Agenda item

To provide information to the Council’s Corporate Parenting Committee in relation to adoption performance, progress and activity of Adopt London West, and good outcomes being achieved for children.

Debbie Gabriel (Head of Service, Adopt London West) introduced the report, which provided the adoption performance data for the reporting period. In presenting the report, she outlined the following key points:

• Adopt London West had placed 10 children in the last year which was much higher than the agency had placed since creation. 6 of those 10 children had been placed with Adopt London West adopters which was an improvement in performance.
• As there was a small cohort size, variance in performance could appear to be significant.
• It was highlighted that the working relationship between Brent and Adopt London West was very strong and agency practice aligned closely with practice in Brent.
• There had been an increased effort to reconnect children with siblings working with Brent staff.
• Following the publication of the report, the government had announced changes to the Guardianship Support Fund which Adopt London West could apply to on behalf of a family. Until 2 weeks prior, Adopt London West could bid for up to £5k, enabling the agency to apply for therapeutic services for children up to £5k. There had also been a separate fund of up to £2k for assessments of those with complex behaviour and needs and a match fund if support needs cost more than £5k. Following the government announcement, the Guardianship Support Fund had reduced to £3k and there would no longer be an assessment fund of £2k or match funding. She highlighted that these were significant changes that would have an impact on the child and family, as, for many families, that reliance on the therapeutic support available through the funding could make a difference in them continuing to function.

The Chair thanked Debbie Gabriel for her introduction and invited comments and questions from those present, with the following issues raised:

Noting the change in government funding for therapeutic support, the Committee raised concerns that this might affect a family’s desire to adopt. Debbie Gabriel acknowledged the concerns, highlighting that whilst there was an ideological debate on how reliant some families were on the support, there was a need for it. The announcement of the changes had been made late and received a lot of publicity with the adoption community being active and vocal advocates for their children in response to the changes. Adopt London West had prepared applications in advance as they had previously received confirmation that the funding would continue, so all those applications made in draft now needed to be redone with recalculated costs. This meant families were delayed in receiving therapy. The Chair of the Committee committed to writing on behalf of Brent’s Corporate Parenting Committee to Minister Daby to request they make representations to the Treasury to reconsider the decision or propose alternative funding.

The Committee asked for further details about the Community Champions pilot. They were advised that the pilot had been scoped but more funding was required to start that. Adoption England had been given more funding meaning Adopt London West could continue with its Black Adoption Project and use other pots of money for other work. Committee members had previously attended a workshop on the Black Adoption Project which had led to the project as it was now, which had an active stakeholder group and was built on the principles of full coproduction. The Steering Committee had decided the priorities for the project and parents were active members of that. Focus groups with young people had also taken place in shaping the project and key themes from those focus groups were around friendship, connection and being with young people with the same experiences as them. They also fed back that they would like work to focus on their Black identity and heritage.

Noting the underrepresentation of Black adopters, the Committee asked how representative the adopter cohort was. Debbie Gabriel responded that there were some disparities, and the work of the project aimed to narrow that gap, but research showed that Black children were 12 times more likely to have their care plan changed away from adoption as the service could not identify adopters. Where children had mixed heritage the service looked to place them with families who closely resembled them as much as possible, but it was difficult due to the complexity of children’s profiles. Where it was not possible to match heritage but an adopter fulfilled the remainder of criteria for that child then a match would be made, but for some children it was right to wait.

In relation to the performance data on the average time taken for a child entering care to be placed for adoption, the Committee asked if there was any insight into that. Officers advised that performance variance was due to the small cohort of children and could be the result of significant delays due to extended complex care proceedings, the individual needs of the child impacting the availability of suitable adopters and the change in adoption proceedings giving parents more abilities to challenge an adoption process in the court. When a parent relinquished a child, there were children’s rights for them to be placed in their families, so there was a need to explore all options available before coming to a final decision. As such the adoption process was extremely heavily regulated and procedural within law and guidance. It was added that Brent accommodated relinquished babies and had a signed agreement with the parent to place the child with foster carers. Some adopters also got approved as temporary foster carers, so, where possible, the child could be placed with potential adopters.