Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): In attendance today, we have Alicia Toal, chief executive of Voice of Young People in Care (VOYPIC); Kathleen Toner, director of the Fostering Network; Michele Janes, head of Barnardo's; and Sheena McMullen, the campaigns, advocacy and policy adviser from Action for Children. You are all very welcome. We really appreciate your time today. This is a priority for the Committee, and we want as much engagement as possible, so thank you. We have about an hour for this session, and it will be covered by Hansard. I invite you to make your opening remarks, and then I will open it up for questions.

Ms Michele Janes (Reimagine Children's Collective): Thank you, Chair, for the invitation to present to you today and share our experience of the implementation of the children's social care review and its impact on the children and young people and families whom we serve. We will start with Alicia before moving to Kathleen and then Sheena, and we will come back to me at the end. As you say, it would be really good if we could get some questions at the end.

Ms Alicia Toal (Reimagine Children's Collective): Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. VOYPIC works with children and young people to promote and protect their rights, voice and participation in all decisions affecting their lives, and we do that locally, nationally and internationally. We facilitated the Experts by Experience reference group, and it engaged with and advised the independent review team. Much of its work, thoughts and priorities are reflected in the report and the recommendations.

The group categorised the priorities into five key themes, the first of which is the participation of children and young people. Children and young people want to be involved in the plans and decisions that are made about the services, their care and their lives generally. We have seen that 60% of the 416 young people whom we have supported through our advocacy service are attending and participating actively in their care planning. Of those 249 young people, 196 needed direct support from an advocate to attend, so only 53 were able to attend care planning or participate in their meetings without an advocate. Advocacy services, including independent advocacy services, are crucial to supporting the meaningful involvement of children and young people and their families. They are keen to be involved and to engage in the ongoing outworkings of the review.

The second theme is social work and the workforce. Young people tell us day in, day out that they have difficulty accessing their social workers and that they want more time with their social workers. Unfortunately, we are hearing young people talk about the busy workloads of the staff who are there to support them and about not wanting to call on their social workers when they are in times of crisis because they are aware that others are in need. Young people should not have to contend with and think about that. Young people value the role of, and relationship with, their social worker when things are working well, but they also recognise the benefits of having other key roles in a multidisciplinary team that is coordinated with other services and can be actively involved in their care. That makes sure that there is always someone there to help at times of need or during a crisis. That extends to flexibility to respond outside of Monday to Friday, nine-to-five.

Where young people live is the third key theme, particularly for young people with care experience as they recognise and value the role and range of care placements and settings that meet the needs of individual children and young people, and they want all care placements to be of the highest quality. They want no placements to be deemed as a placement of last resort. They want better support and better training, including financial support for foster carers and kinship carers, and they want to tackle the regional disparity, or postcode lottery, in how children's care and services are structured and delivered and, in particular, what children and young people can expect and are entitled to from their corporate parent. That is particularly an issue for young people who are leaving care.

The fourth theme is transitions, which means the need for better transitions for young people when they are moving from children's services into adult services — that goes across disability services and mental health services — and better support for young people who are leaving care, whether that is when they turn 18, although too many are leaving before they turn 18, or when they are being returned to live with parents or families. Care leavers, as a group, were really negatively impacted on by the COVID pandemic. It affected their education and training, increased their social isolation and had detrimental impacts on their emotional health and well-being. They are also facing real financial difficulties due to the cost-of-living crisis and a lack of good-quality accommodation and support. We know that a review of leaving and aftercare services has been completed, but we are yet to see it published. The full implementation of the Adoption and Children Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, which would improve and extend provisions for some care leavers, has also been delayed due to financial and workforce constraints. That is also having a huge impact on adoptive families and the support and services that they receive.

The fifth and final theme is care-experienced parents. They, as a group, feel like they are under great scrutiny; they feel judged, experience discrimination and often report poor levels of support. Obviously, support is crucial for those young people, as it is for all parents who are involved with children's services.

We will send a copy of the pack that I have to members. I will pass around a paper that reflects some of our advocacy casework across all ages and all placements. That casework reflects the most common issues and what young people raised in the review, but it also reflects that real change has not happened and outcomes are not improving.

The top issue that comes through our referrals to the advocacy support service is the lack of appropriate placements. The placements that are available are under pressure, and there are too many young people in foster families and in children's homes. That creates stresses, results in placement breakdown and, ultimately, more placement moves for children and young people.

A key priority for young people is family time: the connection with their birth families. That is one of the top three issues for all children and young people. Much of the reason for that is about making changes: they want to make changes to the current arrangements. We are increasingly seeing the arrangements not being adhered to. Workforce issues are causing problems, where children are not able to meet with parents, siblings, grandparents and the important people in their lives.

VOYPIC's work has increased. It is supporting young people who are entering secure care. In particular, we are seeing a rising need in the number of young people who need support for care planning and a need for increased support for young people in their exit plans. We are also seeing that there are difficulties with trying to place young people who are leaving some of our regional centres, including the Juvenile Justice Centre and Lakewood secure centre.

Preparation and support for young people leaving care, their financial support and the lack of suitable accommodation and assistance with education and training and access to other services is a priority for our advocacy work with young people aged 16 and over. In recent years, we have seen a growing number of complaints and appeals that, traditionally, we would not have received. Those are symptomatic of the growing pressures on services and the difficult circumstances in which our young people are living.

We need to see action in a few key areas. Government policy has to address the growing rates of poverty and deprivation. Children from the most deprived areas in Northern Ireland are nine times more likely to enter care. The number of children in care continues to rise. We have provisional statistics from the Department that show that, as of August this year, there were 4,134 children and young people living in care, and we know that the numbers continue to rise. Our system finds it difficult to manage, support and care for the young people who are there today, never mind the young people who will come tomorrow and next week.

We need investment in coordinated early-age and early-stage interventions and in services that provide effective and early support in families' homes to reduce the rates of referral to child protection services and ongoing admissions to care. That spending to save will have long-term benefits for not only the children and families now but our public services in the future, reducing the need, in later life, for crisis services in mental health, addiction, homelessness, accommodation and criminal justice. We sometimes hear lots of talk about the cost of reform, but we do not hear enough about what the cost will be if we do not reform and transform our services.

Funding of services has a direct impact on the numbers of children who need a care placement. A 2021 study in England found that each £10 per child decrease in funding was associated with an extra 1·9 per 100,000 of 16- and 17-year-olds entering care the following year. Workforce pressures remain, and we have teams experiencing vacancy rates of over 40%. In some cases, that could be a conservative estimate. We have noticed that a growing number of our children and young people have no allocated social worker. Some 77% of the young people in our leaving and aftercare services did not have an allocated personal adviser.

Investment is needed as is a whole-system approach. Changing one aspect of children's services has a knock-on effect on other parts of that continuum, and we have seen that in the past. Initiatives to support young people to remain with their foster carers post 18 had unintended consequences on fostering provision and services as a whole. Managing residential services during COVID and meeting the rising demand on residential services had a detrimental impact on respite for families of children with disabilities. We have to stop tinkering around the edges and with individual components of the wider system if we want to have system transformation.

There are enablers in the interim. The full potential of the Children's Services Co-operation Act (Northern Ireland) 2015 should be maximised to improve the well-being of all children and young people. We need to ensure more effective use of limited resources to secure earlier, lower-cost interventions that have better outcomes for children, and we need creative approaches to cooperation across Departments, public authorities and children's services providers across all sectors. The recommendation for the delivery of children's social care through a single agency is the key enabler for the implementation of the review's recommendations. The benefits are clear to me: streamlined leadership and direction; single agency strategic planning and monitoring; transparent budgeting and spending that is not in competition with health services; streamlined outcome measurements, measuring the impact on our children and young people and families; improved communication; better service and practice development and implementation; less complicated change management; and a more consistent application of the standard of services for our children and families and better protection of their rights and entitlements.

The recommendations in the review set out a series of actions to change how children and young people are supported and cared for and the need for a children and families agency to deliver that transformation. As Ray Jones, the independent reviewer, said, there has been lots of activity but not enough action. VOYPIC is working with the Department of Health — we are engaged in the reform board process — and the Reimagine Children's Collective to ensure that recommendations are delivered, but, without ministerial direction and the implementation of the review's recommendations, the reform programme lacks a coherent and ambitious vision. Later this month and over the remainder of the Assembly's mandate, we look forward to facilitating engagement between Committee members and young people who are currently in or are leaving care, because it is essential that members hear directly from the most powerful advocates for children and young people in care: the children and young people themselves.

The appeal from the independent reviewer and the young people involved in the process was clear. They said, "The clock is ticking. Don't let us down". The clock is ticking, and it has been for the 471 days since the report was published. We are getting dangerously close to letting our children and young people and families down.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Thank you, Alicia, for that very comprehensive piece. It is good to hear your perspective. We have had a number of meetings with Ray Jones, as you know, so we are very clear about where we need to be going. Obviously, as a Committee, we want to keep a very close eye on progress on the implementation of the recommendations. We have been doing that and have been getting regular reports. If you tuned into the Committee meeting last week, you will know that we raised issues about the speed of progress and things around that, so hopefully we can tease some of that out today. I will ask a couple of questions, because I know that some of my colleagues will want to cover specific areas.

Miss McAllister: Do the other witnesses not want to come in before the questions?

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Sorry?

Ms Kathleen Toner (Reimagine Children's Collective): We were each going to make some comments.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Sorry. OK. I thought you were finished. OK, go on ahead. I am just conscious of time, because we are running quite late.

Ms Toner: I will not repeat anything that Alicia has said. I just want to acknowledge that that comprehensive overview has brought the children and young people into very sharp focus for today's conversation. I am the director of the Fostering Network, a charity and membership organisation for foster carers, which is part of the continuum of care. We are part of the Reimagine Children's Collective precisely because it keeps a very sharp focus on the needs of those children who are looked after. I am also a member of the fostering work stream in the reform board.

As a charity, we have 100% membership among foster carers and kinship foster carers across the North. We also have corporate and organisational membership of all independent fostering agencies and the five trusts. We work closely with our members to amplify their views to bring about changes that will ensure that every looked-after child and young person has the chance to flourish. A lot of the comments that I will make were reflected to Professor Jones during the time of his review. My comments are based on consultations with our members and include some notable findings from our forthcoming 'State of the Nations' Foster Care' report.

You will all know that foster care provides children with safe and loving homes when they cannot live with their birth families. It gives children the care, stability and nurture that they need to overcome a difficult start in life, heal from trauma and develop meaningful relationships. Good foster care is a protective factor. It promotes resilience and helps children to realise their aspirations and full potential.

The increasing rate of children in care has been more rapid here than anywhere else in the past 10 years. Those rates continued to increase as the cost-of-living crisis deepened. Health and social care trusts and, particularly, the Government here, are, effectively, the corporate parent for those children, and our members are disappointed that the draft Programme for Government does not highlight children who are looked after as a named priority group, as was the case in previous Programmes for Government.

As Alicia mentioned, we have 4,134 children and young people who are being looked after, 83% of whom are looked after in foster homes today. That is 3,400 children in as many homes, across every primary school and every community in Northern Ireland. In 2023, the number of children in care increased by 5% on the previous year, and it has increased by 35% in the past 10 years. That has not been matched by investment in fostering provision.

Challenges in the recruitment and retention of foster carers have also created a perfect storm. We have approximately 2,830 foster carer families here. In May this year, we estimated that we needed a further 260 just to keep pace with demand. Figures on 31 March last year showed that, in 2023, 419 foster carers were deregistered by health and social care trusts. That is a significant percentage of the almost 3,000 foster care families. There are many reasons for those deregistrations, but I am sure that you will agree that it is a significant loss. We believe that retention is equally as important as recruitment. Despite that, the annual uplift this year for foster carers' allowances was 3%, putting Northern Ireland even further behind other countries in the UK with whom we had parity for many years. In comparison, two years ago, England increased allowances by 12%.

Our forthcoming 'State of the Nations' Foster Care' research report will provide further evidence of the challenges that we need to address and explain why we are struggling to recruit and retain foster carers. Of real concern is the fact that 72% of the foster carers here who responded said that their fostering allowances do not meet the costs of looking after the children whom they care for. The same question was asked in England, and 52% gave that response. Here, 54% undertake some form of paid work alongside their fostering. In England, Scotland and Wales, that figure is 40%. Support to foster carers is primarily provided through their supervising social workers. Really concerningly, only 78% of our foster carers said that they currently had an allocated supervising social worker, compared with 97% in England, Wales and Scotland.

Many people have seen our report, 'Fostering... Brighter Futures', which responded to Professor Jones's review. That highlighted further inconsistencies across the trusts in social care systems, processes and service provision, including early intervention; high vacancy rates and turnover in social work; and inconsistency in contact with social workers. Despite providing daily care, 24/7, 365 days a year, for children and young people, foster carers still feel like they are not treated as a part of the team around the child. In addition, legislative and policy change has continued to be slow.

What needs to happen? From my perspective, an uplift in foster carer allowances could be done immediately to restore our parity with the rest of the UK. We also need a clear, coordinated framework to ensure that the findings and recommendations of the review are implemented. On the implementation of the arm's-length body (ALB), we have been pleased to see some progress on the introduction of fostering standards, but they were first consulted on in 2013. Those must also be resourced. Implementation of the review's recommendations on foster care must include plans to ensure that foster carers are a valued part of the social care workforce; the development of a Northern Ireland-wide recruitment and retention strategy, with a skills-based learning and development framework and increased financial support through equity of fees and allowances here; a greater emphasis on fostering in social work and professional training; the inclusion of foster carers in key meetings and the decisions that are made about children in their care; and a focus on early intervention as part of an evidenced and informed framework of interventions to support foster carers and kinship carers in their roles.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Thank you, Kathleen.

Mrs Sheena McMullen (Reimagine Children's Collective): I will try to be brief and not repeat too much, but it is safe to say that I 100% support and agree with what the other witnesses have said.

In Action for Children, our role is to protect and support children and young people and their families by providing practical and emotional care in community settings. We try to produce research and push for change in three main areas, both in the UK and here in the North of Ireland. One of the main things that is hugely relevant is having a fair social security system as number one in the anti-poverty piece that Alicia referred to. At the Committee for Communities meeting this morning, I made the same point and the direct connection to the social care review process. One is deeply connected to the other, as are all the other pillars and priorities in the draft Programme for Government. Unless we look at anti-poverty legislation and make progress on that, the issues and processes that we are talking about today will continue to be major barriers.

The second thing that we are looking at all the time is the provision of help for families when they need it. Since 2010, early support has either been cut or stayed at the same level, which is very much driving the increased numbers of children in care. In Northern Ireland, that number is the highest since records began. That is why we feel that we need to make the point again and again that, until we deal with poverty, the numbers that these ladies have already presented will continue.

I hope that members received in their pack our recent report, 'A Place to Call Home'. That was a UK-wide piece of research with a specific report for here. We are campaigning for a more supportive care system that also involves and includes social housing for care-experienced young people. I emphasise again, as Alicia did, the importance of the voice of children and young people here. Although it is over 400 days since the publication of the review report, very little has changed on the ground for children and young people. The report also highlighted the cross-cutting and systemic issues that initiated the calls for reform. That is why we are all here today.

As a collective, we are becoming more and more clear in our support for the recommendation that an arm's-length body for children's services be formed. That will be a key enabler for all the ambitions within the sector. During this process, we have discovered that many of the hoped-for changes cannot be done in tiny bits by tinkering around the edges. Too many of them are interdependent and have to be done at the same time or in a particular sequence. That grip, vision and leadership has be there; at the moment, it is not. There are also limitations on resources for the bits that require extra or new resources, as Kathleen alluded to. Changing that would require a decision on the ALB and cross-Executive agreement on, for example, the legislation in the Children's Services Co-operation Act. You will, hopefully, be aware that we have also been raising questions about mental health funding in this area. There are levers and tools that we can use for children's services that could allow for the investment and resource that empowers us to take action on the ground with the people who are interacting with children and young people's services.

We have to lift our eyes from the crisis mode in the discussions and really look at the tangible things that we can do to make an impact. We keep getting asked: what are the quick wins? You have already heard some today. Some of the quick wins will come from looking at family support and investing in the infrastructure that we already have. There is a really strong infrastructure there, so looking at that and investing in it properly will be crucial. We really want to see a decision from the Minister on the ALB soon. Action for Children's position is that, until that happens, we will remain tinkering around the edges. We cannot wait any longer. The children and young people in our 'A Place to Call Home' report are surviving but not thriving, and our ambition is to change that. That is why we are here today collectively.

Ms Michele Janes (Reimagine Children's Collective): My name is Michele Janes, and I am the director of Barnardo's here in Northern Ireland. I chair the Reimagine Children's Collective, and I sit as a community and voluntary sector representative on the strategic reform programme board.

I will spend a couple of minutes giving you an overview of the work that the collective has been involved in. We are a coalition of 10 of the largest regional children's charities in Northern Ireland, and we are unified by a shared commitment to transforming children's social care. Our collective expertise spans everything from antenatal care to early years, child and youth services, family support, fostering and adoption, advocacy and work with children who are affected by poverty, care and disabilities. Why did we form the collective? We recognised that the independent review presented an opportunity for transformational change. Children's social care services are not meeting families' needs, and innovative approaches are necessary to improve and transform the system.

The children's sector was highly engaged throughout the review process. Many organisations consulted children, young people, parents and carers; participated in research; conducted research; participated in workshops; met the review panel; and developed detailed consultation submissions. We feel responsible for ensuring that the voices of children, young people and families are heard and acted upon. The scope of the review is vast — it is huge — and no single organisation or Department has the expertise to tackle the complexity of those challenges alone; not one. Collaboration is essential. My colleagues have talked about the Children's Services Co-operation Act. That collaboration is essential to effectively address the challenges and bring about meaningful change.

As a collective, we are collaborating with the Department of Health through the reset and rebalance work stream, which is work stream 6, . That is aimed at resetting the dynamics between the community and voluntary sector and statutory bodies. That was recommendation 47 in Ray's review. Our goal is to create a more collaborative approach to improve outcomes for children, young people and families. Our objectives are about resetting and strengthening partnerships, improving communication and securing fair representation for the voluntary and community organisations. We are also focused on making systemic changes, including securing better funding for children's social care. On the issue of a rebalance, we want to shift the focus of children's social care, as colleagues have said, from crisis intervention to early family support through collaboration and resource-sharing across the Departments and the trusts.

What initiatives are we are involved in? You have heard that we have made some progress. It is always really good to highlight the progress. Professor Jones recommended that an annual conference be held to track the progress of the implementation of the recommendations of the review. That is recommendation 53. We are delivering that in partnership with the Department of Health on Wednesday 27 November. We have just gone ahead with that, and we hope to hear from the Health Minister, young people, who are the experts on this, and Professor Jones.

On the issue of the children and families charter, our work has shown that children, young people and families often feel that engaging with children's social care services is frustrating and disempowering. The reset and rebalance work stream is supporting the co-design of a children and families charter. The charter aims to establish a social contract between children's social care services and the families who rely on them. That is an important piece of work, as it will provide something tangible based on the feedback that we have received from those who engage social care services. Our children, young people and families engaged in the review process, and they deserve to hear back about what they asked for. They need to hear that, actually, we will deliver on that.

The third thing that we are focused on at the minute is a new funding model. The Reimagine Children's Collective is working with statutory partners to develop proposals for a new funding model for services delivered by the voluntary and community sector. This dialogue aims to raise awareness of challenges such as underinvestment, short-term contracts, job insecurity and rising costs. It also seeks to strengthen multi-agency working, moving away from a transactional relationship towards better collaboration. While the work stream is still in its early stages, it has already helped to build valuable relationships with statutory colleagues and explore new ways to collaborate. It is essential that the experience and expertise of the community and voluntary sector be included and used in this process.

Today, the Committee has heard from my colleagues about the challenges facing young people, parents and foster carers in Northern Ireland in 2024. The situation is unacceptable. The review was published 16 months ago. Even before that, we were fully aware of the problems in children's social care and their damaging impact on children and families. We agree with Professor Jones: the difficulties in children's social care are systemic and endemic. To bring about positive change, we need significant transformational reform of the structures, the culture and how children's services are planned and delivered. In our view, the review recommendations provide a clear blueprint for how we can achieve that.

As I said at the start, we recognise the scale of the challenge in reforming children's social care services. We believe that it can be done. We really do; we would not be here otherwise. We are putting in our own time, effort and energy. We believe that it can be done with everybody working together towards shared outcomes. As the Collective, we are deeply committed to improving outcomes for the children, young people and families we work with. This commitment motivates all of us to work together and collaborate with others to bring about the positive and lasting change that our children in Northern Ireland deserve. Our ask of the Committee is to use its scrutiny and influence to drive this change forward with urgency. Our children cannot wait any longer. Thank you for listening to us.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Thank you, Michele, and thank you all. Apologies; I was rushing on. It was not intentional.

You have probably answered a lot of questions in your opening remarks, individually. That was extremely comprehensive. Whilst we have been looking at this very closely, and it is a focus for us, coming from the various perspectives but with the same common themes has been really useful today. I want to touch on some of your remarks, Michele, on the importance of the role of the community and voluntary sector. We have four organisations in front of us here. Each of you has an invaluable role. The level of knowledge, expertise, insight and understanding of the issues affecting children, young people, families, and what needs to happen, is just —. It is not as if I am saying this for the first time today; I am always saying it. This is a really clear example of how important that sector is.

I am keen to see more about the model you spoke about, Michele, because some of the questions l was going to ask were on accessing funding. We had a debate earlier in the week around accessing funding for the community and voluntary sector in terms of mental health provision. However, I know that that is something that is across the piece in the community and voluntary sector. I would like to hear a wee bit more about that, because that is about listening to what the improvements are that can happen, what it looks like, and how we ensure, from here on in, that the community and voluntary sector is seen as an equal partner.

We have all engaged with the trade unions on children's social work services and the real, deepening crisis there. You alluded to it in your remarks. It is very worrying. There is a twin-track approach to dealing with that: dealing with the issues impacting on staff in social work services, but also ensuring that children and families are not ending up engaged there. That is where a lot of you come in as well. If we are doing that, the funding piece is something that we really need to tackle and get right. Do you, Michele, or anybody else want to come in?

Ms Janes: We are really just at the start of that journey. I had a very useful meeting with officials from the Department of Finance two or three weeks ago, who asked about our experience of how different Departments do things. We all have experience of funding from the Health, Communities, Economy and Education Departments. They do not need to reinvent the wheel; existing papers, things that have been written and policy directions need to be rolled out across Departments. We are looking at that. We want to move away from that transactional approach in which Kathleen delivers six sessions to four children on a Friday night to what the children actually need. What are the outcomes that we are trying to change, and how do we go about that? Whether there are six children, four children or whatever, if we deliver positive outcomes, we will start to change things.

We have also talked about how you look across Departments. At times, the investment is duplicated in different Departments. We need to take a really good look at that and at where we need to put money at the right time. You were so right in what you said. We are trying really hard to prevent children from coming into the system if they do not need to. When they do, we have to give them the best. I go back to what my colleagues, especially Sheena, said: if a child in poverty is nine times more likely, why are we not addressing poverty? We did not even see it in the Programme for Government. I am really concerned about that. If we want a quick win, let us get brave with our poverty strategy. Let us get it out there, and let us start implementing it. That is one of the first things.

We still have a lot of work to do on the funding model, but the bones are already there. We do not have to reinvent wheels. There are things already available that just need to be tweaked, rolled out and implemented. I have had a conversation with some of you previously about poor implementation and the funding crisis. We need to be planning now and doing things in a better and more joined-up way.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Absolutely. You will be aware of some of the organisations that I work with in my constituency, such as the Bolster Community and the Clanrye Group. They do phenomenal work on the ground, adapting to the changing needs of what is around them, like you all do. However, they are then asked to fit into a box. It should be about quality, not quantity.

Ms Toner: The one thing that is really important that Ray Jones did — it is one of the reasons why I am involved in the Reimagine Children's Collective — is that, if you ask what we need to do for children and young people, you will get a different answer. We are told that we have to jump through this hoop and that hoop and this structure and that structure. If you go right back and your underpinning principle is about what the right thing to do is for children and young people to keep them safe and to make sure that they can flourish as adults, your answer for your policy and your processes will look different.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Michele, you talked about keeping children, young people and families out of the system. It is about empowering families at the earliest possible stage to deal with issues around poverty. That, essentially, is where it comes from; in many cases, it is about their circumstances. There will always be cases where it is more than that, but then we are not dealing with the crises at the end of it.

That leads on to another point about the need for cross-departmental working. I know that you have been presenting to other Committees. Are you seeing an appetite for that? I am seeing it in other areas of work. We talked about learning disability earlier. There is definitely a shift right across the Executive, but particularly around children's services. There is a really good opportunity in that regard, and it ties in with anti-poverty and all of that. What have you heard so far?

Mrs McMullen: Just maybe going back a wee bit, the finance piece is really crucial in facilitating that level of cross-departmental working. It comes down to what Michele said about duplication in terms of reporting and when you get your money and the reporting of outcomes, financial costings and all of those things. It comes down to how the contracts were originally commissioned and who does what. I think that that is why the policy piece is really important, and even the role of the Finance Minister and the Finance Department guidance that goes to the other Departments. That was raised in the debate earlier this week, and I think that that is a really key point.

Nevertheless, we also want to move to a collaborative and collective impact approach, which means social value and collaboration from the start and seeing each other's values. We want to work in partnership with statutory bodies as well as each other, but the way that it is marketed means that there is a competitive marketplace for care. That does not work, and we want to see that transformation. In order to do that, we need every Department to understand that. We need them to know that, if you make this a competitive procurement process, this is the outcome of that. It means that we cannot operate together and we are fighting each other for pots of money, rather than thinking, "How can we use this pot of money collaboratively and collectively for maximum impact, based on our strengths?" We know each other's strengths and assets, and when we come together, we are a really imaginative, creative and agile force. You have to go to that starting point to get that trajectory. That starts in the Finance Department, but it is cross-departmental. It is important that that process has a place in the Programme for Government and a clear space in that agenda, with all the links being made. At the moment, we hope that that will happen, but we want to make sure that it will be.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): That is it. We should always be outcomes-focused. What are we going to achieve? What is the end goal here? If we are not looking to do that, we are not doing the right things. As you said, Sheena, when everyone is working in competition, there are levels of duplication. There is better value for money and better outcomes for everybody if we are working across and complementing each other. That works between the statutory and community and voluntary sectors as well.

Mrs Dillon: I apologise, because I am going to have to leave before this is over. I know a lot of the issues anyway, and I appreciate all of your presentations.

First of all, Michele, I think that you are right: I think that we can change things and make them better. We would not be here either if we did not think that, to be honest with you. We have to do that, because if we do not, this is our historical institutional abuse of the future, where we will have let children down again. It is different, in that it is not intentional abuse, but it is abuse nevertheless. If we are not doing the best for them, then we are causing them harm. That is an important point to make.

The work that you have done and the report that you have come up with is really good. It is really easy for anybody to understand, which is helpful. In terms of what you have done and making that real, what does the Department have in place, or what needs to be in place? I am talking about Health here as the lead Department, but I agree that every single Department needs to play a part in this and no Department should be trying to duck that. Health is the lead in terms of engaging the Reimagine Children's Collective, because you have the answers. It is about engaging with you and making sure that the solutions that we are coming up with will work and that we are all working together. Sheena said that there should be collaboration right across the piece. What could be in place to make sure that there is regular, meaningful engagement that means that the right decisions are being made and are being implemented — in other words, that you are having enough engagement to be able to say, "These are the things that we should do, but they are not happening or not happening quickly enough: how can we do it quicker?"

Ms Janes: That is a really good question, Linda. The Reimagine Children's Collective joined work stream six, Reset and Rebalance, which is a jointly chaired work stream with the Department of Health. I co-chair that work stream. There is a lot of regular engagement. Some of our challenges are that we are used to getting on and doing. We do not have time to wait, because we have the children and families in front of us all the time. We have young people who want answers. We have foster carers who need their allowances. We want to move really quickly. The problem is that there is bureaucracy inbuilt in some of the systems that we cannot do anything about. For example, when I met some of you a few weeks ago, we talked about not being able to set a date for a conference or whatever. We are saying that we need to move on that, so we are bound by some of the bureaucracy in some of the systems. Those systems need to change. We are trying to move things on in a system that is broken, and I do not just mean in children's social care. There is bureaucracy in the wider system of Departments that makes things really slow. For example, you have to have another paper, etc. We need to say, "Trust us. We all work for charities. We cannot spend a penny that does not belong to us. If we cannot spend it, we give it back. Trust us; we know what we are doing. Allow us to move ahead with some of these things." There genuinely are some really quick wins. We have an infrastructure of family support hubs in Northern Ireland. It is fantastic, and it has an evidence base. Sky reviewed it. It does early intervention really well. We do not need to look for something else just now. We just need to invest a bit better in that consistently across Northern Ireland, not a wee bit here and a wee bit there. It must be consistent.

Foster carer allowance is a really easy one. We want our foster carers to feel as valued as any other foster carer across the UK. We need to increase their payments in order to be able to —. I do not know any foster carers who have come into foster care for the funding. We have 4,134 children in care at this moment in time, and we need to do something about it. There are quick wins. We are feeding that directly back to the Department all the time. I feel that the Department is bound by a bureaucracy that we cannot change, even though I am saying, "We are just going to do this now". You can see that the way of working is ingrained. I cannot change that, but, hopefully, this Committee can scrutinise how we can be trusted as equal partners. We can find solutions quickly. One of the barriers is the funding. I know that there are really motivated, creative and solution-focused people working with us from the trusts and the Departments who also want to effect these changes, but their problem is that they do not have any money. I sat in a room with colleagues who were saying, "We want to do what Kathleen has suggested, but we just have to wait and see if the money comes. We will write a business case and wait for the money".

Ms Toner: We have provided a lot of evidence, including today, and we had the opportunity to share that directly. There are some very innovative ideas around how you could reform the looked-after system generally, but we need to be clear that those ideas are being heard. We have been consulted multiple times, and children and young people have been consulted multiple times. We appreciate the importance of advocacy and consultation, but we are going to continue to say the same things. We need clarity of vision, clarity of priority and clarity that children and young people will absolutely be at the heart of information and resourcing. We have provided all that evidence.

There are some quick wins. I mentioned the uplift in foster carer allowances. I totally appreciate that that money does not come out of thin air, but 419 foster carers left the service last year, out of around 3,000. That is 12·5% attrition. If I am back here next year and it is another 12·5%, I will have provided you and the Department with that evidence, but there is nothing to currently indicate to me that that trajectory will change, because there is no investment. All the information is being provided, and we need to look to put some resource into those areas that will really make a difference for children and young people. If we lose 400 more foster carers this year, we will, next year, be hitting 5,000 children and young people who are looked after, and you will be looking at, as you just said, a long-term tragedy. We absolutely need action now.

Mrs Dillon: Those answers are really helpful, and I would like to see the evidence on the foster carers who left. I know that some of the reasons will be financial, but I also know, from some of the cases coming through my own door, that some of it is about not getting support. Actually, it is quite the opposite: they are almost being threatened and put under real stress by social services, the trusts and social workers. That is no slight on social workers, because I understand that they are under extreme pressure, but I have had foster carers come to me who are at breaking point. They have taken children out of homes that are at breaking point, and now they are at breaking point. There is a real issue there, and we need to address it. The answer is around how things can be done differently, and that probably is something that we as a Committee can look at. Where is the bureaucracy that could potentially be overcome? All of those are things that we can look at as a Committee. I really appreciate your coming here today and giving us that information.

I want to put this on the record, because it came up at the meeting and I feel strongly about it and want it on the record. Our Minister and our Department should never outsource and should never privatise children's services, particularly for looked-after children and children's homes. That was made clear to us the day we were at the meeting. I am passionate about that. We should never be in that position, or children will become a commodity.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Thank you, Linda. I have a very quick question. I may have missed this. Kathleen, you talked about the number of foster carers who have left. How many new foster carers have come in? I want to get a sense of that. Sorry, I know that other members are waiting. I wanted to ask that question before it went out of my head.

Ms Toner: I quoted that figure because, last year, when the children's social care stats were published, that was the first time that I had ever seen them. How we gather our data is very different to elsewhere, and that is partly because we do not have the implementation of standards here that would require us to collect some of that data. It is not that clear how many foster carers are coming in. Individual trusts could tell you how many they are recruiting, as could the individual independent fostering providers. We have two of them represented here in Action for Children and Barnardo's. However, recruitment is not going to address that level of attrition.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Absolutely. It was to try to get a sense.

Ms Toner: The numbers that are coming into the service are much less than the numbers that we know have left. I can get that figure and provide it to you.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): We can ask for it by trust to get a sense of it. I had a meeting with the Southern Trust last Friday, and we talked about it. I met Colm McCafferty from children's services. In the past, I have done engagement with fostering social workers, who, obviously, are trying to encourage recruitment. I was interested in that, so thank you.

Mrs Dodds: I met you a few weeks ago, so I am not going to go over old ground. Forgive me, because I cannot remember who said it, but I noted down one of the saddest things that I heard today. Despite the review and despite the whatever number of days and weeks it has been since the review, very little has changed on the ground. We have had a number of briefings from officials from the Department who are working on the review, but I am not sure that any of us around the table are clear either about what has changed on the ground, out of all of those briefings. I am glad to see some other people nodding their head.

I like to do things rather than sit and talk about things. You have your conference coming up. First, was the Department dragged to the conference, or is the Department co-working with you on the conference? That first one is almost an aside. Secondly, within the next six months, what are the six things that you want to see that will change on the ground and make life better for young people and children and those involved in delivering children's services? If we could get six quick wins, what are the six quick wins that you could have in six months which would make life significantly better? We as a Committee can then ask about those quick wins. We can ask where they are and why we cannot get on ahead.

I understand your view, which I have spoken to you about, on an arm's-length body, but, quite frankly, that is a legislative issue. That will be a very long-term issue, and we cannot wait for that. We need to do things in the meantime.

Mrs McMullen: On the point that you made about it being a legislative issue, we believe that there is a way that a shadow ALB could be set up without the legislation. There is a sequence that Professor Jones suggested for this that would not require that and which would be essential to navigating the current disparate response that is in pieces all around and in different spaces, with lots of meetings in different trust areas and so on. I will just highlight that. There is probably a way that this could be done if there was an appointment of a clear leader with the specific responsibility of coordination across the region, and that would not necessarily require legislation. Is that accurate?

Ms Janes: Yes. To go back to your first question, the Department has been involved in the agreements around the conference. The challenge is on agreeing a date, because other things need to happen first. We are waiting on an announcement from the Minister on his take on it, and I understand that it requires cross-Executive conversations and decision-making. The Department is supporting us and is providing the funding for the conference, which is really helpful.

You asked about quick wins. We have some priority areas needing solutions, and you will have heard them all already around listening to children, young people and families. We need to prioritise their voices. That is where you will see that we are developing the children and family charter. I am quite happy for you to come back and ask, "Where is that getting to?" It is a piece of work that is being developed with our colleagues in the statutory sector. We have had some workshops to look at that.

With regard to the bit about investing early and renewing the focus on investment in early intervention and prevention within our communities, including expanding Sure Start, in the consultation responses to the review report, 83% of those who responded agreed that Sure Start should be expanded to reach all 0- to-3-year-old children and their families outside the current catchment areas. Imagine how fantastic it would be if we could have a baseline that was equal to all of our children and families. Sure Start currently operates in the most deprived wards across Northern Ireland. However, our housing situation is such that families are living outside those wards and cannot access the provision. If 83% of people who responded to the consultation agreed that we should expand it, let us look at that and the progress that it could make, because we know that the outcomes for children who have been through those programmes are really positive. We could look at that.

On cross-sector collaboration, we want to foster collective action for transformational change. We are seeing some of that starting with our role on the reform board and some of the work streams, but how that translates into action is a challenge. To go back to what Linda said, we feel very strongly that there should be no profit in children's social care. Some of my colleagues and I share concerns that, potentially, that is happening already here in Northern Ireland.

Then, on accountability, I know you are working really hard and have said that this is one of your priority areas, but we really need to develop ways to hold the system accountable. Kathleen talked about not knowing how many people applied to be foster carers in Northern Ireland. We should be able to get that information at the touch of a button. There are huge issues around data collection region-wide. We need to monitor the systems to find out what is working for who and ensure that we do not find ourselves in this situation again. To go back to those bits on the foster care allowance, the family support hubs, the Sure Start and the advocacy services, we know that those things will effect long-term changes in our children's outcomes.

Ms Toner: I can give a couple of examples of things that can be done and do not cost very much money. Money is being invested in the recruitment of foster carers. There should be a region-wide approach to that. We should have a campaign. We run a foster care fortnight every year in May and that is, effectively, the Northern Ireland campaign on the recruitment of foster carers. We need something in addition to that. We run that on a shoestring, and we do it really effectively. A small amount of investment could make a massive difference, but also that process needs to be relational and strengths-based. It needs to ensure that inquirers and applicants have access to foster carers, and it needs to have people at the other end who can actually do the assessment. We need to ensure that, when people are being encouraged to apply for fostering, there are people who can assess them. We also need to make sure that our delegated authority guidance, which is issued by the Department on an ongoing basis, is up to scratch and meets the needs of foster carers.

In the review of children's services in England, we recommended that foster carers should have delegated authority to agree to a child getting a haircut or going on a school trip — simple things that aid everybody's life. They should be able to do that as a matter of default, unless there is a reason not to allow it. Instead of social workers being perhaps tied up with discussions such as, "What does delegated authority mean for this individual child?", it could release some much-needed time for them to do other things.

We need to have a clearly defined understanding of how allowances come about. We need to have an opportunity for foster carers to be able to feed into that. We need to ensure that that process happens annually. Usually, either in our employment or in other areas, there is a union, a membership organisation or a group of people who are asked about what is needed going forward. There needs to be a clearly defined, transparent process for those things. None of that requires legislation or a great deal of investment, and it could be done quite quickly. We need measures to address the issue in social work and ensure that we have multidisciplinary teams working with children and families. Social workers are being asked to do things that could be easily done by other people. A number of very practical things could be done. I could go on, but I will not. I am conscious of your time.

Mrs Dodds: May I ask one last question, Chair?

Do you have any data on the disparity in the services provided by different trusts for children and young people? Over the last number of weeks, I have had a lot of conversations about the disparity in respite services provided by the trusts. Anything like that would be very helpful. There is a very big discrepancy in what is provided from one trust to another, which are often only five minutes apart.

Ms Toner: There is a bit of a postcode lottery. We have just produced a document titled, 'Out of Pocket: Fairer Fees for Foster Carers'. We made FOI requests across the whole of the UK. We gathered data on the differences in fee payments, as opposed to allowances, for foster carers, and we could see the differences. There are substantial differences in how that is done. Two trusts did not respond. We know that some trusts are doing it in a more systematic way, so their foster carers will experience more sense of continuity, and maybe that makes them feel more valued. Others did not produce that information. We do not know whether that was because they do not gather the data. We know that there needs to be a proper fee and allowance structure for foster carers. We have the same allowances right across all five trusts. This is the only part of the UK where that is done. Allowances across all five trusts here are exactly the same. However, additional remuneration for children with additional needs or respite is completely ad hoc —

Mrs Dodds: At the discretion of the trusts.

Ms Toner: — in many respects. That certainly is being looked at in the fostering work stream.

You asked about some of the things that have been helpful. We are really pleased because, every time I go to this type of meeting, I say, "We need our standards and our regulations", and we are moving further towards that, but we need them to move at pace, and we need resource to implement them. There are differentials —.

Mrs Dodds: You need consistency —

Ms Toner: Absolutely.

Mrs Dodds: — across all the trusts to do that, and we do not get that.

Ms Toal: We see variation across the trusts in how they interpret and implement regional policies and procedures. For example, when young people leave care, there is different support available to them, depending on where they live. We see greater disparity in the support that different trusts provide to young people who want to go into higher education. When they move out of care, home allowances can vary. You can see the differences in policy and structure. That is why the notion of a single agency — it does not need to be an ALB — is a really good recommendation. It would be such an enabler, because having one strategic line of leadership should ensure consistency.

Miss McAllister: Thank you very much for coming here today. Children's services, particularly under social care, are a priority for this Committee. I am not sure whether the Chair mentioned that we have tabled a Committee motion for debate in the Assembly next week. We want to ensure that we all work together to constantly bring this issue to the fore, because it needs to be a priority.
Hopefully, we will then get answers from the Minister on some of the outstanding recommendations, so I hope that you can tune in.

There are some things that you said that I want to touch on. First, Alicia, you said something about children leaving care and the disparity. You made a comment that too many under 18 are actually leaving care. Can you explain that a bit more? I ask because that is really frightening to hear, because I assume that a child under 18 is not going back into the care of their family if they are leaving the care system.

Ms Toal: I suppose that we are seeing a range of things happening. Young people have reported to us and have given us examples of when they have felt that they were being encouraged to move on or, for example, for young people in foster care, not being able to avail themselves of the Going the Extra Mile (GEM) scheme. That is, as I put it, really about protecting the foster places for younger children.

We are seeing more 16- and 17-year-olds. We have a range of supported accommodation projects available across Northern Ireland. Some of those places are for 16- and 17-year-olds, but the majority were for 18-plus. We are seeing that those projects are being filled primarily by 16- and 17-year-olds. They are becoming quasi-children's homes. Traditionally, residential care would have been a provision for children over the age of 12. We are seeing more and more younger children, of eight, nine, and 10, in residential care. It all has a knock-on effect, as I mentioned earlier. You try to bring in reform and make changes in one part of the system, and there are knock-on effects unless you are looking at it whole, in the round.

Miss McAllister: I assume that it means that if the person is under 18, the trust or the Department is failing in its statutory obligations regarding that young person under its care. Is that also the case when it comes to access to support for those over 18? Are the trusts even meeting their minimum statutory obligations?

Ms Toal: We are finding that — I think I referred to it earlier — about three quarters the young people aged 16-plus who we are working with do not have a personal adviser, and that is a requirement. We do find that there will be measures taken to ensure that young people have social work support if they are not living in a care placement. We are finding more young people returning home to parents, perhaps, but they may feel that that return is not being well supported. Sometimes, the issues that were in the family have not necessarily been resolved, so we are seeing older teenagers possibly moving around quite a lot: in multiple placements, going home, coming back into residential care or to other similarly supported accommodation provisions.

Miss McAllister: That is something that we can certainly bring to the attention of the Minister in our speeches next week. In general, we get regular, written briefings from the Department regarding updates on the recommendations. I assume that you do not get these briefings and updates. In one of our briefings, the Department highlighted to us that a number of recommendations had been rejected but did not specify which ones. Are you aware of which ones were rejected?

It also highlighted that on 34 accepted recommendations, 14 will require additional funding to progress. That makes me think that there are 20 for which they have the funding to progress — maybe not to progress to completion but to progress further from where they are now, after 400 days. Is there a feeling or a view regarding all of the work streams? In addition, to be perfectly honest, it was very critical of — not the people in the work streams — the fact that the work streams were set up to deal with this, rather than just implementing the actions in collaboration with the sector.

I want to get a sense of whether you feel the pace of the work streams is good enough. Do you feel that, sometimes, it is just another additional layer to bureaucracy? I ask because that is certainly the feeling that we are getting. The independent review was the review. The recommendations are the actions. I recognise that I may be putting you in a difficult position, because I know your positions on the various work streams, but you are the experts who work with the young people. I am sure that the young people themselves want to know where they are with each of those. Have they even been told? Do they get an insight into the Department on those work streams as to where those recommendations are?

Ms Janes: That is what the conference will do. We always said that we had to feed back to the children, the young people and the families who contributed to that. We had hoped to do that earlier in the year, but it just was not possible because the information and progress had not come through.

I am a bit worried that we might get stuck in more analysis, as you said, and in another process rather than implementing the actions. We are aware of some of the information, but I do not have the detail that you have just given in relation to it being rejected. We are waiting for the announcement from the Minister as to his position on the review and its implementation.

Miss McAllister: He has a position on a number of aspects, because the Department has said that three are closed — we dispute whether they are actually closed — and some have been rejected. There is clearly a view there, so we will be bringing that up with him next week for sure.

Mrs McMullen: You had a question about children and young people. The 'A Place to Call Home' report details the narrative from children and young people themselves as to whether their situation has not changed or is not changing. A lot of children and young people whom we are speaking to are saying that they want to raise their voices because they feel that they want to do something for those who are coming after them. At the moment, they have resigned themselves to their situation. That was quite hard to listen to, when we are putting in a lot of energy and we have hopes and aspirations for change for them in the now.

That sense of procrastination and delay is quite frustrating when you are a service provider in the middle of it. Even with the amount of engagement and feedback that we are asking from our staff on those issues, they are in the system and they are feeling the brokenness of it. It is very difficult to walk that journey together. Alicia would say that about the feedback too. They were saying that the clock was ticking, and that was 400 days ago. That constant tension is quite hard to work with.

Ms Toal: One of my observations about the progress of the work streams would be that, whilst we are waiting on that strategic direction and decision-making around which recommendations are in, I have noticed that they are doing their best to get a good understanding of the data that tells them more about the lives of children and what is happening in families now, and they are trying to predict what might be the demand on services and the needs of individual children and families. However, their hands are tied when they are trying to get good data and good data collection systems, and they are having to go to individual trusts and teams to pull together the necessary information. We need better data collection and monitoring going forward.

I know that one of the recommendations that was discounted from the review recommended not using the new Encompass system for children's social care because it was deemed to be very Health-focused. I know that that was rejected, but there still has been a delay in implementing that system in children's services. It will be a long time before we will have good data and a good understanding of children, young people and families and who they are in Northern Ireland.

Ms Janes: The review started in February 2022, and there were 3,500 children in care. When the review was published in June 2023, there were 3,800 children in care. In August, that had risen to 4,134 children. If that is not evidence of our need to move quicker and implement the recommendations, then what is? Yes, we need systems and processes in the long term, but there are actions there that could be moved on, rather than having more conversations.

Ms Toner: It is also about early intervention. For example, we have a service called Step Up Step Down in the South Eastern Trust, which has proven to be extremely effective at keeping children safer at home with their families. It is about understanding how that might get rolled out, if you like. The pathway is really unclear. I have no particular vested interest in it: obviously, we evolved the programme, but it is highly effective and could be very beneficial. That is another thing that could be done quite straightforwardly and moved forward. We know that, in the South Eastern Trust over the last five or six years, that has kept about 250 or 260 children at home safely with parents. If you were to roll it out across the other four trusts, it could have a very substantial impact on the numbers of children who are coming into the care system but also on families who are being supported at home. The cost of that service in the South Eastern Trust is minuscule in comparison with the impact that it has and certainly in comparison with how much it would cost to keep another 250 children in a trust, with a foster carer or with residential care provision.

There are things where it is unclear how they might be pushed to progress further; there is a lack of a clear pathway. To be fair, it has been an exercise in ensuring that people's voices are being heard and there is an opportunity for that. It is still not completely clear to me, even though I am on several of the groups, what is going to happen.

I feel sorry for our colleagues from the statutory agencies because they are constantly having to say, "Well, yes, that would happen but", as Alicia mentioned earlier, "Workforce and financial considerations mean that we cannot progress it.". If it is actually the case that we do not have those resources, we need to state clearly what we do have the resources to do. Those children's needs are not going to disappear. As we continue to advocate for a whole range of services, if a decision is being taken somewhere that, actually, we cannot do that, I would much rather that someone said, "We cannot prioritise that but we are going to make really sure that we are going to do it here.".

We are aware that not all statutory provisions are being met. If you have 40% of your social work team there, there is only so much that you can do. So, what can you do with that? Move upstream, invest earlier and much cheaper, use resources within the community and keep maybe 1,250 children and young people out of care.

Miss McAllister: That is perfect. It is just the right message that needs to be given to the Department. It is, "What can you do?", not always, "We cannot do this or that.". To be clear — Chair, we discussed it last week — they told us that funding, additional resource, had been put into the work streams. Are you seeing that funding flowing through to the sector? The information given to us was very limited. It just said that additional funding had been put into the work streams.

Ms Toner: Does that mean that it was put in to facilitate the organisation and administration of the work streams or to deliver the services that the recommendation —?

Miss McAllister: You would know if you had had additional resources given to your own organisation. [Laughter.]

Ms Janes: Potentially, there has been investment in the administration of the work streams. What we are calling for is investment earlier in the system. All these activities happen, but what difference is that making to children, young people and families on the ground? Is that the right investment in the right place? We need to shift, to get in there early.

Miss McAllister: I would ask more questions, but I do not want to keep you, and I look forward to engaging with the young people themselves, later this month, is it not?

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): Yes.

Mr Donnelly: A lot of my questions have been answered, but I have just a couple of further questions. I want to follow on from what Nuala said about children leaving at 16. You said that they go into supported-living schemes. Is that largely by choice, or is it a matter of necessity?

Ms Toal: It is probably both, really. We have supported young people through our advocacy service who, for example, would have preferred to stay on with the foster carers after turning 18, and that was not enabled. We are probably seeing some young people voting with their feet. Some may have been having a difficult time in residential care. Supported accommodation projects were there, primarily, I have to say, as a kind of step-down model, where young people, 18-plus, would have a little more independence, but also, they would be supported to develop skills such as budgeting and cooking, as a stepping stone to independent living.

What we are seeing is that those places are being filled with younger children, at 16 and 17. Then, at 18, they are having to move on to independent living, for example, because there are reduced supported projects. However, we are also seeing some young people who are coming into the system at an older age, at 16 or 17, or who are not being placed in residential care and are going to other provisions. There is a limited number of places in supported accommodation projects for 16- and 17-year-old homeless young people, but we know that young people have also been placed in completely inappropriate and unregulated accommodation — hotels, B&Bs and the like.

Mr Donnelly: Is there no support for them at all?

Ms Toal: There is an onus to put in place better support for those children and young people, particularly for those who are under 18. I cannot say absolutely that that is the case for every child or young person who requires it.

Mr Donnelly: That is concerning. Do you consider those to be safe environments for young people?

Ms Toal: That is why I said that there are particular provisions and support directly from social work staff. If there are any concerns around those placements, there will be additional support through social work staff and some of the support services, but my argument is that they should not have to be placed in those environments at all.

Mr Donnelly: That leads me to my next question, which is on what Linda Dillon raised around the commodification of children. You alluded to people profiting from children's support services. What does that relate to? Does it relate specifically to the model that you were talking about?

Ms Toal: No. Linda Dillon raised that. One of the recommendations in the review is that there would not be privatisation of children's services.

Mr Donnelly: It was suggested that it might already be happening. Can you give an example?

Ms Toal: There have been a number of private or independent providers in residential care, particularly over the last year or two. I suppose that there is a range. We need to get a better understanding of the generic term "independent", where charitable organisations are and which organisations are for profit.

Mrs McMullen: May I come in on that, briefly?

Mr Donnelly: Yes.

Mrs McMullen: The report that I referred to looks at the picture across the UK. Ray Jones's context is social work in England. In England, children's social care has private residential places and private enterprise being involved in care. That is now a huge and difficult issue that is leading to very difficult consequences in relation to people's protection. Ultimately, those places are for profit; I think that is what Linda was talking about. That warning was set out very clearly in the review, and we are raising the alarm that, unless there is specific, intentional action in Northern Ireland, we could end up going down the same route. Because of the level of demand in Northern Ireland, business enterprises could see an opportunity if there is not a keen eye watching over that. I would be happy to send the Committee a wee bit more information about the English context, if that would be helpful.

Mr Donnelly: Yes, certainly.

Miss McAllister: It is for children's respite care that we have had private providers.

Mr Donnelly: But you are talking about residential care, Sheena.

Mrs McMullen: Yes, although I think that it applies across care more widely. Generally, you can see that there is a business model that would be happy to step into that space. However, when care becomes a commodity, people's care outcomes generally go down. That has certainly been the case in England. There is lots of evidence that, in that way, it is not even cost-effective. I am happy to send a bit more information about that, if it would be useful.

Mr Donnelly: I have a final, quick question. You mentioned that there are, I think, 490 deregistered carers.

Ms Toner: It is 419.

Mr Donnelly: Sorry, 419. What period was that over, and what was the main driver for deregistration?

Ms Toner: There is a range of reasons why people might step down. Post-pandemic, some people may have found themselves in a situation where there were not able to look after children. The reasons why foster carers are deregistered are usually complex. They have to go back to panel, and there is a range of reasons why that might happen.

I referred to "deregistration", but that is a bit of a misnomer, because foster carers are not technically registered. We do not have a register for them; they go to panel and are approved. When I said that, therefore, I meant foster carers whose approval has been removed for whatever reason. Sometimes that is a proactive choice. For example, I received a letter from a foster carer last week that, basically, outlined that, because they felt that they had been poorly treated and that they were not valued, they had decided to resign immediately — "forthwith", they said — from the fostering service. Some people, as Alicia said, vote with their feet. For some people, it may because they have found themselves aged out. This is the first time that I have seen that statistic, so I am looking forward to the stats coming out later this month to see whether that continues to be the case and over what period. Last year was the baseline — the first time — so it will be interesting to see whether we have that again this year.

It might be helpful to clarify one thing. When children and young people hit the age of 18, their care order falls away because they have become adults, so they then become subject to our Going the Extra Mile — the GEM — scheme. There are different payments. If you are a foster carer, approved to look after children and young people, you are paid your allowances in respect of that child up to the age of 18. That changes at 18. Alicia mentioned that, as more children are coming into the system at younger ages, the foster carers are asked, "You have a space. This young person is now 18. They are an adult. Can we release that space?". That is a trend that we saw in England for a long time: foster carers stop being foster carers, effectively. In England there is Staying Put, and there are similar arrangements in the other three countries, but there is a difference in the allowances in respect of the young person. That is a trend that we want to watch, because it is a substantial part of the care system in England, and it seems to be emerging here because of the volume of children who need to be looked after.

Mrs McMullen: I will put in a little bit from the research that we just did. We heard from foster parents about the pressure to find alternative accommodation for their foster placement when they reached 18, and that was driving them to use huge amounts of their pension to find an apartment near them so that they could continue in their support role and know that the investment that they had made in providing a safe and stable home for the child who was now a young adult would not be lost. They had no hope that the system would do that. In some cases, they bought a caravan to put in their driveway for the foster child to move into, because they felt under pressure to make a space in their home for another child. That shows the calibre of the people who offer that type of care, but it should not be like that.

The really big point about housing and accommodation specifically for care-experienced adults at that point of need is definitely something that we want to highlight more amid the wider housing pressures that we are facing. It impacts on them because they are being sent to unsafe environments.

Ms Toner: I have four children of my own: think about when they all hit 18. Most young people hit 18 in the middle of a school year, and, if they are continuing in education or study, that is a huge trauma. If you are anticipating that at 16, how do you study? How do you focus? How do you have aspirations? We need to make sure that that does not increase in the way that it has in other countries.

The Chairperson (Ms Kimmins): OK. Thank you all. The discussion has been so valuable to our getting more information on this issue: it will definitely help us with where we go and what we do next. I hope that you have a sense of how important this is for us as a Committee and that we really want to see it progressed as quickly as possible with an outcomes-focused approach. We really appreciate your coming in, and we know that you will keep us informed of any research or documents, which is also very much appreciated. I am sure that we will have further engagement as we go on. Thanks a million.