By Anji Ossai and Charlotte Webster-
Social work leaders and a leading academic have criticised the UK Covid-19 Inquiry’s report on adult social care, warning that the experiences of frontline practitioners and the needs of people with learning disabilities have been largely overlooked.
The British Association of Social Workers (BASW) has expressed “deep disappointment” at the lack of attention paid to social workers in the inquiry’s latest report, while Professor Chris Hatton of Manchester Metropolitan University has warned that the findings focus overwhelmingly on older people in residential care homes, leaving many working-age adults with learning disabilities underrepresented.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Both BASW and Professor Hatton contributed evidence to Module 6 of the inquiry, which examined the impact of the pandemic on adult social care across the four nations of the UK. However, they say the final report fails to reflect significant concerns raised during the investigation about staff welfare, the withdrawal of community support and the consequences for vulnerable people and their families.
The criticism raises questions about whether the lessons drawn from the pandemic adequately reflect the experiences of the wider social care sector, particularly those whose needs could not be met by a response centred on care homes.
BASW was designated a core participant in Module 6, recognising its significant interest in the inquiry. During the hearings, the association provided evidence about the difficulties social workers faced in carrying out their statutory duties amid changing restrictions, limited resources and inadequate guidance.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Ruth Allen, who was BASW’s chief executive at the time, told the inquiry that early government guidance failed to recognise the distinctive responsibilities of social workers. She said the general guidance issued for health and social care did not adequately address the specific demands of social work practice. Social workers had important statutory responsibilities, alongside leadership, coordination and risk-management duties, Allen explained.
Yet she warned that their role had been sidelined during the pandemic, leaving individuals vulnerable and families without adequate support. Access to personal protective equipment (PPE) was another major concern. Allen described inconsistent access to protective equipment during the early months of the crisis, with supplies remaining unreliable for some social workers outside hospital settings even as the situation improved.
When Allen concluded her evidence, inquiry chair Baroness Heather Hallett acknowledged the point, saying she had received the message about the importance of recognising social workers’ role.
However, BASW says that recognition was largely absent from the final report. Social workers were mentioned just five times, according to the association, with most references relating to registration arrangements rather than practitioners’ experiences. The remaining reference concerned social workers being permitted to visit care home residents in 2024, after the pandemic.
Samantha Baron, BASW’s interim chief executive, said the association was “deeply disappointed and perplexed” by the limited attention given to social workers and the impact of insufficient guidance, resources and support. She said the volume of evidence submitted by BASW and its members should have prompted explicit recognition of the risks to staff welfare and wellbeing, as well as the profession’s critical role during emergencies.
Baron also highlighted the absence of specific statutory guidance reflecting the different legal and professional contexts across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. She argued that clear, adequate and timely guidance would have helped protect social workers and their families while giving practitioners greater confidence in their decisions.
BASW nevertheless welcomed recommendations aimed at improving protective measures for staff and maintaining regulatory oversight of care quality and safety.
“Given the bulk of evidence that we and our members submitted, the challenges our profession faced and the serious risks to staff welfare and wellbeing should have been recognised.”
Learning disability needs ‘left out’ of pandemic lessons
Professor Hatton has raised separate but related concerns about the inquiry’s treatment of people with learning disabilities, particularly working-age adults living in their own homes or supported accommodation rather than residential care homes.
A professor of social care at Manchester Metropolitan University, Hatton was an expert witness for Module 6. He submitted evidence alongside Professor Richard Hastings of the University of Birmingham, drawing on the Coronavirus and People with Learning Disabilities Study.
The research followed the experiences of adults with learning disabilities at four points during the pandemic, gathering evidence from almost 1,000 people with learning disabilities, their family members and support workers. Its findings highlighted the consequences of policy decisions that prioritised older people living in care homes while failing to adequately account for the different circumstances of people with learning disabilities living in the community.
The researchers found that accessible information about Covid-19 and public health restrictions was not always available. They also highlighted the loss of work, volunteering, day services and community activities, which had been central to many people’s wellbeing.
Family carers experienced considerable pressure as support services were withdrawn, leaving some to manage increased caring responsibilities with limited assistance. The researchers warned that prolonged stress affected carers’ physical and mental health and reduced their capacity to support relatives. Hatton also told the inquiry that the lives of people with learning disabilities had become “incredibly small” as community support disappeared, leaving some feeling abandoned.
Yet he said the report gave insufficient attention to these experiences, with his oral evidence about the withdrawal of community support appearing in a chapter focused on restrictions on visits to care homes. Of the report’s references to people with learning disabilities, Hatton noted that most concerned those living in care homes or mentioned them alongside other groups. Supported living and day centres received only a single mention each, despite their importance to many people’s daily lives.
He described the report as “extremely disappointing”, arguing that it focused almost exclusively on residential care for older people rather than the many working-age adults with learning disabilities who rely on community-based services.
He said the report failed to address issues including accessible public health information, maintaining support for people living independently or in supported accommodation, meeting the needs of people with profound and multiple learning disabilities, and helping families who take on greater caring responsibilities during emergencies.
Hatton warned that the omissions reflected inequalities experienced by people with learning disabilities and their families before, during and after the pandemic. Without more inclusive recommendations, he argued, the same groups risk being overlooked in preparations for future public health emergencies.
Calls for a different approach to future emergencies
The concerns have been reinforced by a separate commission established by Learning Disability England, titled How We Survive and Thrive. Led by people with learning disabilities and their families, the commission examined their experiences during the pandemic and called for their needs to be central to emergency planning.
Its recommendations included recognising people with learning disabilities as a priority group in emergency preparedness, involving them and family carers directly in shaping policy, and maintaining or increasing community support when crises occur. It also called for accessible information to be provided from the outset, including through Easy Read materials and video, so people can understand public health advice and make informed decisions.
These recommendations address a central concern raised by Hatton: that policies designed around one group of people receiving social care may not be appropriate for others with different support needs and living arrangements.
The withdrawal of services for people who depend on regular assistance, community activities and family support, the withdrawal of services can have consequences extending well beyond the immediate health risks of an infectious disease.
Inquiry defends scope of report
The UK Covid-19 Inquiry has defended the scope of its investigation, saying Module 6 examined the effects of the pandemic on publicly and privately funded adult social care across all four UK nations.
A spokesperson said the investigation involved the disclosure of more than 17,000 documents to core participants, five weeks of public hearings in summer 2025, evidence from 57 witnesses, 177 witness statements and three expert reports, including one from Professor Hatton.
The inquiry acknowledged BASW’s contribution as a core participant and welcomed its support for recommendations on staff protection and regulatory oversight. It also said the report considered working-age and older adults using residential and domiciliary care, adding that implementation of its recommendations would help the adult social care sector prepare for future pandemics.
The inquiry maintained that its reports collectively provide a blueprint for improving the UK’s preparedness and response to future public health emergencies.
What the inquiry recommends
The Module 6 report sets out a series of measures intended to strengthen the resilience of adult social care. These include requiring the UK’s four governments to establish clear pandemic-planning arrangements for the sector, with responsibilities defined at national, local and provider level.
Other recommendations cover practical arrangements for expanding isolation facilities in care homes, financial support for staff required to self-isolate or limit work across multiple sites, and clearer guidance on visiting restrictions during future outbreaks.
The inquiry also calls for adaptable inspection arrangements, systematic collection and publication of data on deaths among adult social care workers during a pandemic, and mandatory training for professionals caring for people approaching the end of life.
In England, it recommends a voluntary register of adult social care workers to strengthen professional recognition and workforce oversight. While these proposals address important weaknesses exposed during Covid-19, BASW and Hatton’s criticism centres on whether the report has adequately captured the experiences of those expected to deliver care and those whose support was withdrawn.
The dispute highlights a broader challenge for future pandemic planning: ensuring that social workers, people with learning disabilities and family carers are not treated as secondary considerations when emergency policies are developed.
The test of the inquiry’s legacy for BASW and researchers, will be whether the lessons of Covid-19 lead to practical changes that recognise the full range of social care needs — and prevent the same groups from being overlooked when the next crisis arrives.
P.S: A byline(joint authourship) acknowledges the contribution of those involved in producing an article. Where two people have contributed to the research, gathering of information, interviews, analysis or writing, a joint byline may be appropriate to recognise their respective contributions.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar