Keeping children in care out of trouble: an independent review
Call for written views and evidence
Published: 23 June 2015
Closing date: 4 August 2015
RESPONSE FORM
Please see the end of this document for information about the review and its background. A
separate response form and guidance for children and young people responding to the
review are available at: www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/carereview
Please send us your evidence by 5.00pm on Tuesday 4 August 2015.
By email: carereview@prisonreformtrust.org.uk
By post: Care review, C/o Prison Reform Trust, 15 Northburgh Street, London EC1V 0JR
For more information, contact Katy Swaine Williams, Care review co-ordinator, on 020 7251
5070.
Your contact details and data protection
You do not have to give us your name or contact details in order to take part in the review.
We will still take your evidence into account. If you do give us your name and contact
details, we will only use them for the purposes of the review, including to send you a copy of
the review’s final report. We may also try to contact you during the review with any follow up
questions arising from your evidence. Please let us know if you would prefer not to be
contacted other than to receive the report.
Full name
Organisation and
job title (if relevant)
Postal address
Email
Telephone
Are you happy for
your evidence to be
published? (Please
delete as appropriate)
Yes
No
Signed:
Date:
1
All evidence received will be taken into account by the review. However, not all the evidence
received will appear in the final review report. Where evidence is included in the report from
children and young people or their families in relation to their personal experience, it will only
be published or referred to in anonymised form, from which the individuals in question
cannot be identified.
The questions the review wants to address are set out below. Please cite quantitative or
qualitative evidence to support your response where possible. In all your answers, please
try to reflect the diverse needs and characteristics of children and young people of different
genders and ethnic backgrounds, to the extent that your experience allows. Please use the
space at the end of the form to add examples of best practice that you know of, and any
further comments.
1. How does the experience of being in care affect the likelihood of offending?
Children are placed in care for a reason. In 2013 42,480 children were in care because of
abuse and neglect. The consequences of this abuse and neglect do not stop once these
children have been removed from their families. Neglect and abuse have long term
consequences on development and life chances.
Moreover for many children and young people the experience of being in care can be
disruptive, stressful and often unhappy. We see in our work with young people in care that
as children in care get older they are exposed to more and more risks that could result in
contact with the justice system.
This contact occurs for two main reasons. Firstly the care system does not do enough to
help children overcome the trauma that they experience in their younger years. Secondly,
as the protective layers that care services provide for children begin to fall away with age,
a number of push and pull factors emerge that can lead to criminal behaviour.
In order to prevent this from happening, services need to change. In order to overcome
abuse and neglect there needs to be closer attention paid to the therapeutic services
children receive and a much keener focus given to promoting high emotional wellbeing
positive mental health. In order to fix the system to prevent this ‘collapse’ of provision for
older children, services need to change their attitudes towards older children in care and
provide age appropriate interventions to help prevent the slide towards the youth justice
system.
2(a) Which features of the care system increase or reduce the chances that a child
or young person will offend?
Placements
One of the biggest features of the care system that causes instability is the way in which
placements are chosen. The longer a child remains within the care system the more likely
they are to have had more than five placements. 50% of those ceasing care after the age
of 18 have had more placements compared to just 15% of those who leave care between
the ages of 10 and 15i. Younger children often receive the most stable placements – either
through adoption or long term foster care but as children get older placement stability
clearly decreases. This is due to a number of factors; there is often a lack of foster carers
able and willing to take older children and often children’s needs increase as the long-term
consequences of their abuse and neglect become more acute and difficult to deal with. As
2
a result older children are often placed in either residential children’s homes or supported
accommodation. Both of which appear to have features that can push children towards the
youth justice system.
- Residential Homes
Over 50% of children’s homes residents are aged 15 or olderii. Children’s homes are
highly regulated and if poorly run often feel like an institutional rather than a family setting.
Just under half of all children in residential settings have had four or more placements iii
Essentially children’s homes accommodate older children who have had multiple
placements. These children have often had the worst experience of the care system and
have high needs and often challenging behaviour.
Furthermore, in 2014 more children were placed outside their local authority in a children’s
home than were placed inside their local authority in a children’s homeiv. This means they
are far away from family and friends, may have changed schools, and are likely to receive
less contact with their named social worker.
In these highly regulated settings, and far from home, children are more likely to go
missing. 9% of children in residential homes went missing in 2012/13 – more than in any
other settingv. Moreover almost 50% of missing episodes were repeat episodes meaning
that they had run away from their home more than oncevi. Running away from care is an
important risk factor relating to criminal justice. Our national surveys of young runaways
indicate that 12% of runaways steal in order to survive and 9% have beggedvii. Both of
these behaviours put children at risk of coming into contact both with the police, but
perhaps more importantly with other young people and adults who may have a negative
influence on them and lead them into more risky and potentially criminal behaviours.
There are other risk factors related to children’s residential homes and the criminal justice
system. Children in residential homes have worse educational attainmentviii than other
children in care and in the strengths and difficulties questionnaire that is used to measure
their levels of emotional wellbeing the average score in a children’s home is 18.1 which is
rated as a serious cause for concernix.
National data collected about children’s also gives us information about crime. 20% of
young people living in a residential home for the last 12 months will have been convicted
or subject to a final warning or reprimand during the yearx.
The data on Residential Children’s homes is particularly good. It shows us how older
children, often having multiple placements and as likely to be living far away from home as
they are to be living within their local authority are being placed in settings from which they
are more likely to run away, be absent or excluded from school, do poorly in exams and
come into contact with criminal justice. All of this coincides with young people who are
beginning to test boundaries, push limits, experiment and develop relationships outside
their school and placement. When all these risk factors are combined it is not perhaps
surprising that children with experience of residential homes are so often found within the
criminal justice system.
- Supported Accommodation
Supported accommodation is in many ways the opposite of the residential children’s
home. It’s unregulated, there is little data and young people are moving from a highly rigid
and institutionalised setting into one where they may have more freedom than they have
ever had before. Most young people will move through some form of supported
accommodation as they exit care. These settings are designed to prepare young people
for independent living.
3
Every year, we estimate that around 8,000 children in care, care leavers and homeless
young people stay in supported accommodation (combination of children in care
placement data, care leaver data and The Children’s Society data on homeless 16 and 17
year olds). This supported accommodation can range widely from moving-on flats
designed to promote independence to hostels and foyers.
Our report on ‘Getting the house in order’ highlighted significant safeguarding risks in
supported accommodation including sexual and criminal exploitation. For example:
Five young people placed in the same hostel were groomed and sexually exploited by a
group of 10 men. The young people had been going missing on a regular basis and found
in the company of men, often under the influence of drugs. Despite concerns raised by
voluntary sector organisations and the police, the young people did not recognise their
sexual exploitation. In this case the police investigation resulted in men being charged
with various sexual offences.
Young people were placed in a hostel being targeted by people who sell them drugs, in
many cases ‘legal highs’. In some instances they lent them money to buy drugs and then
required them to repay their debt with interest. Those young people who could not pay
were forced into criminal behaviour or street begging to repay the debt.
A young person in supported accommodation was encouraged to take drugs and then got
involved in shoplifting in order to fund her drug habit.
A young person who went missing from their accommodation who was found on the street
distributing drugs.
Forthcoming evidence that we are planning to publish in September further examines
what is happening in this accommodation. Early analysis of the evidence we have
gathered suggests that contact between children’s social services and accommodation
providers is minimal, that many of the young people are living in poverty, the police are
often called to the accommodation and violent incidents can be quite high. Indeed our
evidence suggests that providers call the police too soon and that this can result in the
criminalisation of children who, had they been living in a family setting, might have been
spared direct contact with the police.
Supported accommodation typifies our argument that the care system becomes weaker
as children approach adulthood. Difficult placements in residential homes can be followed
by placements in supported accommodation that expose young people to risk and can
result in criminal behaviour – often as a by-product of exploitative relationships with other
young people and adults.
- Foster care
It is worth briefly mentioning foster care. 41% of young people aged 16 and over in foster
care have been in placements for over five yearsxi. Not only do they enjoy this increased
stability but they are now able to stay put with their foster carer until 21 if both carer and
young person agree. At the moment there is no data on outcomes for those who have
been able to stay put but the government is hoping it will result in better outcomes. The
stable care those in foster placements have compared to those in residential and
supported accommodation may result in further inequity within the system which could
result in those having less favourable placements being further pushed towards the
criminal justice system.
Social Worker turnover and trusted adults
Social work turnover has been high for many years now, but professionals often assume
4
that all children in the care system are affected in the same way when their social worker
changes. As children get older their relationship with their social worker changes and they
may begin to realise what a big role their social worker plays in their life. Furthermore, as
placements break down, and as demonstrated above, they are more likely to live outside a
family unit, young people place more importance on the professionals in their life. This
situation is even more critical because, as they get older, young people have a bigger role
to play in decisions about their care and so value the advice of those they trust and know
well and feel it more keenly when they perceive they have been let down. If their social
worker is always changing they can often feel like they have no-one to turn to.
In consultations with young people, we often hear about how one trusted adult can really
turn things around. Often that adult can come from a number of services, for example a
young carer support worker who helped a young person she worked with to overcome
homelessness or a sexual exploitation worker who encouraged a young person she
worked with to seek help for drug and alcohol abuse. Young people tell us they want
someone who listens, has a plan, gives them choice and is reliablexii.
Often the system does not provide this. As young people get older their needs often
become more specialist and the result is them having a number of professionals in their
lives, none of which they feel they can trust or rely on. It would not be unusual for a young
person on the edge of the criminal justice system to have a YOT worker, a social worker,
a support worker or carer attached to their placement and possibly further professionals
from Child and Adolescent Mental Health or Drug and Alcohol services. Young people tell
us they do not want this, they want “someone who is focussed on all your needs and not
just your specific problem”xiii.
Professional Attitudes
The attitudes of professionals towards older children also form a risk factor for children in
care, particularly because they have so much professional contact. Our report
‘Safeguarding young people’ written in conjunction with the NSPCC and the University of
York found that there “appears to be a common professional view that the effects of
maltreatment are less severe for older young people than for younger children. This view
is not, however, well supported by the limited research evidence that exists on this
topic”xiv. Professionals often feel older children, close to adulthood, should be able to cope
and do not need as much help and support as younger children. This is not the case.
Whilst older children may appear confident and behave like adults they can still be very
vulnerable. It is even more important that professionals get their responses right, because
evidence, like that of Thornberry et al (2010) suggests that persistent maltreatment during
adolescence has ‘stronger and more consistent negative consequences…than
maltreatment experienced only in childhood’xv These effects include criminal behaviour,
mental health problems, substance misuse and health-risking behaviours. Getting the
response wrong in adolescence can lead to criminal behaviours.
Furthermore, evidence from our work with runaways suggests that even with professionals
who are not closely involved in their lives young people often receive negative and
unhelpful responses. A practitioner working with children and young people at risk of child
sexual exploitation (CSE) told us that a young girl he worked with reported being called
“slag” and “white trash” by a police officer. A young person said she was told after
disclosing sexual abuse “what do you expect dressed like that, you’re looking for it”xvi.
These attitudes are not helpful and they do not encourage young people to engage
constructively with services. This can lead to them becoming more isolated and more at
risk of entering the youth justice system.
Wellbeing and Mental Health
The final issue that may have consequences for young people coming into contact with
5
the youth justice system centres on young people’s emotional wellbeing and mental
health. Looked after children have their mental health assessed frequently through the
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire up to the age of 16 but in later adolescence there
is no embedded way of measuring mental health or wellbeing and therefore it is difficult for
practitioners to assess how able young people are to deal with problems, how much
support they need and for them to spot issues early before they get more serious. This is
so important considering looked after children are five times more likely to develop a
mental disorder than children living at home with their familiesxvii. Our own national
research into subjective wellbeing has found that children living outside their family unit
have significantly lower wellbeing compared to those living with their familyxviii
2(b) What other factors (including pre-care and post-care experiences) influence the
chances whether a child or young person with experience of care will offend?
Pre care
As stated at the outset, most children end up in care because of abuse and neglect by
their families at home. A history of abuse and neglect can have serious consequences on
children in both adolescence and adulthood. Research looking at adolescents who display
harmful sexual behaviours for example has examined cohorts where anything between
66%xix and 92%xx of the young people have been exposed to serious abuse or neglect in
earlier childhood. Children who enter the care system need loving and stable carers to
overcome some of these experiences, but they also need professionals who, as the
immediate consequences of neglect subside, recognise that certain behaviours may
appear later in the life course and should be dealt with as a consequence of neglect rather
than as criminal acts. A more therapeutic approach to some of the problems of behaviour
and conduct that appear to commonly occur in older children in care could be crucial in
stemming the flow of children in care who come into contact with the criminal justice
system as their behaviour is criminalised rather than addressed as a consequence of
abuse or neglect.
Post care
As discussed above, the inequalities within the leaving care system also contribute to
instability and poor outcomes that could result in experience of the criminal justice system.
For young people allowed to stay put until they are 21, in some cases 25 years old, there
is clearly more stability than those who have to move out at an early age and live
independently.
33% of looked after children leave care before their 18th birthday, but Ofsted has found
that two thirds of the care leaver services it has inspected are inadequate or require
improvementxxi. Furthermore, as increasing numbers of children enter care at a later age,
more children are leaving the system without having met the qualifying criteria for care
leaver status leaving them even more at risk and with no support. If leaving care support is
lacking and does not meet the needs of young people holistically then they are likely to
struggle and experience crises that might see them come into contact with the youth
justice system.
2(c) When decisions are made regarding a child in need that prevent entry into the
care system, such as placing a child in kinship care, what influence can that have
on the chances of a child or young person offending?
Our recent report ‘Getting the house in order’ examined the current provision for homeless
16 and 17 year olds in England. Under the homelessness guidance, those aged 16 and 17
6
should become looked after children an go into the care of the Local Authority in order to
deal with both the immediate, and longer term effects of youth homelessness. Our
research found that only 36% of homeless 16 and 17 year olds accommodated by Local
Authorities actually enter the care system. 64% are prevented from entering the care
system and are accommodated under other provisions available to the Local Authorityxxii.
In these situations young people are still highly likely to be living in the same
accommodation, in the same location, but because one group is supported by children’s
services and the other is not there are great disparities between them. Those not
supported by children’s services often struggle to meet rent payments and other costs out
of mainstream benefits – many of which are reduced for younger children. Those under
children’s services care will have their placements financed by the local Authority and may
also qualify for care leaver support ensuring that they are better supported into adulthood
– potentially preventing future problems that may see them come into contact with the
youth justice system.
3. Which features of the youth justice system* increase or reduce the chances that
a child or young person with experience of care will get involved in the criminal
justice system and/or reoffend?
* The term ‘youth justice system’ is intended to mean the law, policy and practice relating to the
treatment of children and young people by the police, youth offending teams, courts, secure
children’s homes, secure training centres and young offender institutions.
See section on Professional Attitudes – particularly in relation to police officers.
4. Are there parts of the youth justice system* that have an unfair impact on
children and young people with experience of care?
* ‘Youth justice system’ is defined here as at question 3 above.
5. Which features of other services, such as education, health and housing,
increase or reduce the chances that a child or young person with experience of
care will offend?
Runaway Services
All children who runaway and go missing from care are entitled to a return interview,
funded by the Local Authority, once found. Return interviews are a proven way of
identifying risk, reducing it, and preventing future incidents of running away. Ofsted’s
thematic inspection of Worcestershire cited a 30% reduction in runaway incidents after the
introduction of return interviewsxxiii. Children in care are much more likely to go missing. It
is estimated that around 10,000 children a year run away from their placementxxiv. Whilst
children in care are more likely to get a return interview than children living at homexxv, it is
vitally import that all children receive the service, that it is independently run – as
recommended in the guidancexxvi, and that those children who continue to run away on
multiple cases receive additional attention and are not written off as trouble makers. As
discussed in the section on Children’s Residential homes, children who run away from
home or care are highly vulnerable to exploitation and being drawn into crime.
Child Sexual Exploitation Services
7
Children’s services response to sexual exploitation is still underdeveloped nationally and
continues to evolve at a very fast pace as Local Authorities try to get control over the
situation. Our own practice work with young people at risk of sexual exploitation in a
number of areas across the country. Models and funding vary but we have found that
providing a single trusted support worker in an intervention that focuses on building
positive relationships and teaching young people about the grooming cycle is a good way
of allowing young people to recognise their exploitation, take steps to end it, and to keep
themselves safe in the future.
6. What can be done to help children with experience of care to avoid getting
involved in the criminal justice system, and who should do it?
Therapeutic Support is vital for children in care to address their past experiences of
neglect and trauma. Looked after children need better access to a range of supportive
therapies and interventions that help them to examine their past safely. Often this is seen
as the role of child and adolescent mental health services but it is not always a
diagnosable condition which young people face – sometimes they just need to talk.
Therapeutic support of some kind would allow young people to contextualise the things
that happened to them, have a better understanding of how they feel and, crucially, link
this to their behaviours. It is critical that this kind of support is offered, as the norm, by
children’s social services in order to reduce the effects of trauma, but more importantly to
improve the wellbeing of looked after children.
It is important to address the question of who should help children in care to avoid getting
involved in the criminal justice system. We would argue that the best way for a child to
avoid the criminal justice system is to have a trusted relationship with a consistent adult. It
probably does not matter if they are a foster carer, a support worker, or even a YOT
worker. What is important is that this person changes as little as possible and spends time
with the child. Social workers, due to caseloads and administrative requirements are
probably not best placed to help with practical interventions to prevent a child getting
involved with the criminal justice system.
Planning for care leavers should also be addressed. It must be improved if it is to result in
meaningful plans and support that make care leavers feel valued and like they have
someone looking out for them who has their best interests at heart.
Care leaver support also needs to be extended to all children with experience of the care
system. Those who do not meet current thresholds are currently treated very poorly. They
have often had very similar experiences to those young people who do meet the
thresholds and yet they are left with no support and face a very uncertain future. In order
to rectify this, national government would need to look again at the thresholds and
redefine them.
7. What are the barriers to reform, and how might these be overcome in an
environment of limited resources?
Unregulated accommodation
Without some kind of regulation, guidance or inspections of unregulated accommodation
then it will be difficult for Local Authorities to adequately raise standards and incentivise
accommodation providers to do more to prevent a child becoming involved in the criminal
justice system. At present unregulated accommodation is only really scrutinised when it is
being commissioned.
8
Attitudes of Professionals
No matter what reforms are made they are unlikely to succeed if looked after children
continue to be treated poorly by professionals. Attitudes that looked after children are
troublemakers, or will never be successful are common place in society at large and some
professionals are not aspirational enough for the children in their care. There are many
policies that need to change but we must also work to improve society’s attitudes towards
looked after children and make sure more positive stories are heard.
8(a) In relation to all your answers above, have you reflected the diverse needs and
characteristics of children and young people of different genders and ethnic
backgrounds? Please add any further comments here.
8(b) Please describe any examples of best practice that you are aware of, where
these are not covered above.
8(c) Is there anything else you would like to say to the review team?
9
10
About the review
This independent review, chaired by Lord Laming and established by the Prison Reform
Trust, was launched on 23 June 2015 to consider why looked after children are more likely
than other children in England and Wales to get involved with the criminal justice system,
and what can be done to help more children in care stay out of trouble.
The review team is formed from a broad cross-section of senior policy makers and
practitioners, including social workers, police, magistrates, academics and other experts. It
will be informed by a consultation group of children and young people who have been in care
and been in trouble with the law. For more information about the review and a list of its
members, go to www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/carereview
Background
Most children in care do not get into trouble with the law. However, children and young
people who are, or have been, in care are over five times more likely than other children to
get involved in the criminal justice system. In a 2013 survey of 15-18 year olds in young
offender institutions, a third of boys and 61% of girls said they had spent time in care. This
is despite fewer than 1% of all children in England being in care. For nearly two-thirds of
looked after children, the main reason they are in care is because they have suffered abuse
or neglect.
The review wants to hear about your experiences, and your views, on what could change
this, thereby transforming the life chances of children and young people in care.
How to respond
The review wants to hear from those who have experience of local authority care and the
criminal justice system, including children and young people, their families and carers, social
workers, youth offending team managers, police and local authority leads, and others who
work with children in care and children in the criminal justice system.
Please send us your response by 5.00pm on Tuesday 4 August – by email:
carereview@prisonreformtrust.org.uk or post: Care review, C/o Prison Reform Trust, 15
Northburgh Street, London EC1V 0JR.
For more information call Katy Swaine Williams, Care review co-ordinator, on 020 7251
5070.
Guidance for children and young people who want to respond to the review, and a
separate response form, can be downloaded at www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/carereview
This revised response form was published on 3 July 2015. Please contact Katy Swaine Williams, the care review
co-ordinator, on 020 7251 5070 with any queries.
i
Department for Education. Children looked after in England, including adoption. 2015. National Tables, Table
D6. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption--2 (Last
accessed 20 August 2015)
ii
Department for Education. Children’s Homes Data Pack. 2014.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/childrens-homes-data-pack (Last accessed Ahugust 22 2015)
iii
Ibid
iv
Ibid
11
v
Ibid
Ibid
vii
Still Running 3 p16
viii
Department for Education. Children’s Homes Data Pack. 2014.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/childrens-homes-data-pack (Last accessed Ahugust 22 2015)
ix
Ibid
x
Ibid
xi
Department for Education. Improving Permanence data pack. 2013. Department for Education, London.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/improving-permanence-for-looked-after-children-data-pack
(Last accessed 22 August 2015) Page 20
xii
The Children’s Society. Seriously Awkward. 2015. The Children’s Society, London. Page 46
xiii
Ibid
xiv
The Children’s Society. Safeguarding Young People. 2010. The Children’s Society, London. Page 163
xv
Thornberry, TP; Henry, KL; Ireland, TO; Smith, CA (2010) 'The Causal Impact of Childhood-Limited
Maltreatment and Adolescent Maltreatment on Early Adult Adjustment' Journal of Adolescent Health 46(4),
359-365
xvi
The Children’s Society, The Children’s Society submission to the APPG for children inquiry: children and the
police. 2013. The Children’s Society, London. Page 3.
http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/tcs/written_evidence__appg_inquiry_childrens_relationship_with_the_police_-_the_childrens_society_-_sep_2013.pdf (Last
accessed 22 August 2015)
xvii
Blomfield S., Collins S., Guishard-Pine J., and Langdon P. 2010. ‘Help-seeking by Foster-carers for their
looked after children: The role of Mental Health Literacy and Treatment Attitudes’, British Journal of Social
Work, No 40, p1335-1352
xviii
The Children’s Society. The Good Childhood Report 2015. 2015. The Children’s Society, London.
xix
Hackett S, Phillips J, Masson H and Balfe M. Individual, Family and Abuse
Characteristics of 700 British Child and Adolescent Sexual Abusers. 2013. Child Abuse
Review 22 (4) 232-245.
xx
Vizard E, Hickey N, French L and McCrory E. Children and Adolescents Who
Present with Sexually Abusive Behaviour: A UK descriptive study. 2007. Journal of Forensic
Psychiatry & Psychology 18 (1) 59-73
xxi
National Audit Office. Care leavers transition to adulthood. 2015. National Audit Office, London.
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Care-leavers-transition-to-adulthood.pdf (Last accessed
20 August 2015)
xxii
Pona, I. and Crellin, R. Getting the house in order. 2015. The Children’s Society, London.
xxiii
Ofsted. Missing Children. 2013. Ofsted, London
xxiv
APPG for Missing and Runaway Children and Adults. Enquiry into children who go missing from care. 2012.
The Children’s Society, London.
xxv
The Children’s Society. Here to Listen? 2013. The Children’s Society, London.
xxvi
Department for Education. Statutory guidance on children who run away or go missing from home or care.
2014. Department for Education, London.
vi
12