Same Race, Same Case? Child Welfare Workers' Experiences of Ethnic/Racial Matching with Black Families In Ontario’s Child Welfare System

Background

Child welfare agencies are often framed as "all-purpose" organizations that are equipped to address a wide range of family needs through case management. However, for Black families, encounters with child welfare sometimes occur through ethnic/racial matching practices intended to build trust and cultural understanding. While matching strategies are promoted as anti-racist interventions, limited research has examined how Black child welfare professionals experience ethnic/racial matching with Black families, particularly within Ontario’s child welfare system. This manuscript examines the following research questions: 1) how do Black child welfare professionals experience ethnic/racial matching with Black families and 2) what conditions shape whether these matches are perceived as beneficial, burdensome, or harmful?

Methods

The Mapping Disparities for Black Families (MDBF) Project examines how anti-Black racism manifests within the child welfare system in Ontario and to identify key areas where disparities emerge, are maintained, and can be meaningfully addressed with substantive policy, organizational, or practice change. Individual interviews and focus groups were conducted with 79 participants employed by or adjacent to the Ontario child welfare system (i.e., front-line child welfare workers, supervisors, agency leads, equity specialists, and lawyers), focusing on decision-making across the continuum of child welfare involvement (i.e., referral, screening, investigation, ongoing service, out-of-home care). Interpretive Phenomenology was used to analyze interview data and to explore how participants experienced their work with Black families, including the dynamics and influences on decisions to match Black child welfare workers with Black families. Preliminary analyses were presented to participants, community members, and child welfare professionals to further contextualize the findings and generate recommendations.

Findings

Five main themes were identified: 1) Structural anti-Black racism across systems; 2) The paradox of ethnic/racial matching; 3) Emotional labour and the burden of representation; 4) Ethnic/racial matching, not always safe; and 5) The importance of racial humility and accountability. Child welfare professionals described ethnic/racial matching as a relational tool that can foster trust and cultural understanding. However, matching was also experienced as a mechanism that burdens Black staff with disproportionate responsibility for managing systemic and institutional anti-Black racism. Black workers were often assigned an increased caseload of Black families and were pulled into cases to defuse complaints of racism even when lacking the authority to change decisions. Privacy concerns, diversity of Black communities, and risks of community exposure meant that, in some cases, Black families preferred non-Black workers. White workers demonstrated that racial humility, advocacy, and structural awareness can build trust regardless of ethnic/racial matching. Matching appeared most appropriate when families requested it and workers had capacity, but less so when used for optics or overburdening Black staff.

Conclusion and Implications

These findings suggest that ethnic/racial matching can support relational safety for some Black families but, at the same time, it risks reproducing anti-Black racism when used to mask structural harms. Child welfare practice should prioritize family-led preferences, robust anti-racist training, and protections against overburdening Black workers to ensure ethnic/racial matching serves families rather than institutional optics.