Care Leaver Payment: consultation analysis

3 Name and purpose of the payment (Q1 and Q2)

3.1 This chapter presents respondents’ views regarding the first two consultation questions, which asked about the proposed name of the payment – i.e. Care Leaver Payment – and its purpose.

3.2 The consultation paper explained that the purpose of the Care Leaver Payment is to help reduce some of the financial barriers that young people face when moving on from care into adulthood and more independent living. Questions 1 and 2 invited views on (i) the extent to which the proposed name of the payment reflected its purpose and intention, and (ii) whether the payment can fulfil its intended purpose.

Question 1: How well do you think the name of the payment represents its purpose and intention? [Name of the payment represents the purpose and intention of the payment / Name of the payment somewhat represents the purpose and intention of the payment / Name of the payment does not represent the purpose and intention of the payment]

Please explain your answer and provide any names you think would be more suitable.

Question 2: Do you think the payment can fulfil the purpose set out above? [Yes / No / Unsure]

Please explain your answer.

Extent to which the name represents its purpose and intention (Q1)

3.3 Question 1 asked how well the proposed name of the payment (Care Leaver Payment) represented its purpose and intention. Table 3.1 shows that, overall, 49% of respondents thought the name represented the purpose and intention of the payment, 43% thought it somewhat did so, and 8% thought it did not represent the purpose and intention of the payment.

3.4 Around half of both organisations (50%) and individuals (48%) thought the proposed name of the payment represented its purpose and intention. The remaining 50% of organisations thought the name somewhat represented its purpose and intention. Among individuals, however, just over a third (36%) thought the name somewhat represented its purpose and intention, while 15% thought that the name of the payment did not represent its purpose and intention (no organisation gave this view).

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

3.5 Respondents were asked to explain their answers and provide any names they thought would be more suitable. Altogether 47 respondents – 29 organisations and 18 individuals – provided comments and the views expressed are discussed here.

The payment name represents its purpose and intention

3.6 Respondents who thought the proposed name of the payment represented its purpose and intention described it as ‘self-explanatory’, ‘straightforward’, ‘clear’, ‘concise’, ‘precise’, ‘short and simple’. Some pointed out that the term ‘care leaver’ is defined in legislation and therefore makes clear who the payment is intended for. At the same time, however, some went on to offer suggestions for alternative names which they thought were better or – more often – to express caveats and / or concerns about (i) definitional issues (specifically in relation to the distinction between ‘care experienced’ and ‘care leaver’) and (ii) the use of the term ‘care leaver’ specifically. These issues are discussed below.

The payment name does NOT or SOMEWHAT represents its purpose and intention

3.7 Those who thought the name of the payment did not represent its purpose and intention, or that it only somewhat did so, made several different points. Some described the name of the payment as ‘vague’ or ‘potentially stigmatising’, or said it gives a negative impression – ‘as if you are being paid to leave care’ – or that it might be perceived as an ‘incentive’ to leave care in cases where Continuing Care should be prioritised. Others in this group thought the proposed name made clear who the payment is intended for, but not its purpose. Respondents in this group often suggested alternative names (see paragraph 3.14 below) and / or they expressed similar concerns to the group above in relation to definitions and the inclusion of the term ‘care leaver’ in the name.

Definition and terminology issues

3.8 A range of respondents (both organisations and individuals) commented on issues relating to definitions and terminology. Regardless of how they answered the closed question, respondents wanted the terminology used in relation to the payment to be clear and consistent to avoid confusion and challenge. Some commented that earlier proposals for the payment appeared to cover all people with care experience, whereas the current proposal focused more narrowly on care leavers. They pointed out that there is a legal definition of ‘care leaver’, but no legal definition of ‘care experienced’. (From April 2015 any young person who ceases to be looked after by a local authority on or after their 16th birthday is classified as a ‘care leaver’.^[5]) At the same time, respondents noted that the term ‘care experienced’ is sometimes used interchangeably with the term ‘care leaver’.

3.9 Respondents emphasised that these two terms are not the same and stated that ‘care experienced’ covers a larger group of people than ‘care leaver’.^[6] Respondents who raised this point also often said that they thought the payment should be available to all ‘care experienced’ people.

3.10 Thus, in their view, the issue of definition was not only relevant to the name of the payment, but also to the question of eligibility. (Respondents’ views on eligibility are discussed in detail in Chapter 4.) These respondents wanted to see clarity about definitions, with some calling for the development of a universally understood and accepted definition of ‘care experience’.^[7]

3.11 In addition, a range of respondents thought the term ‘care leaver’ should not be included in the name of the payment. Several different points were made about this terminology:

• First, there was a suggestion that this term does not reflect the current approach being taken in Scotland (as set out in ‘Keep The Promise’) to support and understand the needs of young people with care experience at a key stage in their lives. Some suggested that the term ‘care leaver’ implies that leaving care is like a ‘cliff edge’ – a point where there is no going back.
• Second, there were concerns that the proposed name might unintentionally encourage some young people to leave Continuing Care placements before they are ready to do so. Respondents who raised this issue thought that any communications about the payment should emphasise, and be supportive of, a gradual transition into adult life. Communications should also be clear that the payment does not preclude care leavers from receiving Continuing Care.
• Finally, some respondents pointed out that experiences of being in care vary greatly for young people, and not everyone wants other people to know that they have been in care. For these young people, ‘care leaver’ is a stigmatising label.

Suggested alternative names

3.12 Regardless of their answers to the closed question, respondents often suggested alternative names for the proposed Care Leaver Payment. In some cases, these suggestions were general in nature – for example, some thought the name should incorporate the concepts of ‘independence’, ‘transition’ or ‘future’ (rather than ‘leaving care’). Other suggestions were that it should include ‘young people’ in the name, or that the name should make clear that it is a ‘one-off’ payment.

3.13 As discussed above, respondents often wanted to avoid the term ‘care leaver’ altogether. Others wanted the payment to be refocused on young people with care experience (e.g. those aged 15–26), rather than care leavers.

3.14 Specific suggestions were:

• Care Transition Payment
• Transitions Payment
• Transition Support Payment
• Support Grant
• Care Experienced Payment
• Care Experienced Young Person’s Grant
• Care Leaver Payment for 16+
• Financial Assistance as You Move On to Independent Living
• Home Start-up Payment
• Independent Living Payment.

3.15 Finally, organisational respondents of all types urged the Scottish Government to consult children, young people, and young adults with care experience about the name to ensure it is suitable and sounds ‘comfortable’ for the intended recipients.

Can the payment fulfil its purpose? (Q2)

3.16 Question 2 asked respondents if they thought the payment can fulfil the purpose for which it is intended – that is, to help reduce some of the financial barriers that young people face when moving on from care into adulthood and more independent living. Table 3.2 shows that, overall, 48% of respondents thought the payment can fulfil the purpose set out and 14% thought it cannot. The remaining 38% of respondents said they were unsure.

3.17 Around two-fifths of organisations (43%) and half of individuals (52%) thought the payment can fulfil the purpose set out. However, organisations were more likely to say they were ‘unsure’ than to answer ‘yes’ to this question. Compared to organisations, a relatively large proportion of individuals (1 in 5) thought the payment cannot fulfil its purpose.

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

3.18 Respondents were asked to explain their answers and altogether, 59 respondents – 34 organisations and 25 individuals – provided further comments.

Respondents thought the payment CAN fulfil the purpose intended

3.19 Those who answered ‘yes’ at Question 2 generally thought that the payment would be welcomed by young people with care experience and that it would help reduce some of the financial barriers this group face when leaving care. However, respondents who answered ‘yes’ also often expressed caveats, saying the payment would only fulfil its purpose if a range of supports and other financial assistance were also made available.

Respondents thought the payment CANNOT fulfil the purpose intended

3.20 Those who answered ‘no’ generally did so because they thought a payment of £2,000 was insufficient (‘like putting a plaster on a broken leg’), or unlikely to have a significant positive effect on the lives of young people leaving care. Some individuals in this group suggested that young care leavers do not need money; rather, they need other types of support (such as ‘therapeutic support’ or ‘mental health services’). Those who answered ‘no’ were also concerned that young people receiving this amount of money without supervision or support would be at risk of financial exploitation or other potential harms.

Respondents were UNSURE if the payment can fulfil its purpose

3.21 Some of those who answered ‘unsure’ thought the payment would be a helpful contribution to the financial challenges care leavers face, but was unlikely to entirely fulfil its intended purpose. That is, it would not, by itself, address the longer-term financial barriers encountered by young people with care experience. Others thought that a one-off payment may not be the best way to reduce financial barriers. These respondents thought such a payment could, in fact, be detrimental if the right support was not provided to help young people make good use of it.

3.22 Some respondents also questioned who would define the specific purpose(s) of the payment and who would determine if the purpose(s) had been fulfilled after payments had been made.

Caveats to respondents’ views

3.23 Irrespective of how respondents answered the initial closed question, they often made similar points in their comments saying that the extent to which the payment is able to fulfil its purpose will depend on: (i) providing guidance, support, and advice alongside any financial payment to young people with care experience, and (ii) providing a wider range of financial support to young people with care experience.

3.24 Both of these points are discussed in detail later in this report. (See Chapters 6 and 9 for a discussion of respondents’ views on the support that should be made available to payment recipients, and Chapter 11 for a discussion about the wider financial support needed by young people with care experience.)