in this collusion. I’ll summarise the reality of this so claimed commended performance. The numbers of applications have declined and commensurate with that SWE have ‘reduced’ the time it takes to respond to applications. Claiming “that” “probably” might be “a” reason is like claiming if I had three tangerines in my fridge and ate two it’s “likely” I’ll have one left to eat later. Some of us actually read these reports and most of us did actually pay attention in maths class so we can also count.