Understanding how children experience social work interventions is an important part of gauging whether what is provided is genuinely helpful. In this paper, we describe the findings from a research project using Q-method, aimed at understanding what children involved with statutory services think about their social workers and how they experience the time they spend together. Using a pre-existing practice framework, we explored skills including empathy, collaboration, and purposefulness from the point of view of children and young people. The participants in our study (n = 22) were insightful observers of social work practice, able to describe not only how they experienced time spent with their workers but also inferring differences in motivation and approach. In addition, workers who were described in similar terms by different young people were nevertheless experienced differently. This suggests not an archetypal "good social worker"-instead, there are skills that are good for specific children at specific times within the context of specific relationships.

This study aimed to address knowledge gaps related to the prevention and management of mental health responses among those with a condition that presents risk of severe COVID-19 infection. A scoping review that mapped English and Chinese-language studies (2019–2020) located in MEDLINE (Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, and Airiti Library was undertaken. Search terms related to COVID-19, mental health, and physical health were used and articles that included all three of these factors were extracted (n = 77). With the exception of one hospital-based pilot study, there were no intervention studies targeting mental health in those at risk of severe COVID-19 infection. Promising practices such as integrated care models that appropriately screen for mental health issues, address health determinants, and include use of digital resources were highlighted. Patient navigator programs, group online medical visits, peer support, and social prescribing may also support those with complex needs. Future policies need to address digital health access inequities and the implementation of multi-integrated health and social care. Furthermore, research is needed to comprehensively assess multi-integrated interventions that are resilient to public health crises.

IntroductionThe increasing number of children and young people entering statutory care in the UK is a significant social, health and educational priority. Development of effective approaches to safely reduce this number remains a complex but critical issue. Despite a proliferation in interventions, evidence summaries are limited. The present protocol outlines a scoping review of research evidence to identify what works in safely reducing the number of children and young people (aged ≤18 years) entering statutory social care. The mapping of evidence gaps, clusters and uncertainties will inform the research programme of the newly funded Department for Education’s What Works Centre for Children’s Social Care.Methods and analysisThe review uses Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology. Electronic database and website searches will identify studies targeting reduction of care entry, reduction of care re-entry and increase in post-care reunification. Supplementary searching techniques will include international expert consultation. Abstracts and full-text studies will be independently screened by two reviewers. Ten per cent of data abstraction will be independently conducted by two reviewers, with the remainder being extracted and then verified by a second reviewer. Descriptive numerical summaries and a thematic qualitative synthesis will be generated. Evidence will be synthesised according to primary outcome, intervention point (mapped across socioecological domains) and the realist EMMIE categorisation of evidence type (Effectiveness; Mechanisms of change; Moderators; Implementation; Economic evaluation).Ethics and disseminationOutputs will be a conceptual evidence map, a descriptive table quantitatively summarising evidence and a qualitative narrative summary. Results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations, the What Works Centre website, and knowledge translation events with policy-makers and practitioners. Findings will inform the primary research programme of the What Works Centre for Children’s Social Care and the subsequent suite of systematic reviews to be conducted by the Centre in this substantive area.

Understanding how different forms of supervision support good social work practice and improve outcomes for people who use services is nearly impossible without reliable and valid evaluative measures. Yet the question of how best to evaluate the quality of supervision in different contexts is a complicated and as-yet-unsolved challenge. In this study, we observed 12 social work supervisors in a simulated supervision session offering support and guidance to an actor playing the part of an inexperienced social worker facing a casework-related crisis. A team of researchers analyzed these sessions using a customized skills-based coding framework. In addition, 19 social workers completed a questionnaire about their supervision experiences as provided by the same 12 supervisors. According to the coding framework, the supervisors demonstrated relatively modest skill levels, and we found low correlations among different skills. In contrast, according to the questionnaire data, supervisors had relatively high skill levels, and we found high correlations among different skills. The findings imply that although self-report remains the simplest way to evaluate supervision quality, other approaches are possible and may provide a different perspective. However, developing a reliable independent measure of supervision quality remains a noteworthy challenge.

This chapter seeks to ground the reader in some of the key concepts and thinking relevant to the research that populates the following chapters. It starts by considering what participation means, and for whom, exploring theoretical concepts such as Arnstein’s ladder of participation (1969) and Hart’s (1992) later adaption for the context of children’s participation, as well as other frameworks particularly useful for exploring participation in public services. This is followed by an exploration of some of the key issues and considerations specific participation in the context of children’s social care. How participation is defined tends to differ depending on who is ‘participating’, in what context, and for what end. In this chapter, we are particularly interested in participation within children’s social care, meaning the two groups that we will be exploring when discussing participation will be children and young people and parents within children’s social care. The rest of the chapter is then given to exploring some of the research relevant to the involvement of parents and children in social care decision making – namely through meetings held with professionals. In particularly, this section focuses on the roles of professionals in enabling meaningful participation in decision making, and some of the challenges involved.