The plans are set to ban the use of such provision for under-16s and introduce national minimum standards for settings as well as providing a legal definition of “care” and “support”.
Proposals have also been made to give Ofsted and regional police forces greater power to enforce standards and safeguards.
-
Put end to unregulated provision for under-18s, urge campaigners
-
Unregulated supported accommodation: what you need to know as consultation closes
Here, CYP Now breaks down responses from key organisations across the sector:
Local Government Association (LGA)
-
The LGA supports a ban on the use of independent and semi-independent provision for children under the age of 16 but it highlights that the “majority” of the use of such settings for under-16s is in an “emergency situation”. The LGA states: “Before any ban is implemented, it must be made clear what action local authorities would be expected to take if they were unable to find a suitable registered placement for a young person”.
-
The LGA does not support calls to make unregulated provision illegal for young people aged 16 to 18. It states: “We believe that for some young people, a level of independence with appropriate support is the best way of ensuring that they can make a positive transition to adulthood.”
-
The LGA has called for a “flexible approach” to defining “care” and “support” in law. Its consultation states: “A more flexible approach to “care” and “support” would allow councils to establish young person-centred plans and packages that ensure young people get what they need. In the next section we outline suggestions for wider regulatory reform that may support this flexibility.”
-
The LGA would welcome the introduction of national standards for unregulated accommodation.
-
The LGA is “in favour of proposals to give Ofsted powers to issue enforcement notices to illegal unregistered providers before proceeding with prosecutions”. “This action will potentially help to swiftly remove illegal provision from the market and encourage providers to comply with regulation and national standards,” it states.
Association of Director’s of Children’s Services (ADCS)
-
The ADCS states that a blanket ban on unregulated supported accommodation for all under-16s “could result in a series of unintended consequences”. It states in its consultation response: “Without the flexibility to use unregulated provision, what will local authorities be expected to do if they are unable to find a placement for a young person who is not yet 16? There is a danger that the proposed reforms will replicate the current situation in relation to secure children’s homes; there is a waiting list but nowhere to wait.”
-
As an alternative to banning such provision for all under-16s, the ADCS has put forward plans for a comprehensive review of the regulatory system “with a view to achieving a more fluid system which aims to meet the needs of children and young people”. “A change in the regulatory framework to register providers rather than physical settings, similar to that in fostering and adoption, would allow for the flexibility needed to make emergency/ crisis placements while also allowing LAs to tailor the care and support around the individual needs of children and young people,” it states.
-
The introduction of national minimum standards could be built around “robust quality assurance frameworks in place” at many local authorities, the ADCS states. However, it warns that “there is a risk that the introduction of national minimum standards will drive up the costs of this provision for local authorities” and urges DfE to be “alive” to this risk.
-
The ADCS supports plans to increase Ofsted’s powers of enforcement to take legal action against unregistered providers. It states: “Increasing Ofsted’s enforcement powers may help to root out unscrupulous providers who persistently flout the rules and operate illegally. At the same time, Ofsted must support those providers who are unwittingly operating outside of regulations and wish to register to do so in a timely fashion, at the moment this process is not fast enough.”
Independent Children’s Home Association (ICHA)
-
The ICHA supports the banning of unregulated supported accommodation for under-16s. However, it adds that there is a “belief that a minority of young people are ready to move on from children’s home care from 16 onwards and some establishments have developed skills to enable this transition to work well with their support”.
-
“We believe that setting standards to ensure that all young people have access to a good level of support is vital,” the ICHA states.
-
The association, which surveyed members before submitting its response, also supports plans for Ofsted to regulate such provision. Its response reads: “Regulation by an external body, Ofsted, will be integral in maintaining and pushing up standards across this sector”.
-
The ICHA has also welcomed proposals for a legal definition of care claiming that under current rules “local authorities are able to accommodate younger children in unregulated provisions due to a lack of an accepted definition of what constitutes care”.
Article 39
-
Children’s rights charity Article 39 has called for a ban on unregulated supported accommodation for young people up to 18. It states: “While a very positive move for children aged 15 and under, this partial ban risks continuing the serious neglect of 16 and 17 year-olds. It is deeply regrettable that the DfE has identified more than 6,000 children in independent and semi-independent accommodation but is only proposing to guarantee care to fewer than 100”. Article 39 says the banning of provision for under-16s would create a “two-tier” residential system.
-
The charity is against the introduction of a new requirement for local authorities to inform a local police force if a child is placed out-of-area in independent or semi-independent provision. Article 39 says this proposal “is predicated on vulnerable children continuing to be placed in large numbers outside their home areas” and “will do nothing to tackle the severe shortage of suitable placements for looked after children and young people, including in secure children’s homes”.
-
Article 39 does not welcome plans to introduce a legal definition of “care”. “Care must be provided to all children in care and care leavers. Developing a legal definition of care for the purpose of legitimising its absence in ‘other arrangements’ is not legally or professionally justified,” the charity states.
-
The charity also states that the proposed new national standard for unregulated supported accommodation “would have an extremely negative impact, because they deliberately omit care and are in other ways inferior to existing children’s homes quality standards”. It “would give legitimacy to a leaving care age of 16 for this very vulnerable group of teenagers”, Article 39 adds.
