Findings of the service referrals analyses suggest that despite the privileged position of the
ecological model in social work education for understanding clients’ problems (Saleeby, 2001)
and the widespread belief that neglect more so than any other form of maltreatment is related
to clients’ material disadvantage, Canadian child welfare workers, in practice, may be inclined to
adopt an individualized, psychological/psycho-educational approach to the problem of child
neglect. Whether this stems from workers’ beliefs about the root causes of neglect or from their
understanding of the paid work of child welfare (i.e., to treat individual parents versus addressing
structural/material issues) cannot be determined by the current study. Pelton (2008) argues that the
imperative to attend to the concrete needs of clients rests not only in clients’ demonstrated need for
such services but in the fact that unlike rehabilitative interventions, which are notoriously difficult
to evaluate and require sophisticated research designs, concrete interventions have excellent face
validity and demonstrated effectiveness. For example, if inadequate housing is a presenting risk
factor, helping a client to obtain better housing or to repair household hazards will be exceptionally
effective in reducing that risk.