Evidence-Informed Practice: An Evaluation of the David Bennett Inquiry Report

In this essay I will evaluate the David Bennett Inquiry Report, which was set up by the North, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire Strategic Health Authority (NSCSHA) to investigate the death of Mr David Bennett. I will define evidence-informed practice (EIP) and summarise the inquiry report. I shall highlight and critically analyse some of the key issues raised in the report in relation to ethnic minority issues. Finally, I will discuss the implications of evidence-informed practice for social work as well as my own future practice.

EIP in social work began in the early 1990s when contemporary writers Geraldine MacDonald and her colleagues wrote articles very much in contrast to earlier reviews; they looked at results from studies such as quasi-experimental studies and client opinion studies about the effectiveness of social work practice. This led to good outcomes for social work practice (Webber, 2011) [Online]. Evidence-informed practice in social work has been described as:
‘Evidence based social care is the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions regarding the welfare of those in need of social services.’ (Sheldon and Chilvers, 2000, p.5, adapted from Sackett et al., 1996 cited in Webber, 2011, p.3)
Webber (2011) and Sheldon and Chilvers (2000, p.5, adapted from Sackett et al., 1996 cited in Webber, 2011, p.3) both define EIP as using effective interventions and up to date knowledge to aid understanding of the issues that people face in society. Using evidence from reliable sources is likely to lead to good outcomes that can be justified. However, Mathews and Crawford (2012) state that some established professions such as law or medicine have their own evidence base which is well defined and protected, unlike that of social work practice;