Homes for Ukraine: safeguarding concerns for vulnerable refugees

Latest figures from the Department for Education show that almost a quarter of Ukrainian refugees who have arrived in England as part of the government’s Homes for Ukraine scheme are school-aged children living with their families.

Worryingly, an investigation by Children & Young People Now finds that more than one in 10 local authorities were forced to alert the Home Office and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) to safeguarding issues around at least one person listed as a matched sponsor.

To address such concerns, a recent amendment to government guidance on the Homes for Ukraine scheme for local authorities, made in late May, offers greater detail around the need for all adults living in a household hosting a family with children to undergo an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check among other safeguarding measures compared with earlier publications (see below).

Initial guidance, published when the scheme launched in March, called on local authorities to make “best endeavours” to carry out checks on sponsors ahead of the arrival of refugees.

However, it adds that further guidance on safeguarding processes around hosts, and other adults living in their household, “will be shared in the next version of the guidance”, according to government documents. As yet no information has been given as to when it will be updated.

The delay in “stringent” guidance on protecting vulnerable children and young adults, forced to flee their homes in traumatic circumstances, has prompted fears from organisations supporting vulnerable children and refugees over an increased risk of exploitation faced by children moving to England from Ukraine.

Experts also cite concerns over the pressures faced by already overstretched local authorities to support them (see analysis).

No single matching route

Latest data from the DLUHC shows that as of 7 June, 40,085 Ukrainian refugees had arrived to live with sponsors in England under the scheme.

Department for Education statistics reveal that school-aged children account for almost a quarter of this group with 9,900 school places already secured.

Government guidance on the Homes for Ukraine scheme highlights that there is “no single route to matching” refugees with sponsors.

This means those wishing to host refugees can go through existing relationships, charities, non-governmental organisations and even social media to match with refugees aged 18 and over with or without children under the scheme.

The lack of a central matching process “means that there is a high risk that traffickers and criminals are seeking to exploit and abuse under its cover,” warns Patricia Durr, chief executive of children’s rights organisation Ecpat UK.

“One of the main concerns has been that anyone in the UK or elsewhere can set up a matching site and be responsible for identifying hosts for refugees to pair with,” she adds, arguing that calls for a joined-up approach to ensure that checks come before matching have come from local authorities and charities on the ground and government response has been too slow and too late. She adds: “The hands-off approach to checks and matching increases the risk that traffickers and other criminals will set up matching sites and pages to prey on those in need.”

Worrying statistics

The results of a Freedom of Information request made by CYP Nowto all 152 local authorities in England, to which 76 responded, shows that 16 per cent of councils reported at least one or more sponsors listed to have matched with refugees in their areas as posing a safeguarding risk.

Norfolk County Council says it flagged 11 safeguarding risks to the Home Office, the highest number of any council that responded to the FOI request.

Overall, at least 36 alerts to potential safeguarding risks were made across the 72 local authorities, however, a handful told CYP Now they were unable to give a clear number – instead saying they had submitted “less than five” or “less than 10” – in an attempt to protect the anonymity of individuals.

Of those local authorities who had processed DBS checks before submitting responses to the FOI request, five councils said one person listed as a sponsor had not been successful.

Meanwhile, 29 people on local authority sponsors lists were known by councils to have been flagged on the Police National Computer, which stores and shares criminal records information across the UK, as part of checks by Border Force and the Home Office.

The majority of councils who responded to the FOI request said they had not been in discussions with the Home Office over such checks.

Call for central system

Durr argues this “hands-off” approach to safeguarding checks by government has resulted in a “lack of join up with local safeguarding bodies”.

She is among campaigners calling for the introduction of a central system through which sponsors are matched with refugees which would be responsible for information sharing across relevant organisations.

The scheme needs “urgent regulation”, says Durr. This should include government oversight of matching sites and measures which ensure visa applications trigger immediate information sharing so that the relevant local authority can carry out checks on the accommodation and sponsor prior to arrival; support for local authorities to enable them to do the checks and undertake host and home assessments; and provide the right level of support and planning and ensure each person coming through this scheme receives healthcare and support to access local services,” she says.

The need for regulation was put forward in a letter to Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove, signed by Ecpat UK and from experts in anti-trafficking, leading resettlement schemes, delivering hosting schemes and supporting refugees.

“It should be noted that the majority of those using this scheme will be women and children,” the letter states. “There have already been reports of traffickers exploiting refugees as they cross the border into Poland and Romania and we are aware of concerns among the Ukrainian community that dubious matching sites are already being operated in the UK to lure refugees.”

Local authority pressure

In its guidance to local authorities the government states that: “The vast majority of those applying to be Homes for Ukraine sponsor households will be doing so for altruistic reasons. But nonetheless there are risks, as in other areas, that some will be applying to be a sponsor for the wrong reasons. Everyone should be vigilant and take appropriate safeguarding action where needed.”

A briefing paper published by the British Association of Social Work (BASW) says this does not go far enough to protect vulnerable children and young adults.

“Safeguarding is not an optional add-on. Safeguarding should be a key concern in every aspect of public policy,” it states.

The briefing echoes calls, made by experts in their letter to Gove, that an effective Homes for Ukraine scheme “would have a government portal to match Ukrainians with UK hosts and undertake basic screening and would ensure hard pressed local authorities are properly funded to meet this humanitarian responsibility”.

Council support

Anntoinette Bramble, chair of the Local Government Association’s (LGA) children and young people board, says “councils are working tirelessly to provide the vital support needed to help refugees settle in local communities and access local services”.

“Children fleeing Ukraine will potentially be vulnerable and at risk,” she adds, explaining that the LGA will “continue to raise with government these key issues on behalf of councils, so we can get the best support that every child refugee needs”.

While experts say they understand the challenges of setting up a brand-new scheme at pace, they suggest that months after the Homes for Ukraine scheme was first launched in March, very little progress has been made to allay concerns around the safeguarding of vulnerable children and young adults living with hosts in England or travelling to do so.

The DLUHC has vowed to bolster guidance on safeguarding measures for local authorities and, in May, published a list of verified matching organisations both sponsors and hosts are encouraged to use but it appears that calls for a central matching system have yet to be answered.

LOCAL AUTHORITY SAFEGUARDING CHECKLIST

• Carry out an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check on all adults living in the household where at least one member of a refugee family is aged under 18. This includes a check of the children’s barred list and must be carried out as soon as data is received on sponsors and refugees.

• Councils will be required to cover the cost of DBS checks from the £10,500 funding that is being provided to enable them to provide support to families to settle in.

• On the arrival of refugees local authorities must:
  
  1. Establish reception point arrangements to provide an initial welcome to the UK and any immediate support required.
  
  2. Consider the provision of social care staff to respond to any safeguarding concerns that may be flagged by Border Force.

IN NUMBERS

• 16% of local authorities who responded flagged at least one safeguarding issue the Home Office

   

• 36 alerts were sent to the Home Office over potential hosts

   

• 102 people across 76 local authorities removed from sponsors list over safeguarding issues, unsuitable housing or asking to be removed

   

• 29 people on sponsors lists were flagged on Police National Computer

   

• 5 people failed their DBS check for sponsorship

Source: CYP Now FOI request, June 2022