This morning we had a discussion in relation to the issues following an allegation and NAFP to feedback to the DfE where the existing process is failing - see below:
- The transfer process for dealing with allegations is an issue - there appears to be no urgency or responsibility - this is in relation to a child being moved out of area - the lack of ownership - the police force for where the child originated V the police force for where the child has moved to - mixed support from the LA - dependent on how effective the LADO is.
- Reports of outstanding outcomes for many months - the scenario above took 8 months and 18 attempts (escalations)
- There needs to be an agreed approach / timeframe adhered to - an understanding of the foster carer or their family that are being impacted by this delay - (Mike Wilkins case - where he took his own life)
- Once children are removed, the LA appear to have no urgency - sometimes the delay is because they say they need to speak to children - but the progress of this is slow - especially if children are out of the area - drift
- LADO - if they are effective in their role - there appears to be no delay - they drive it forward
- No evidence of harm or ongoing disclosures - children moved - and no urgency for closure from the LA
- Strategy meetings - sometimes the IFA has pushed for it and the LA and police not adhered to the timescales
- LADO asking the IFA to carry out their own investigation - discussion re the 2 separate processes - Police see if there is a crime committed, LADO - has children been harmed
- IFA - should someone continue to be a foster carer - and the review process to consider this, the terms or the termination of approval
- Care proceedings - example of the court intervention and how this was used in court against the foster carer and in the case for the child and their parents - inappropriate - poor practice from the judge - person still fostering and the IRM supported this through their own recommendations.
- S47 - LADO role - “professionals who abuse”
- Children’s interests - reasons for the move - using the allegation to move “in house” or speed up a move home etc
- “Good goodbyes” - and this often being denied - leaving children abandoned and carers with no closure or opportunity to end things well
- Impact on children and also on carers mental health - duty of care
- No work with children to help them understand - or have an opportunity for a meeting etc
- Managing risk - rather than eliminating risk - good discussion
- Moving children - can also be that the LA will not consider moving children - due to not having anywhere for them to go - discussed how they might continue to stay should it not be appropriate for the carers to remain as foster carers - sgo etc - but also talked of some positives around SGO and the transition
- Ofsted - (members say) do not appear interested in the LA approach - more the IFA and if they have been pro-active or not
- Letter box contact - this was a useful suggestion and something the IFA could simply do - to support carers to write a letter to children - for the IFA to send to the LA to share with children if and when appropriate but also to be on their file for later life if chooses to access - the IFA to keep a copy also - everyone agreed this was a good idea and could consider this
- Complex compliance team - in ofsted - who can liaise with the police and LA - someone gave an example of how this was effective - CL to discuss at the next ofsted meeting - as would be helpful to know more about this team.
- Finally - a member asked if a future session could be about the support available for foster carers facing allegations - and more about the emotional support, keeping people “held” and their families - how we consider carers that feel “alone” and “lost” in the system - please join us on FRIDAY 19 JULY - 10AM-11AM to develop this conversation.
