Children's Homes (Hansard, 10 January 2005)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Filkin)
My Lords, the national minimum standards for children's homes were introduced in April 2002 and they require that looked-after children receive services from suitably trained, supervised and competent staff. During its inspections, the Commission for Social Care Inspection assesses compliance with the standards and regulations and listens to children's views. While there has been significant progress in staff training and supervision, there is still more for providers of homes to do before we can be confident that the standards are being fully achieved.

§ The Earl of Listowel
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply and I acknowledge the commitment of the Government in this area. Is he aware of the final comment of the childcare expert who contributed to the Channel 4 Dispatches documentary, "Profiting from Kids in Care", when he said that the least trained, least qualified staff were working with the most troubled and difficult children in the homes investigated? Can the Minister summarise the difference in training for residential childcare staff in this country compared with the two to three-year training commonly provided in Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden and other continental countries?

§ Lord Filkin
My Lords, having watched a recording of that programme recently, I am not surprised that the comment was made, given the seriousness of the findings in the programme about the practice in one or two children's homes. On how the training for residential childcare staff differs from that in other northern European countries, as the noble Earl knows, those countries have a system called pedagogy which looks at the totality of a child's development, which is different from the practice and tradition in our society. I believe that there will be convergence, through the Children Act, on ensuring that children in all settings, particularly in children's homes and in looked-after situations, achieve the full outcomes set out in the Act. Therefore, I believe that, as a consequence, the thrust will be on how to ensure that local authorities, working with other providers, achieve better outcomes for looked-after children.

§ Baroness Howarth of Breckland
My Lords, I recognise the variation in practice demonstrated in the programme, but does the Minister agree that our residential childcare staff deal with our most difficult, disturbed and emotionally traumatised young people and that many of them do so magnificently? Can he explain why they have fewer opportunities than 10 teachers or medical staff for further training and development? Will the new registration of social workers make a difference to that?

§ Lord Filkin
My Lords, the noble Baroness has asked three important questions. She is right that the needs of many, if not all, children in children's homes are some of the greatest of any children in our society for reasons that I am sure are self-evident to the House. In a couple of weeks' time, I shall be discussing with the Commissioner for Social Care Inspection whether the standards are being met sufficiently or fast enough. I want to be assured that the expectations on children's homes, however or by whoever they are provided, as regards the standard of training of their staff is being met as rapidly as is realistic. Therefore, I wish to have a discussion with the commissioner, and no doubt also with the directors of social services, about whether we are making progress as fast as we can.
Clearly, that issue opens up the question of whether we have sufficient entry routes for training, including higher training, for residential care staff. I agree with the noble Baroness that if these children are, as we know they are, some of the most vulnerable, we have to ensure that there are adequate trained staff and supply routes for staff to become adequately trained. I shall be looking at such issues.

§ Baroness Sharp of Guildford
My Lords, will the Minister tell the House what proportion of staff working in children's residential homes have the minimum qualification—namely, an NVQ level three— and whether there is any possibility that Sir William Utting's proposals about a centre for excellence for training will be implemented?

§ Lord Filkin
My Lords, the noble Baroness has got me on that one. I have about 35 different figures here and I cannot spot the specific one she has asked for. Nevertheless, I shall write to her and place a copy in the Library. As part of the review about which I spoke earlier, I shall consider Sir William Utting's report and the point that she made.

§ Baroness Howe of Idlicote
My Lords, in light of the continuing appalling educational levels achieved by children in local authority residential homes, what more do the Government believe needs to be done to ensure that the necessary extra trained educational support in each local authority home is provided?

§ Lord Filkin
My Lords, that is an excellent and important question that I hope every local authority is currently asking itself. They all have a duty now to consider how to raise the educational attainment of looked-after children. For reasons on which we can speculate, the outcomes are very poor, as the House knows. Undoubtedly, one element is to ensure that there is greater stability and that children are not moved constantly from one place to another, from one school to another. A second is the level of expectation by carers, whether foster parents or those in children's homes, to ensure that they really value the importance of education 11 in the lives of the children and to give the kind of support to the children that one would expect a good parent to provide. We must consider not only the quality of care and support given by providers, but also the leadership provided by the local authority on the importance of this agenda at senior member and senior officer level. They have a specific and unique responsibility for some of the most vulnerable children in our society and, so far, we are not doing well enough as regards giving them the opportunities that they need.

§ Earl Howe
My Lords, have the Government any plans to introduce within the new minimum standards currently under review a minimum staff supervision number for those working with children in residential care?

§ Lord Filkin
My Lords, as the noble Earl signalled, we are currently undertaking an overarching review to see whether the current national minimum standards in their form and focus are best fit for the purpose of the wider pedagogic goals of the Children Act. Clearly, as part of that review, we shall consider whether the standards require review. The point made by the noble Earl is undoubtedly one point to which we shall turn our minds—whether one needs to specify input standards like that or whether, as ever, one should think about outcomes.