Safe workloads and case allocation
Focus on complexity
Health checks often focus on the number of cases, not their complexity. Caseload allocation should consider complexity, challenge, and risk along with quantity. Assessing complexity across different organisations is challenging. Recognising time spent on administration tasks beyond direct casework is crucial.
Work commitments often make finding time for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and supervision difficult. Workload management systems should allocate enough time for these tasks without compromising other responsibilities. Diary methods, where workers record their activities, offer insights into:
- social workers’ actual workloads
- the types of tasks they spend time on
- their working hours
Carefully manage this method to avoid it being seen as surveillance or a threat to professional autonomy. Strategically assess available resources to help practitioners meet caseload demands effectively.
Ad hoc approaches to workload management
Adopting ad hoc methods for workload management means tasks are allocated case-by-case, rather than following a structured plan. To prevent overload, proactive workload management systems are important. You should consider practitioners’ capacity, expertise, and strengths.
Recent research findings (see References) provide insights into innovative caseload management practices by individual social workers and teams. These can help organisations design better workload systems.
Ensuring balanced workloads
Workload imbalances, where some practitioners are overloaded while others are under-used, can cause:
- resentment and lower morale among the workforce
- greater risk of mental and physical health problems due to overwhelm
- disengagement for those who are under-used
- overloaded workers to move to less stressful jobs
- under-used workers to seek more engaging roles elsewhere
Both situations can lead to low productivity and retention issues. Transparency, equity, and responsiveness to diverse needs are important in workload management.
Research shows that UK minority group social workers often face more challenging workloads due to systemic biases, leading to longer hours. This highlights the need to monitor individual workloads to make sure they are fair.
Creating supportive workplaces to prevent burnout and turnover
Social workers are dedicated and often work long hours to manage caseloads and cover for absent colleagues, putting others’ needs before their own. This leads to:
- increased stress
- burnout
- health problems
- impaired performance
- an unsafe work culture
Leaders should recognise that heavy workloads and demanding cultures contribute to high turnover. Overwork harms wellbeing, strains personal relationships, and reduces time for leisure and self-care. Long hours disrupt the balance between work and personal life, affecting family and caregiving responsibilities. Organisations that prioritise demands over practitioners’ wellbeing will not be successful.
When developing workload management and case allocation systems, ensure caseloads are realistic and promote a healthy work-life balance. Managers should model this balance by maintaining reasonable work hours and encouraging breaks.
For more strategies to support practitioners’ wellbeing and work-life balance, refer to Employer standard 4: Wellbeing
Developing workload management systems collaboratively
The standard calls on social work organisations to develop workload management systems collaboratively with practitioners and their line managers.
Practitioners should have input into decision-making regarding their caseloads and in monitoring the safety and effectiveness of workloads in general. Co-design creates sustainable solutions. It does this by incorporating practitioners’ perspectives and needs, and the effect on people accessing services.
A collaborative approach leads to efficient outcomes and cultivates a sense of ownership. You should include practitioners from different backgrounds. This helps to ensure the system meets the needs of a diverse workforce.
You may resist involving practitioners in the development of workload management systems for some of these reasons:
- lack of awareness
- control
- fear of change
- time and resources
- power dynamics
- perceived expertise
It is important to use genuine approaches to social worker involvement. It is not enough to include them in decision-making processes without valuing their input or views. This will lead to them feeling powerless, frustrated, and disengaged in your workforce.
To encourage an inclusive work environment, you should respect employee input and involve them in the development of the workload system.
References
This is the list of research and evidence sources used to produce this section. Publicly available links are included.
Baginsky, M., Moriarty, J., Manthorpe, J., Stevens, M., MacInnes, T., & Nagendran, T. (2010). Social workers’ workload survey: Messages from the frontline. King’s College, University of London.
Lechman, C. (2006). The development of a caseload weighting tool. Administration in Social Work, 30(2), 25–37.
McFadden, P., Davies, H., Manthorpe, J., MacLochlainn, J., McGrory, S., Naylor, R., Mallett, J., Kirby, K., Currie, D., Schroder, H., Nicholl, P., Mullineux, J., & McColgan, M. (2024). Safe staffing and workload management in social work: A scoping review of legislation, policy and practice. The British Journal of Social Work.
Roodt, G. (2018). A job demands—resources framework for explaining turnover intentions. In M. Coetzee, I. Potgieter, & N. Ferreira (Eds.), Psychology of retention (pp. 1-20). Springer, Cham.
Social Work Scotland. (2022). Pause the national care service bill for further work, social work Scotland urges. Edinburgh, Social Work Scotland.
Next page: Tools and resources
The resources have been developed by
Research in Practice
in collaboration with
DfE.
Published: 30 October 2024
Last updated: 30 October 2024
Published: 30 October 2024
Last updated: 30 October 2024