Inquiries propose system-wide reforms for children in care

The view that the care system is failing many adolescent children is seemingly unanimous. Last October, children’s minister Edward Timpson described it as a “national scandal” that many teenage care leavers in England end up in a “trap of poverty and joblessness”.

Just weeks later, his sentiments were echoed by parliament’s education select committee, which warned that older children are also being failed by the system.

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) acknowledges the need for change. Its president, Andrew Webb, says it is one of his priorities for the next year and now the organisation has published a “position statement” on the issue as part of its ongoing inquiry into the care system.

The document says that while children’s services have undergone significant change in recent years, services for adolescents entering the care system are “remarkably resilient to change”.

To turn things around, it calls for a radical redesign of services, with more emphasis on diverting young people from the system altogether and a greater focus on positive outcomes while they are in care.

In terms of provision, the ADCS makes clear that no single type of care – whether it be kinship care, children’s homes or fostering – is a panacea. It calls for a range of options to be made available to address young people’s individual circumstances – their reasons for entering care, placement history and age – and different approaches for 11- to 14-year-olds and 15- to 17-year-olds.

The document addresses the following key areas:

EARLY HELP
The ADCS wants its members to address the fact that most adolescents enter care as a result of “crisis”, often following a breakdown in family relationships. It warns that the system will eventually become “unaffordable” if nothing is done to address potential problems within families at an earlier age.

This, it says, should be done as part of a whole system change, with resources geared towards seeing care as “a continuum” rather than a crisis point intervention. The ADCS suggests that local authorities consider using social pedagogy, which focuses on the child’s development through psychology, philosophy and sociology.

OUTCOMES
The ADCS says outcomes for adolescents entering care do not justify the costs, and local authorities make insufficient use of the evidence on what the provision they commission actually delivers. To address this, the ADCS is developing guidance on outcomes commissioning.

In the meantime, it identifies multi-systemic therapy, multi-treatment foster care and functional family therapy as models that deliver results and should be considered.

Multi-systemic therapy has already been adopted by a number of authorities. Among them is Essex County Council, which is using social impact bonds to fund work with 380 11- to 16-year-olds at risk of going into care and their families. Essex has diverted 100 young people from entering care by adopting the approach.

INSPECTIONS
For those who enter care, the ADCS is keen that residential care delivers positive results. It has called for tougher inspections of residential care provision by Ofsted, arguing that the way the market has developed in recent years has led to residential care being delivered to an “agreed standard” and a lack of focus on medium- or long-term outcomes.

“Our national inspection regime does not make any real judgment about the impact of care, but concentrates instead on the day-to-day processes – no school would expect such a light-touch approach to whether its teaching actually made a difference,” the ADCS position statement says.

It also wants payment of place­­ment fees to be linked with improved outcomes for young people – a form of payment-by-results.

Jonathan Stanley, chief executive of the Independent Children’s Homes Association, says his organisation is already working on outcomes measurements. He adds that there should be a system of outcomes-based inspection for all care placements. “All children’s homes are currently inspected, but in terms of fostering, fostering services are inspected but fostering placements are not,” he says. “We need a level-playing field for all placements.”

Stanley says there needs to be a clear methodology so that the progress of young people when they leave care, compared to when they entered, can be measured.

KINSHIP CARE
Although placements with extended family are more stable than formal foster care placements, the ADCS argues that they may be poorer quality.

Children living with relatives may have endured a lot of adversity and have severe emotional and behavioural difficulties, but kinship carers are less likely to receive support than foster carers. The ADCS wants local authorities to use kinship placements, but provide training and support to these carers at the same time.

TRANSITION
Department for Education figures show that the older a person is when they leave care, the more likely they are to be in education at the age of 19. Indeed, 40 per cent of young people who left care at 18 or over were in education compared to 26 per cent who left at 16. Those who had stable placements were also more likely to be in education, employment or training.

In light of this, the ADCS calls for a more flexible approach to leaving care. It says decisions on when a young person should leave care ought to be based to a greater degree on their maturity and readiness to move on, rather than their age.

Gareth Crossman, executive director of external affairs at the fostering and adoption charity Tact, says that while a more flexible care leaving age will have immediate financial implications for councils, it is a cost far out­weighed by longer-term savings.

“Eighteen-year-olds who are not in care may try to live independ­ently, make mistakes and still have an opportunity to return home,” he says.

“The relationship between the young person and the state should be redefined so that in some cases there might be a longer ongoing relationship between the young person and the state.”


The Care Inquiry

Launched last summer, the Care Inquiry is the work of eight charities that were concerned that the government’s focus on increasing adoption was distracting from improvements in other forms of care. It has now issued its final recommendations.

Who was behind the Care Inquiry?
There are eight charities involved: Adoption UK; the British Association for Adoption and Fostering; the Family Rights Group; the Fostering Network; Research in Practice; Tact; the Together Trust; and the Who Cares? Trust.

What did the inquiry explore?
The inquiry’s remit was to see how best to provide stable and permanent homes for vulnerable children in England. It focused on positive relationships, involving children in decision making, managing transitions in care and workforce improvements.

Who did it talk to?
The inquiry held several evidence sessions with people with direct experience of care or the work of the care system. A consultation with young people was also held, as well as a review of research evidence by academics.

What was the main finding?
Relationships with people who care for them and about them are the “golden thread” in children’s lives, and can lead to happy and stable placements. It also found that adoption, although right for some children, will only ever provide permanence for a small number of children.

So, how can relationships be improved?
The inquiry calls for more focus on the child’s best interests. The primary focus should be ensuring all children have the opportunity to become a family member where they feel loved and secure. It wants local authorities to be under a duty to consider the suitability of the match between a social worker and a child when allocating a social worker. The local authority should also consider any request by the child to be given a new social worker.

Meanwhile, social workers, residential practitioners, carers and other professionals who have built up a good relationship with a child should be encouraged to maintain contact when they change job, or when the child leaves care or moves placement. Social workers should also ensure that children are able to maintain or develop meaningful relationships with parents and other family members. To achieve this, children should be placed as near as possible to their family home or school, unless it is not in their best interests.

Does it believe young people should be more involved in decisions about their life?
Yes. The inquiry reckons handing more say to children and young people over the way they are cared for will make them far happier. It recommends that children should receive an information pack, compiled by their carers, about the family and home to which they are moving. In addition, children should have a choice over where they live. This would be done through councils identifying more than one suitable placement and the young person choosing which one is best for them.

Children could even be allowed to “test out” a placement before making a final decision. The inquiry also suggests that local authorities make use of young people who are, or have been, in care to shape the way services are provided. Carers of children should also be involved in planning and decision making about the child living with them.

How should care transitions be handled?
There should be as few moves as possible before a child returns to their parents, goes to live with permanent carers or moves on to independent living. Disruption around leaving care should be minimised by a social worker who knows the young person continuing to be their social worker during the process. 

And what about the workforce?
The inquiry wants more stability in terms of the professionals children and young people in care are in contact with. To achieve this, it wants social workers to be allowed time for a “high-quality handover period, when either they or the children move”. It also calls for three-month leaving notice periods for social workers to ensure decent handovers can take place.