Written evidence from Home for Good (CFA0083)

HOUSE OF LORDS CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACT 2014 SELECT COMMITTEE INQURY

Submission to the Children and Families Act 2014 Committee

April 2022

Introduction

Home for Good is a UK-wide charity with a vision to find a home for every child who needs one. We work to inspire, equip and resource individuals and families to play their part in caring for vulnerable children by either exploring fostering, adoption or supported lodgings for teenagers and journeying with them as they consider the part they could play.

Home for Good is pleased to contribute a submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Children and Families Act 2014. This is a vital piece of legislation and we welcome the commencement of this inquiry to evaluate and assess its impact on the lives of children and families.

Home for Good runs a national Enquiry Line where last year we heard from nearly 2,000 households who were considering adoption, fostering or supported lodgings, or are already caring for children and young people in this way. This mechanism, along with our network of staff members and over 400 volunteer Champions across the UK who journey alongside individuals and families every week, gives us an insight into the impact of policy and legislative developments, as they are felt and experienced on the ground. It is this real-time insight that underpins and informs our submission to the Committee.

Adoptions in England: Stable, faster, lasting?

Early Permanence Routes

1                     Part 1, Section 2 of the Children and Families Act 2014 makes provision for local authorities to place children in a “Fostering for Adoption” placement, where adoption is being considered for a child, but the local authority does not yet have permission to place the child with approved adoptive parents. Data published by the Department for Education has shown that this legislative provision has had a significant impact on stability for children, with a year-on-year increase in the number of children placed in Early Permanence placements since data first began to be published in 2018. In 2020/21, 450 children were placed in an Early Permanence Placement – either in a Concurrent Planning or Fostering for Adoption arrangement – a 15.3% increase from the previous year.[1]

2                     There are a range of benefits to placing a child in such arrangements, including the increased likelihood of stability and continuity for children. With Early Permanence arrangements, a child is able to live with either dually approved foster carers and adopters (Concurrent Planning) or approved adopters who are also temporary foster carers (Fostering for Adoption) right from entry into care, instead of being placed in foster care and then later being matched with an adoptive family, which would likely involve several home moves. This enables children to experience permanency more quickly and reduces the likelihood of broken attachments. The importance of enabling a continuity of relationships for children and young people cannot be overstated.

3                     In addition, such arrangements have been shown to have a positive impact on birth families, with a greater emphasis placed on the need for Early Permanence carers to build positive relationships with birth family members, particularly when a child is being fostered. This means that where adoption is decided as the best outcome for the child, the adoptive parents and birth parents often know one another well, which birth parents have described as providing reassurance and some level of comfort in exceedingly challenging circumstances. Not only this, but due to levels of contact and the building of relationships prior to the Adoption Order, many adoptive parents are highly motivated to continue some level of contact and relationship between a child and their birth family, even after the Adoption Order is made.

RECOMMENDATION

4                     The language used within this section of the Act is outdated and does not distinguish between the two types of Early Permanence placements now utilised: Concurrent Planning, whereby reunification and adoption plans for the child are pursued in parallel, and Fostering for Adoption, whereby there is no active plan for family reunification. The Act should be amended to recognise the important distinctions between these two routes and place equal value on each route, as decisions made should always be in the best interests of the child and their circumstances.

5                     Furthermore, data collected about the use of Early Permanence does not distinguish between Concurrent Planning and Fostering for Adoption, which prevents scrutiny of the impact and balance of use between the two types. We would strongly recommend that the Committee considers introducing a requirement for data collected by central Government to distinguish between the two forms of Early Permanence placements.

Consideration of the ethnic, religious, racial and cultural background of children

6                     Home for Good has been working for a number of years to tackle racial disparity in the care system, as no child should wait longer for the home that they need on the basis of their ethnic background. The Children and Families Act 2014 removed the mandate to duly consider a child’s ethnic, religious, racial and cultural background when seeking to place them with an adoptive family in order to prevent children waiting unnecessarily longer lengths of time due to the need for a perfect ethnic match. However, through interviews that Home for Good has conducted with families and professionals working in the adoption sector, it has become evident that this legislative shift has not necessarily impacted practice on the ground. For many social workers, finding a strong ethnic match remains a priority as a result of the increased attention over the last few years given to the importance of race and ethnicity as part of identity formation.

7                     Despite this change, other aspects of the 2002 Act imply that some regard for these aspects of identity should still be part of decision-making around children’s lives, including Section 1(2) and (4). However, our conversations with a number of social workers informed us that many feel ill-equipped to know how to explore these issues appropriately with prospective adopters. In 2020, Home for Good held a focus group discussion with a group of approved Black adopters. Many of those in attendance had experienced inappropriate questions that demonstrated a lack of confidence and training among social workers in exploring issues of race and identity in appropriate ways.

8                     Alongside this, there has been a shortage of individuals and couples stepping forward to adopt from some ethnic minority backgrounds, including those from Black communities. The Government has taken action to address this through the #YouCanAdopt campaign with data showing encouraging signs of progress. 590 adopters from minority ethnic backgrounds were approved at the end of September 2021, which represents a 30% increase compared to March 2020.[2]

9                     It is a complex issue and as communities and society is evolving and shifting, our understanding of how children’s needs can be met and supported also needs to expand. Adopted adults whose parents were from a different ethnic background have described experiencing challenges in understanding and being supported to celebrate their ethnic heritage, particularly when they grew up in culturally non-diverse local areas. However, other families who do not share the ethnic background of their adopted children have described the way in which their children have been able to receive support from their close community and network, made up of a diverse range of people, in navigating, understanding and celebrating their cultural, ethnic and racial background.

RECOMMENDATION

10                  It is Home for Good’s view that the legislative provision within Part 1 Section 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to remove the mandatory consideration of a child’s ethnic, religious, racial and cultural background has not led to children from minority ethnic backgrounds being placed with adoptive families more quickly. Rather, recruitment of a greater diversity of prospective adopters has led to more minority ethnic children being found suitable adoptive homes.

11                  We contend that these are important aspects of a child’s identity and that consideration of how these needs and characteristics will be supported is an important part of identifying an adoptive family who will enable a child or children to flourish. Future legislation should reflect this, but also go further in mandating all assessing and matching social workers to undergo regular cultural and faith literacy training, in order that they can be equipped to explore these aspects appropriately, confidently and thoroughly.

Suspension of the Children and Children Act Register

12                  Home for Good has a vision to find a home for every child who needs one. As a result, we particularly focus on children and young people who are furthest away from finding the homes that they need. This includes children who wait the longest within adoption, which includes children over the age of five, children who are part of a sibling group, those from a minority ethnic background and those with a disability.

13                  With the suspension of the Adoption Register for England in 2018, Link Maker has become the sole national matching platform used by local authorities to access a UK-wide pool of available adopters. Many local authorities and agencies were utilising this tool before the closure of the register, as there are strong benefits to having a single platform that is used by all Regional Adoption Agencies and Voluntary Adoption Agencies. We strongly believe that digital tools provide key opportunities to improve and deliver needed efficiency to the matching process nationally and we support the existence and development of such tools.

14                  However, we are concerned about the impact that the closure of the national register and sole reliance on Link Maker has had on children who wait the longest. The national register used to prioritise those within this category and our understanding of Link Maker is that it does not prioritise these children by default.  In addition, the Adoption Register included a statutory requirement for local authorities to place children on the register after 90 days if family finding had not yet been successful. This is no longer a requirement, which is potentially causing children who are likely to wait a long time for adoption to wait even longer, as Regional Adoption Agencies and Voluntary Adoption Agencies seek to find adopters from within their regions and may thus delay placing a child’s profile on Link Maker.

Support for Adoptive Families

15                  We welcome the shift over the past decade in recognition of the fact that an Adoption Order is the beginning, rather than end of the story for children and families. All children who go on to be adopted have experienced trauma and loss as a result of separation from birth family members, and the legacy of this trauma endures for a lifetime. Therefore, it is vital that we support adoptive families on an ongoing basis, in order that they remain stable and healthy environments within which children can have their needs met and reach their potential.

16                  While there have been significant improvements in the provision of support for families since the Act was introduced, further progress is needed. Despite support plans being created for many families at the point of matching and placement, some families are unaware that a plan exists and feel unsure how they can access the support set out within it. In their latest report, Strengthening Families,[3] the APPG for Adoption and Permanence set out the importance of support plans being underpinned by a multidisciplinary assessment, in order to ensure that the holistic needs of children are being considered as support plans are formed. We concur that this is vital.

17                  We welcome initiatives such as the Adoption Support Fund, which provides a vital route for families to access much-needed, high-quality therapeutic support. A three-year extension to the fund was recently announced to mirror the three-year spending review and whilst this provides some measure of reassurance for families, successive short-term extensions of the fund do not provide the needed stability to the sector that enables support services to grow, diversify and expand the services they can provide to families.

RECOMMENDATION

18                  We recommend that future legislation should include the guarantee of the Adoption Support Fund to reduce the impact of political and even future Governmental changes on families’ abilities to access support.

Budgets and financial support for adoptive families

19                  We are pleased to see this consultation raise the question of whether adoptive families are receiving the right financial support post-adoption. Section 7 of the Children and Families Act 2014 creates a new employment right to shared parental leave and statutory shared parental pay for eligible working parents. This extends to eligible adoptive parents too.

20                  While these are welcome developments, there remains a cohort of adoptive parents who are unable to enjoy guaranteed access to adoption pay; that is, those who are self-employed.

21                  Statutory adoption leave, first introduced in the UK in 2002 and a ‘day one’ right since 2014, enables adoptive families to access the same rights and financial benefits as those available through statutory maternity and paternity leave and pay. Adoption pay has been a significant step forward in both removing financial barriers and in recognising and communicating that adoption is an equally valid way for individuals and families to grow their family. However, self-employed individuals are not eligible for adoption pay and there is no equivalent arrangement to the Maternity Allowance[4] that self-employed birth parents are able to access. This is a significant loophole that not only undermines the message of adoption as an equally legitimate choice to having birth children, but also creates additional barriers for self-employed people who are pursuing adoption.

22                  Statutory adoption guidance issued by the Government in 2013 states that:

“The local authority should consider making a payment of financial support equivalent to the Maternity Allowance to adoptive parents who are ineligible to receive SAP because of low earnings, length of service or self-employment, but otherwise satisfy the relevant criteria for Maternity Allowance.”[5]

23                  However, there is no legal requirement for local authorities to make payments of financial support to those who do not qualify for statutory adoption pay, with the above guidance merely encouraging local authorities to consider doing so. A recent Parliamentary debate[6] on this topic highlighted the widespread variation across the country in the extent to which such payments are being considered and the challenges faced by adoptive parents themselves in feeling confident enough to ask about payments, for fear that it could jeopardise their assessment.

24                  Furthermore, if one individual in a couple seeking to adopt is self-employed, they are unable to access shared parental leave. Shared parental leave is increasingly seen as the preferred option for adoptive families when a child is placed with them, as it enables both parents to spend significant periods of time with the newly adopted child in order to allow essential attachment and bonding to take place. A final point is that employed prospective adopters are entitled to get paid time off work to attend five adoption appointments after being matched with a child, with their partner entitled to get time off to attend two adoption appointments. While this is perhaps a less significant discrepancy, it nonetheless represents an additional benefit that self-employed adopters cannot access.

25                  Home for Good will be publishing a short report on this specific issue, which will be published in May 2022. We would be pleased to send a copy of the report to the Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

26                  There is shared ambition across Parliament to ensure homes are found in a timely manner for children waiting. At present, this unfounded and arbitrary discrepancy for self-employed people is acting as a significant barrier for many prospective adoptive families but can be easily addressed. We urge the Committee to ensure that any future legislation makes provision for self-employed individuals to have access to equal adoption leave and pay as a ‘day-one’ right to ensure parity with employed individuals is achieved.

Children and Families Act 2022: Future legislative opportunities

Kinship Care

27                  The Children and Families Act 2014 makes it clear that where a child is unable to remain living with their birth family, social workers must first consider whether wider birth family members or family friends could be eligible for consideration before seeking to place children with unrelated adoptive parents. Research suggests that there are currently 162,000 children living with kinship carers across England and Wales.[7] These are most often grandparents, but can include aunts, uncles, family friends and neighbours who step in, often at short notice, to care for children.

RECOMMENDATION

28                  At present, there is no legal definition for kinship care and we join with others in the sector[8] in calling for a legal definition to be included in future legislation, not only to recognise the invaluable role that kinship carers play, but to provide a basis for robustly supporting these families. In addition, kinship carers should be entitled to access kinship care leave when a child first comes to live with them, that mirrors the provision available to adoptive families and maternity leave.

Supported Lodgings for 16+

29                  In addition, Home for Good, along with many other organisations, has been concerned for a number of years about the lack of high-quality provision on offer to older teenagers in care. Around one in four children in the care system in England are aged 16 or over and yet provision has not developed to keep pace with this growing cohort, who have very different needs to younger children. A lack of suitable provision means that too many young people are being placed in unsuitable settings, such as caravans and canal boats, which do not enable them to flourish. We welcome the legislative measures introduced by Government in 2021 to ban the use of unregulated settings for children under the age of 16 but recognise that we must take steps to ensure that the provision available to young people aged 16 and over is of the highest quality.

30                  We believe that supported lodgings is a provision that is currently underutilised and holds potential to provide stability, relationships and a supportive stepping-stone to adulthood for many more young people than it is currently available to. Supported lodgings is where a young person aged 16 and over lives in the home of a ‘host’ family or individual. Designed for young people who are ready for a slightly more independent option than foster care, the host is tasked with supporting the young person emotionally and helping them to develop vital skills for adulthood.

31                  Home for Good has been conducting research for more than two years into the use and impact of this provision across England and has published a report summarising our findings, titled ‘Brimming with Potential’.[9] Our research found that around 1,000 young people are currently living in a supported lodgings placement, with many experiencing stability and benefitting hugely from the relationship-centred approach of this placement type. We have heard numerous stories of young people who remain in contact, or even living with their host for many years after their ‘official’ placement has ended.

32                  However, to ensure that more young people can be offered a supported lodgings placement, there are challenges that need to be addressed, as highlighted within our report. These include the limited awareness of this provision among the general public, which limits the number of people stepping forward to become hosts, and inconsistency across local authorities and third-party providers about what high-quality supported lodgings entails. This stems in part from a lack of formal definition in legislation or guidance on supported lodgings.

RECOMMENDATION

33                  We urge any future legislation to include a definition of supported lodgings, to help provide vital standardisation and shared understanding of this provision across the country. We would also urge any future legislation to place a statutory duty on children’s services to consider family-based placement options for children first, which includes supported lodgings. While these settings may not be the best fit for all young people, we recognise that with the right support, most young people will do best within a family-based setting, even one that is slightly more independent such as supported lodgings.

May 2022