'Moving On' from care into adulthood: consultation analysis

3. Accessing information, services and support

This chapter presents an analysis of questions about the information that is available to young people moving on from care, and the adults in their life. The questions explore what information is required and how this can be made available in an accessible and timely manner. More specifically, Q4 to Q6 examine information and support requirements for young people who return home to live with their birth family, Q7 to Q9 cover Continuing Care, Q10 to Q12 Aftercare and Q13 and Q14 lifelong care.

Q3. How can we ensure young people receive the right support and guidance to build the life skills they need for adulthood before they move on from care?

Improved consistency of support

Three quarters of respondents commented at Q3. A common theme was the need for consistent support, notably from a key, trusted adult. This was emphasised both in responses to Q3 and across other questions. Suggestions for who could act as a trusted adult included adults in clubs or the community, social workers, foster carers and mentors. However, the quality of the relationship was considered more relevant than any specific role. Respondents felt a trusted adult should spend time listening to young people, build a relationship, model healthy behaviours and attitudes, respond effectively and action any plans, as well as stick to commitments made. The benefits of relationship-based support were given. This included providing someone young people could rely on if other supports fell through, linking them with relevant services and offering a sense of security and safety.

Better access to support or information

Another common theme across the consultation questions was the need for improved information and support for children and young people moving on from care. Respondents highlighted issues with the availability of, and access to, supports such as adapted information resources, mental health and wellbeing supports, suitable housing options and community-based provision. Ensuring young people receive the right guidance and support to meet their individual needs and enable flexible choices was often noted. For instance, East Lothian Council Children’s Services shared details of their tenancy award schemes, which they considered helpful and usually in line with young people’s readiness to move on. They suggested an expansion of similar initiatives could be useful.

Suggested life skills delivery

The types of life skills young people leaving care might need, or how life skills initiatives could be provided, was another common theme. Suggested life skills included financial management skills, such as paying bills and budgeting, self-care or relational skills, home economics and household management skills.

Ways of delivering life skills included:

• Using certificated modules.
• Through carers or schools.
• Developing a shared understanding of what life skills mean.
• Ensuring knowledge is translated into skills.

“By providing them with the opportunities to develop basic skills; ensuring that both foster carers and residential staff have this as part of their care plan and it is reviewed on a regular basis.” - Individual

Inverclyde Council’s Practice Pad was shared as an example of good practice. Practice Pad provides a house where young people can learn independent living skills through overnight experiences or longer stays.

“This initiative aims to better prepare them for taking on the responsibility of their own tenancies, give them space to consider if moving on at that time is right for them, and to reduce failed tenancies.” - Scottish Throughcare and Aftercare Forum (Staf)

Improved planning or multi-agency arrangements

Providing a needs-led, individualised response through robust pathways for young people was recommended by several respondents. It was suggested that this could be achieved through better assessment, planning and review processes. Better joint planning and working was recommended in the following areas:

• Evidencing the GIRFEC approach in pathways planning.
• Additional specialist assessments or planning for those with specific additional support needs.
• Clarification of the role of wider corporate parents working together.

“Young people should get supported according to need rather than age, what you need to be able to have those things. The start of the conversation shouldn’t be about moving out before checking ‘are you ready’ i.e. what skills you already have. This should consistently part of pathways planning at the earlier stage i.e. how to build the skills.” – Individual

Increased awareness and understanding

Several respondents suggested an enhanced awareness and understanding among staff supporting young people preparing to leave care. A better understanding of the issues faced by young people preparing to leave care was suggested, such as recognition of the impact of trauma, transitions and challenges faced. In addition, the need to have a thorough understanding of available supports and entitlements was emphasised, particularly among those who have a key role in supporting young people, such as those adopting a trusted adult role. Guidance, toolkits and training were suggested as ways to achieve this.

Address relational or wellbeing needs

Providing emotional support or recording emotional needs in plans was recommended by some respondents. Suggestions included recording evidence of ‘readiness’ of young people to discuss moving on, providing mental health support and addressing how to set and manage boundaries and navigate health care.

Improved access to representation

Ensuring adequate support for children and young people regarding who could represent them or encouraging self-representation was suggested by several respondents. This included individual representation through advocacy, carers or peer support, and through collective representation such as local Champions Boards. Stirling Council highlighted work its Champions Board had undertaken on tenancy sustainability and developing life skills through their ‘pre-tenancy preparation’. This work assists young people in developing skills before they are ready to embark on qualifications such as the SQA Tenancy Skills Award. Goal 17 Ltd mentioned the benefits of voluntary support and mentoring, which they provide. They suggested that this provides support to people with care experience and also provides people with greater insight into care experience, giving them the knowledge to champion care issues within the community.

Access to practical support

Ensuring young people had access to practical support was advocated by some respondents. Meeting immediate needs for shelter, food, warmth and digital access was recommended, along with access to, or help understanding, documents such as pay slips, National Insurance or tax contributions. West Lothian Council noted they had developed an ‘independence checklist’ to consider the practical knowledge and experience young people need prior to leaving care.

Less mentioned themes, in order of prevalence, included providing better access to training for social workers, better support for those with additional support needs and provision of service directories.

Enhanced involvement of carers

Some respondents felt providing training or support for carers would be useful or suggested improved involvement of carers in planning discussions. Suggestions for training were aligned to those noted for professionals above. Examples include understanding their role in relation to transitions or encouraging trauma-informed and reparative parenting approaches. Meeting carers’ needs for support, such as therapy, preventative or intensive support, or advocacy was also recommended by these respondents.

Support when returning to live with birth families

As noted in the consultation paper, The Promise states that families who have had a child removed should not be abandoned. These families must continue to be provided with therapeutic support, advocacy and engagement in line with the principles of intensive family support.

Some young people leaving care return home to live with their birth family and the Scottish Government wishes to support families to ensure it is safe and in the best interest of the young person when doing so.

Q4. What services and support should be considered and provided to a care leaver who returns home to live with their birth family?

Ensure families have access to support

Two thirds of respondents answered Q4. Providing family-based support when a young person returns to the family home was a common theme. This support was felt important to be delivered to the whole family, including siblings, or to parents themselves for the purpose of enabling sustained and robust arrangements. A range of ways this could be achieved were suggested, including through mediation, family therapy, parenting support, opportunities to ‘drop-in’, support groups and intensive or 24/7 support. Some highlighted difficulties sourcing such support or noted the current focus was on supporting the young person, not their family. For instance, Barnardo’s Scotland noted that community-based family support would be “hugely beneficial” to young people leaving care who return to live with their birth parents. Barnardo’s Scotland response was clear that positive progress has been made with initiatives such as the Scottish Government’s Whole Family Wellbeing Fund, however, did note that more needs to be done.

Continued support for young people

Another common theme was calls for ongoing support for young people, like that described above, such as advocacy, information and support. For instance, the British Psychological Society felt young people should be offered supported time out of the house, for example to engage in activities or education, which could provide respite from family and any issues occurring within the family home.

Several respondents also advocated for emotional and wellbeing support for young people to help address trauma and navigate family relationships. Several respondents called for enhanced communication with young people, such as contact with a trusted adult or regular ‘check-ins’ with a professional. Enabling understanding of the reasons for the original removal from family care was suggested by one individual. Adequate planning was also recommended by some, to prepare families and the young person for the return home.

Aberlour mentioned the Glasgow Intensive Family Support Service, where they have been commissioned to provide a ‘whole family’ approach to supporting young people.

“The support around the family is crucial to managing these relationships and building resilience within the home environment to help all members of the family gain the tools and skills necessary to maintain positive and healthy relationships for the future.” - Aberlour

Attendees at the engagement event with Cyrenians noted that opportunities to identify those with neurodivergence should happen as early as possible and that better use of third sector services by those in statutory services should occur to ensure whole family support.

For instance, attendees highlighted secure care could provide reports on how to support neurodiverse individuals, to help increase understanding around causes of behaviour, and that these reports could be provided earlier.

Ensuring young people have options after they leave care

The need to make sure young people have options to return to care, find alternative accommodation or have access to support, should they need it, was emphasised by several respondents. This was felt necessary should relationships at home become strained or breakdown. Suggested supports included ensuring access to accommodation or care placements and contact with trusted adults, or maintaining connections from their time in care. Contingency planning, highlighting support options, was suggested by a small number of respondents.

Financial or practical support

Providing families and young people with financial or practical support was suggested by several respondents. Financial support was the most frequently mentioned type of support in this theme, though further explanation was rarely provided. Other considerations included the need for young people to have their own space, for instance near family or for respite, addressing barriers around travel and enabling access to documents, such as bank account details, National Insurance numbers, passports or birth certificates. Stirling Council highlighted the importance of ensuring material needs are covered and that financial strains do not become a reason for a further breakdown of young people’s living arrangements.

Other themes

A wide range of comments were left by several respondents. These included providing optional, rather than mandatory, support; identifying and supporting specific additional needs; resource implications of enhanced support; and recognition that provision of support to young people leaving care can be challenging due to non-engagement or complex issues that need to be addressed.

Q5. Can you provide examples of good practice where services have worked together in a holistic way to support birth families and young people moving on from care when the young person returns to live with their birth family?

Providing intensive family support

Over half of respondents answered Q5. Several respondents gave examples of intensive support for families and young people. These included family group decision making, functional family therapy, dedicated practitioners or coordinators, and wrap-around support. Descriptions of strategies and interventions included help creating routines, learning life skills, improving relationships and maximising income.

“We have a Request for Assistance process which allows support to be called up locally from our alternative to care provision to offer high levels of support to enable a community pathway to progress to reunify with birth family.” – Aberdeen City Council

“Giving parents the help of a trained Family Support Foster Carer who can ‘step up’ when the parents need it and ‘step down’ when they are in a better place to care for their children.” – The Fostering Network

Some also highlighted the importance of working with parents to ensure good housing solutions, links to community supports, and increased confidence in caring. One organisation highlighted the case of a father who was supported to receive an assessment, which resulted in a formal diagnosis and an increased understanding of his needs and behaviours.

Good inter-agency working arrangements

Some left comments on what they felt good inter-agency planning and working looks like. Views included that starting planning early had resulted in culture shifts, enabled holistic, wide-ranging support to be provided and could support the return of young people to family homes. Named planning processes included ‘Looked After Child: my meetings’, Pathway and Welfare reviews, and rehabilitation plans. The British Psychological Society gave an example of a multi-disciplinary team which included psychology and family service support, child and youth care workers and a social worker. In this case, it was noted the family and young person fully engaged with the services supporting them.

Specific support or service examples

Aspects of support which were considered successful in supporting families, or specific services, were mentioned by some respondents. Examples included:

• A sibling support worker provided as part of a family’s involvement with the Rosemount Project. This project is a crisis support service aimed at preventing children going into care in North Ayrshire.
• An intensive outreach service and links to supports such as mediation, education and housing services provided by East Lothian Council Children's Services.
• Cyrenians’ Keeping Families Together service that provides whole family support and mediation to young people in secure care and their families.
• Provision of mentoring support and guidance to families from carers as part of Step Up Step Down, a programme which supports families to stay together. Support from these carers was felt to be more acceptable to families than from those working for formal services.
• Life Long Links provide information about family members to young people, who may previously have had limited information about their wider family members.

Enhanced support for young people

Examples of enhanced or intensive support available to young people were given by some respondents, including an educational support worker who was involved in meetings for young people transitioning from one area to another, links with local Champions Boards to provide a voice for young people and to empower them to work to change the care system, and the provision of scaffolding and maintaining support from a named contact.

Phased transitions

Some felt a phased approach to returning to the family home was helpful. It was suggested that this approach could help identify and address any difficulties at an early stage, allow for a gradual increase in overnight stays and the development of independent living skills to reduce reliance on the family, and build and strengthen relationships.

Other themes

A few respondents suggested good risk assessments were required, emphasised the need for empathic, non-punitive responses or gave examples of the system not working.

Q6. How do we ensure that young people with care experience, and those who provide them with care, can easily access information about entitlements and support?

Ways to provide information

Over two thirds of respondents answered Q6. Several respondents provided suggestions on how information should be shared with young people and those who care for them. The main suggestion was through digital channels, notably websites, ‘apps’ and social media. Other suggestions included community events and workshops, written materials such as leaflets and booklets, and postal information. Some suggested a 'one-stop' approach, using collated information from all services. The distribution of information through existing platforms was highlighted, including use of the 'Mind Of My Own' (MOMO) app, Young Scot and a bespoke Facebook group.

Some respondents also suggested distributing information through universal services, most notably through education, such as on school noticeboards or through Personal and Social Education classes. Other suggestions were through local authorities or Health and Social Care Partnership websites and community services such as GP surgeries, libraries and community centres. MyBnk, a UK charity which provides financial education to young people, recommended that local authorities consider an easy-to-navigate, central online hub to assist young people with care experience, and their carers, by providing information about local services, entitlements and third sector supports.

Enhance the ability of workforce to deliver information

Several respondents felt that professionals involved in supporting young people and their families, such as health and social workers, advocates, corporate parents, Transition Teams and education providers, should be able to provide information or signposting. This could involve upskilling staff to stay up to date with information on entitlements, processes and services. A key worker or coordinator could also be designated as a point of contact. A few also highlighted the role of advocacy to help young people realise and use their rights. Glasgow Health and Social Care Partnership called for greater consistency in information provision which does not rely on the individual interests and skills of staff providing the information. For instance, the need for up to date, rights based information, access to independent advocacy, and manager scrutiny to ensure consistent practice were recommended.

Some also highlighted the need for robust planning systems and multi-agency teams as a way to provide information. Suggestions included ensuring regular care plan reviews and having a robust Throughcare and Aftercare Service with timely referrals to it. Dumfries and Galloway Council reaffirmed the importance of building partnerships between social services and other agencies and services, such as mental health providers, drug and alcohol services, and criminal justice services to ensure all are helping to create a ‘safety net’ for young people with care experience.

Ensure information needs are met

Several respondents expressed a range of views and solutions around ensuring information is both accessible and useful. Suggestions included providing child-friendly and adapted materials, tailoring information as required, co-producing it with young people, and making it reliable and consistent. Some respondents highlighted difficulties in sourcing such information. Most frequently mentioned was that information packs on entitlements and supports could be distributed and that a rights-based approach to providing information should be taken.

Information young people needed, according to respondents, included how to access support and grants, including information on eligibility criteria or making referrals; practical information, such as how to open a bank account or access free bus travel; rights and entitlements; and processes and systems. The Care Inspectorate spoke about an initiative they have which includes working with young inspection volunteers during inspections for services for children at risk of harm. They note that the volunteers routinely hear that “outward-facing information is not always child-friendly, accessible or written by and for young people.”

Clan Childlaw noted the importance of ensuring young people and their carers were aware of their rights and understood how to ensure their needs were correctly represented. They suggested young people speak to advocates or independent advisors to make sure local authorities offer the support and services they are obligated to provide.

Examples of practice

Several respondents provided examples of good practice in delivering information on leaving care, including:

• Co-produced ‘Your Right to Continuing Care’ information materials led by young people in conjunction with the Care Inspectorate, alongside CELCIS and Clan Childlaw. This included a webinar and information packs on rights and entitlements.
• The Family Based Care Service in West Lothian, which provides monthly newsletters sent to all fostering households, providing up-to-date information and research on key areas relating to fostering.
• The Getting Ready Project operated by Children in Wales, which delivers resources developed in partnership with care experienced young people.
• Orkney Islands Council funded MyBnk to deliver financial education sessions.

Continuing Care

Continuing Care enables children and young people who cease to be ‘looked after’ on or after their 16^th birthday, and who have been ‘looked after’ in foster, kinship, or residential care, to remain in their care setting with the same level of support until their 21^st birthday.

Q7. Are there any changes you would like to see as part of the eligibility criteria for Continuing Care?

Extend eligibility criteria

Two thirds of respondents answered Q7. Several respondents expressed the view that the Continuing Care eligibility criteria should extend to specific groups of young people with care experience who had stopped being ‘looked after’ before their 16^th birthday. This included young people subject to a Section 11 Kinship Care Order or those in ‘informal’ kinship care. those ‘looked after’ in the family home, those impacted by a breakdown in their adoption and those who were in secure care immediately before ceasing to be ‘looked after’.

“It’s crucial that eligibility criteria consider the unique circumstances of each young person, rather than following rigid guidelines. Currently, there is concern that if a young person exits the care system before age 16, they miss out on Continuing Care entitlements. By introducing more flexibility in the eligibility process, decisions could be made based on the best interests of the young person, ensuring they receive the support they need, regardless of technical cut-off points.” – Dumfries & Galloway Council

“Accessibility to Continuing Care within Informal Kinship care and adoption arrangements. They are often not eligible for a service from Throughcare and Aftercare team. These young people can have similar vulnerabilities to those who have been in residential or foster care and so need ongoing support from services.” - East Lothian Council Children's Services

No need for change

Some felt there was no need to change the eligibility criteria. Reasons included insufficient resources to extend eligibility, that The Promise was improving the quality of support and that the current eligibility criteria worked well when applied properly. Clan Childlaw was critical of extending eligibility if it changed the types of support offered. Their response emphasised that Continuing Care should be about ‘staying put’ and ensuring the needs of young people are best met after age 16.

“It is not helpful to ‘extend the eligibility for continuing care’ if what is meant is making more types of accommodation eligible to be continuing care placements – this would devalue the principle of staying put and relationship-based transition from care and would be likely to have the unintended consequences of both creating a two-tier continuing care system and making even more young people at risk of homelessness.” – Clan Childlaw

Calls for clarity and considering other groups

Some respondents called for Continuing Care to be provided to a wider range of groups or for clarity around eligibility for other groups. This included calls for all those with care experience to be eligible, regardless of whether they were ‘looked after’ on their 16^th birthday. There were also a few calls to consider including neurodivergent young people, those with mental health difficulties or those who do not have the capacity to make their own decisions, It was also suggested that there was a need for clarity over whether young people who had arrived in Scotland as Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children were already eligible for Continuing Care.

The Scottish Children's Reporter Administration noted that Section 26A(5)(c) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 sets out where a local authority does not have a duty to provide Continuing Care to an eligible young person. However, it expressed the view that this section of the 1995 Act should be removed support and that Continuing Care for a wider cohort of young people should be considered.

“It might be that we are applying a wider definition to continuing care – and that we are interpreting it as continuing support to provide care. But this feels right. It seems to be now almost self-evident that a child moving from secure care to no care order may need additional supports; that a child who no longer has the option of remaining with carers requires additional or alternative supports and that if continuing care (in its current form) would be detrimental then a new plan / approach to care needs to be developed – and the new plan would require support.” - Scottish Children's Reporter Administration

A few respondents highlighted the need to consider young people returning from out-of-area placements. For instance, the Care Inspectorate reported they had found from their review of the joint inspection of services for children in need of care and protection 2018-2020 that variations existed in registrations of care placements to accommodate Continuing Care placements. Subsequent issues were highlighted by partnerships on the impact this had on, for example, the young people themselves and also on the resourcing implications for the local authorities involved.

Option to remain in care may be preferable

While not directly related to the eligibility criteria, some respondents commented that, if it better meets the needs of a young person, they should be able to remain in care until they are 18 rather than leaving care at 16 and going to Continuing Care. These comments suggested that, for example, moving on to Continuing Care should happen post-16 at a point when the young person is ready to leave care or called for flexible provision of Continuing Care when it is needed based upon the developmental needs or readiness of a young person to move on. Specifically, the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration and Barnardo’s Scotland noted that in the context of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024, and the incorporation of the UNCRC (United Nations Convention on Rights of a Child), there may be a need to clarify whether care provision continues until the age of 18 and then Continuing Care beyond 18.

“The Staying Put Scotland Guidance emphasises the importance of young people being ‘encouraged, enabled and empowered’ to remain in positive care settings until they have developed the practical skills, emotional readiness and networks of supportive relationships that can underpin successful adult life. The needs of young people do not develop in a linear process and flexibility is required to ensure that the provision of Continuing Care can adapt according to the circumstances of individuals.” – Public Health Scotland

“It should only be on rare occasions that a 16/17 year leaves care to move to Continuing Care. It must be clear why this is a better option for that young person than staying in care until 18.” - Nationwide Association of Fostering Providers

Remove the upper age limit for Continuing Care

In recognition that care leavers may need support for longer than their peers, a small number of respondents called for the upper age limit for providing Continuing Care to be removed.

Other themes

Several respondents left general comments on suggested changes to Continuing Care arrangements. These included several who called for more funding for this aspect of support, some who called to raise awareness of Continuing Care, and a few who called for better support arrangements. These issues are addressed in the next question (Q8).

Q8. What additional support do you think is required for families, professionals and practitioners who are responsible for providing Continuing Care arrangements?

Greater awareness or access to information

Three fifths of respondents answered Q8. A common theme was the suggestion that greater knowledge and understanding of Continuing Care was required. Specific awareness gaps included the consequences for young people of ending support early, Corporate Parent responsibilities, an understanding of processes, the nature of Continuing Care provision and learning from other approaches.

Public Health Scotland, for example, highlighted useful learning from approaches such as Family Nurse Partnerships or Community Link Workers in primary care on issues such as stigma, referral processes, eligibility, holistic approaches, trauma-informed practice and the ‘what matters to you’ approach. Other suggested ways to deliver this were similar to those noted in Q6, such as through a central resource, or through training and guidance.

More funding support

Several respondents called for more funding, either to fund services or to increase amounts available for young people and their carers. In order of prevalence, suggestions included the need for more funding for foster carers, a need for increased resources more generally for Continuing Care and for residential placements, and to provide financial support or bursaries for young people.

A reduction in funding for foster carers after a young person reaches 18, or when’ looked after’ status ends, was perceived as causing disruption to young people accessing Continuing Care. This could lead to carers re-evaluating their caring role or switching to an area or service that pays more.

Attendees at the engagement event with Social Work Scotland also noted carers felt they were struggling with the allowance when looking after a young adult. The Fostering Network reported findings from their 2024 survey that over half of foster carers said they were worse off as a result of offering Continuing Care. There was a call for a Scottish recommended or minimum allowance for delivering Continuing Care and one respondent suggested the same level of financial support should continue to be given to foster and kinship carers as they received when a child was ‘looked after’.

Some respondents called for more funding for Continuing Care and associated services. Reasons included avoiding young people and their carers facing a ‘financial cliff edge’, ensuring sufficient breadth and availability of support such as residential placements and reimbursing costs for providing Continuing Care for unaccompanied asylum seekers.

A few respondents mentioned the need to extend financial support or bursaries for young people receiving Continuing Care. The Fostering Network recommended ending the practice of expecting young people to contribute to their own allowances and clarifying financial entitlements for young people in Continuing Care who may be living away from their foster family for most of the year, for example, to attend college or university.

Improved care planning arrangements

Suggestions were left by several respondents on how to ensure that robust planning processes are in place. Suggested improvements included having more than a single annual review, so that those involved understand what is expected from placements, awareness of supports which may benefit young people and adopting a broader view of how to achieve outcomes, for instance, moving away from a ‘systems and process’ or overly ‘professionalised’ approach to increase choice, or adopting a ‘more organic’ approach which involves natural conversations about choices or helps create a community of support around the young person. The Care Inspectorate noted that young people in Continuing Care arrangements experienced poorer quality assessment, planning and review processes than other care experienced groups.

Clear and consistent Continuing Care arrangements

Several respondents recommended principles for effective Continuing Care arrangements, such as the need for consistency, improvements in processes and joint working. Within this theme, respondents called for consistency in implementing processes and guidance across local authorities, ensuring a dedicated Continuing Care service, devising a less invasive and shorter process to become an approved foster carer, increasing capacity for Independent Review Officers and using effective recording.

One respondent felt digital tools should be rolled out to help record views, citing My Meeting and Viewpoint as suggested examples. CELCIS called for a presumption that foster carers should provide Continuing Care through to 21 years and for this to be embedded in their recruitment, assessment, registration, induction and ongoing support.

Some also suggested improved joint working arrangements, such as between children’s and adult services, having designated teams in each area and clarity over roles and responsibilities. Greater clarity over expectations of young people, or involving them effectively in decision making, was also recommended by some.

“It is about balancing how you speak to them as children and then young adults – a combination of empowering them and nurturing or supporting them simultaneously. We need to make sure young people know their rights about continuing care.” – East Lothian Council Children’s Services

This was reflected across the engagement events, such as the Staf engagement called the ICC Forum. Attendees spoke about policies and practices differing between local authorities and between children’s and adult services, which make navigating systems difficult for young people, carers and independent advisors or advocates. Moreover, attendees spoke about young people in different areas receiving different levels of care.

Improved delivery of support

Some respondents described ways to enhance support through increased service capacity, access to therapeutic support, enhanced trauma practice standards, support groups or open forums, including those online. Some advocated consistent support or a named contact. A few emphasised the need for flexible support or meeting individual needs.

Carer concerns for welfare

Attendees at the engagement event with Social Work Scotland also spoke about instances where carers felt reluctant to provide continuing support for young people as they get older. They noted that having a young person coming home from a pub or a night out may create problems in a household, specifically if there are also younger children staying.

Q9. How do we ensure that young people, and their views, are heard during discussions on Continuing Care which impact them?

Active and meaningful engagement

Two thirds of respondents answered Q9. A common theme in response to this question was the need for proactive and meaningful discussions with young people. Key components of good engagement cited by respondents included ensuring young people’s views are central to decisions taken, adopting trauma-informed and sensitive approaches, providing feedback such as ‘you said, we did’ and enabling staff or advocacy representation.

Suggested tools for engagement with young people included visual aids, voting or questionnaires, the MOMO app, social media and the My Meeting model. Some respondents highlighted the need for accessible structures and processes to make it easier for young people to contribute their views, such as using informal settings or using clear and simple language.

One individual raised the need for a welfare-led approach when considering the views of young people:

”Young people I have worked with have been determined to get their own flat at 16, then beforehand, through discussions, realised that they're maybe not ready or would feel very isolated to go straight to that from a supported residential care setting, and therefore we were able to map out the correct path for them. Listen to them but understand what they are asking for and why, and then question if it is the best and most suitable for them (I know what I wanted in life at 16 years of age was wildly different to what I knew I was capable of managing at 18 years of age).” – Individual

This was reflected in notes from engagement events. At the Hub for Success engagement event, one young person spoke about thinking she knew what she wanted in terms of living arrangements, but not understanding the implications of her choice and being unprepared for independent living, in hindsight.

Advocacy and peer support

Using advocates to support young people in discussions was suggested by several respondents. They viewed this as a means to ensure rights are upheld, make sure young people’s views are heard and help overcome communication barriers. Who Cares? Scotland noted they are funded to provide independent advocacy in all local authority areas across Scotland, though highlighted differences in contracts which resulted in varied levels of provision, with waiting lists existing in several areas.

This was also reflected in the engagement session with STAF on Supported Lodgings and Supported Carers, where respondents discussed the benefits of Champions Boards and the participation of Children’s Rights Officers on different panels. They noted that while these small changes are helping, there is still more work to do in this area.

Provide choices and options

Several respondents emphasised the need to offer young people a range of options for expressing their views or accessing support. Suggestions included providing information in a range of formats, allowing various forms of communication, allowing them to choose who consults with them and providing comprehensive information on available support.

Early and ongoing engagement

Enabling early and ongoing discussions with young people was viewed by several respondents as a way to ensure meaningful engagement. Suggested ways this could be achieved included through introducing young people to a Throughcare and Aftercare worker at an early stage, gradually introducing the idea of moving on and building confidence in workers and young people to discuss the topic. Some felt having a social worker or trusted adult who had built relationships with the young people involved could facilitate meaningful discussions.

At the engagement event held by The Fostering Network Young Peoples Advisory Board, a young person spoke about themself and others approaching the end of their foster care arrangements without knowing who their social worker was, having had no contact or information from them. They spoke about not being aware of a support network nor feeling well informed about the transition.

One third sector provider raised the need for young people’s views to be heard not only in individual pathway planning but also in terms of service provision overall. It highlighted the transfer of one of its services to the local authority without consultation of the young people using the service who had built up close relationships with existing staff members, causing significant disruption to the service.

Documenting discussions

Some respondents raised the need to ensure young people’s views are clearly recorded by professionals, particularly during planning processes. Singular suggestions included that informal discussions should also be recorded, that views should be noted and presented even if a young person was not present, having someone available to explain past records to young people who request them and involving young people in writing their care plans.

Aftercare

Advice, guidance and assistance beyond universal services for people leaving care from age 16 is called Aftercare. All young people, regardless of their placement type, who cease to be ‘looked after’ on or after their 16^th birthday, and who are not supported through Continuing Care, are eligible for Aftercare until their 19^th birthday. Then, subject to an assessment of need by their local authority, they may continue to receive Aftercare support until their 26^th birthday, and potentially beyond. Local authorities develop and record pathway plans when needs are identified. These plans will show how the young person’s needs will be met through Aftercare.

Q10. How can we make sure young people can access the range of support they need when they leave care through the provision of Aftercare?

Better access to support and resources

Two thirds of respondents answered Q10. A call for increased access to information, support and resources was a common theme, with issues raised aligned to those described under Q8, such as the need for increased awareness of Aftercare, flexible needs-based support, named people for young people to contact, such as college liaison leads or a worker in social services, having specialist teams or dedicated resources such as English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) workers and providing education on ‘what it means to become an adult’. Respondents highlighted a shortage of resources, which stretches the capacity of services and teams.

In addition, ensuring appropriate housing and tenancy management was raised by some, with group living accommodation showing success according to Dumfries & Galloway Council. The need for a trusted adult was further emphasised by several respondents. Some also called for early engagement with young people and placed importance on ensuring young people's views are respected.

A number of examples, where specific supports worked well, were provided within responses. For instance, East Lothian Council suggested the creation of a service similar to Guardianship Scotland which could help young people explore their identity, address trauma and exploitation, develop coping strategies and deal with the challenges of becoming an adult. Another respondent highlighted the Housing First for Youth’s pilot project in West Lothian set up specifically to support those with care experience and a youth housing forum operating in another local authority (not named) where social workers liaise with housing colleagues to discuss the needs of those with care experience. Suggestions were given for initiatives which could be rolled out further, such as Intensive Outreach Teams, projects such as those at Kibble that address housing and tenancy management, more structured step-down accommodation options between secure care, and independent living, peer mentoring services and group living options.

Improved planning, multi-agency working and systems

Another common theme was the need for improved planning, robust systems and multi-agency working to ensure individualised pathways and adequate support are available to young people. Comments reflected the issues and considerations covered earlier in this report. A more joined-up approach between children’s and adult services was also advocated by some, as was the need to listen to young people or ensure access to advocacy. Given young adults may have fewer connections with services than younger people, more assertive outreach approaches were sometimes suggested.

Q11. Are there any changes you would like to see as part of the eligibility criteria for Aftercare?

Extend eligibility criteria

Two thirds of respondents answered Q11. Several respondents called for the eligibility criteria for Aftercare to be extended to other specific groups of young people, particularly those who had ceased being ‘looked after’ before their 16^th birthday. Suggested groups were similar to those in Q7 about Continuing Care, including children in certain types of kinship care and children who have been adopted.

“One potential change to the eligibility criteria for Aftercare would be expanding entitlement to include young people in kinship care, those who were adopted, or those whose care-experience status ended too early to be classified as care leavers. These groups often experience the same vulnerabilities as care leavers and may need similar support, but they fall through the gap under the current criteria. Providing greater entitlement to these young people could address the sense of unfairness they often feel when they return to services and are ineligible for the same support offered to care leavers. This could help ensure that all vulnerable young people receive the Aftercare services they need, regardless of their specific care status.” – Dumfries & Galloway Council

More flexible or discretionary support

Several respondents suggested there should be more flexibility in Aftercare provision, based on a case-by-case assessment of a young person’s needs and discretion over the circumstances where Aftercare would be appropriate.

Remove the upper age limit for Aftercare

Related to calls for greater flexibility, some respondents also called for the upper age limit for Aftercare to be removed. While a few respondents noted that it is already possible to provide discretionary Aftercare beyond 26, others called for a more formal extension beyond 26 to provide longer-term support. One individual noted that extending Aftercare beyond 26 was particularly necessary for disabled people with care experience whom they felt have trouble navigating the adult disability system without advocacy and support.

No change needed

Some public bodies and social work organisations expressed the view that no change was needed. This was not in contrast to the above points, but rather because they suggested they already applied flexibility in their interpretation of the eligibility criteria, providing further assistance when it was needed until 26 and potentially beyond, based on individual need.

“No, support all young people already and any change would only act as a barrier as we would then be stigmatising some young people as opposed to others.” – Perth and Kinross Council

Calls for clarity and considering other groups

As with Continuing Care, some respondents called for all people with care experience to be eligible for Aftercare and two respondents called for further consideration of those with mental health difficulties and neurodevelopmental needs.

“Aftercare should be available for all people with care experience and should be an option from people to return to, even if not taken up when initially leaving care. This continuity of care would ensure that people with care experience have sustained support and pathways to accessing services across the life-course.” – Public Health Scotland

Potential consequences of changing the eligibility criteria

Some respondents highlighted the potential implications of changing the eligibility requirements, particularly on funding and resource allocation. Along with the consideration of resourcing, respondents cited effective implementation and the consistency of service provision across Scotland as factors to consider within any changes to eligibility requirements.

“Members also note the importance of ensuring that the current support to care leavers is consistent and right before looking at any extensions, the resource implications (financial and workforce) of extending the criteria, and the importance of discussion with adult services about how all those who may need additional support in adulthood are able to find that support through universal services.” - Social Work Scotland

A few organisations suggested that more funding was needed to assist those who receive discretionary Aftercare support. For example, Stirling Council noted that more resources would be needed to ensure all care experienced young people who have additional support needs receive the assistance they require.

Q12. What do you think the challenges would be in changing the eligibility criteria for Aftercare?

Funding

Two thirds responded to Q12. A common theme highlighted by respondents on challenges with changing the eligibility criteria for Aftercare was around service funding and workforce capacity. Respondents noted that funding would need to increase to meet the likely additional demand.

“Both financial resources and our workforce are stretched to the limit already, and any extension to eligibility criteria could not be met without investment.” - Shetland Islands Council

A few others also noted that although eligibility criteria are necessary to manage the cost of providing support; criteria, limits, and thresholds can often be seen as barriers because they are perceived as too rigid, and can be off-putting to young people leaving care. Whilst not directly related to the challenges of changing the eligibility criteria, Who Cares? Scotland highlighted the importance of investing in services such as Aftercare, noting that the Independent Care Review’s “The Money Report” evidenced “the vast economic benefit of investing upstream in measures that prevented people from reaching crisis and requiring costly universal services such as homelessness accommodation, prison or mental health inpatient treatment at a later point”.

Workload and staffing

Similarly, another common theme was highlighting workforce capacity concerns as a challenge when increasing service provision. Respondents were concerned by insufficient numbers of staff, as well as staff turnover, burn out and secondary trauma. Some noted that extending eligibility without additional staffing and funding allocations may compromise the quality of service provided to younger people in care and compete with other social care and social work workforce demands.

Clear guidance to ensure consistency

The importance of having clear guidelines and collaboration across the Scottish Government, local authorities and supporting agencies was mentioned by some. Respondents were concerned about inconsistent approaches and confusion around responsibilities, particularly with Aftercare, between different children’s and adult services, as well as between different local authorities.

“Given there is limited guidance on it, it can be open to interpretation by different councils making it a postcode lottery about the services someone receives.” - East Lothian Council Children's Services

Flexibility

Some respondents highlighted that an inflexible and overly rigid system could impact service provision, even if eligibility were to change. Depending on how future criteria are defined, some respondents noted that continuing to use eligibility criteria may limit the ability to provide a more person-centred approach for some young people with care experience.

“Our experience is that young people will float in and out of requiring support and need to know that the support is there no matter without criteria. We would need [to] ask a young person if they were compulsory supported or not and deem support at a different level because of that. We believe strongly that some young people will need more support than others because of their circumstances and that support should be based on need rather than as a result of criteria.” - Perth and Kinross Council

Lifelong Support

Those with care experience may require access to advice and support at any age. The consultation acknowledges that the impact of care experience can be lifelong and asks how best to provide support for young people for as long as they require it.

Q13. What do you think would be the best way to provide long term support and services to adults with care experience?

Specialist support

Three quarters of respondents answered Q13. A common theme was a recommendation for dedicated or specialist staff in each local authority area to be the main contact for adults with care experience who need more support. This suggestion was most common among individuals. Another suggestion was to create local authority hubs. Regardless of the mechanism of delivery, respondents thought there should be accessible, specialist services in each local authority to ensure people who need support know where to go. One individual suggested a regularly updated website with contacts and resources, and Dumfries and Galloway Council also recommended web-based resources with guidance and links to available support.

Improve transition to adulthood

Several respondents provided different suggestions which would improve the transition to adulthood, providing young people with care experience a stable and solid footing. A few recommended an earlier start to transitions, such as providing support before moving into independent accommodation.

“Support should begin from 15/16 years of age so it’s a consistent approach and not just a new professional being added in once they reach adulthood. Consult with care experienced young people (14 years up) and ask what they think it should look like rather than just the adult view.” – Aberdeen City Council

Others noted the importance of understanding each individual’s needs earlier in the transition process. A small number of local authorities stressed the value of maintaining relationships, as many of their support workers provide informal assistance once Aftercare has ended, although there were no clear statements as to whether those relationships needed to be formalised.

Policies or protocols which enable adult services to enquire and understand whether the person they are assisting has care experience was mentioned by several respondents. Collecting this information when adults register for support would help the agency involved to signpost recipients to services and supports best suited to meet their needs.

A small number of respondents also mentioned support for those leaving care to access education, apprenticeships or employment if needed, which is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

Trauma support

Continued access to support for mental health was recommended by several respondents. They noted that many young people faced traumatic experiences in their childhood and would need continued assistance. Some did not specify whether tailored support was needed. However, others thought that counselling should be targeted to help young people overcome trauma or specific experiences related to their childhood in care.

“Counselling to address childhood trauma and not just see it as regular counselling.” – Individual

Others emphasised that the services provided to people with care experience should all be trauma-informed. Further recommendations were made to set up hubs, programmes and spaces that are trauma-informed, catering to the specific needs of people with care experience. An individual respondent recommended something akin to an adult branch of Who Cares? Scotland to “provide support, opportunities and training in a trauma-informed way”.

Awareness and challenging the stigma of care experience

Several respondents felt that anyone who works in public services and interacts with people with care experience should challenge any cultural stigma around the care system by raising awareness of care experience. Who Cares? Scotland suggested this be extended to a public education campaign. Aberlour also recommended that young people and adults receive clearer guidance on their rights to access their care history and associated records to “help them understand their childhood and key decisions that have been made on their behalf”.

Multi-agency working

As mentioned at Q1, some reiterated the importance of multi-agency collaboration during the transition to independent living. A few also suggested that people with care experience should have lifelong access to advocacy services when they need them.

Q14. What do you think the challenges would be in providing support and services to adults with care experience?

Resource constraints

Just over two thirds of respondents answered Q14. The most frequently identified challenge was the need for greater funding. Respondents noted that local authority budgets are limited and often ringfenced for specific services. In order to extend support, funding for support and services for adults with care experience would need to be provided.

Some others noted that without proper resourcing and capacity within services, adults with care experience may not receive the support they need. Service cut-offs or incorrect types of support could be detrimental.

“Our staff teams shared concerns about the time available to support people versus the complexity of the cases. The third sector often supports people with complex trauma and mental health needs who find it almost impossible to access treatment and counselling. Or if people get a handful of counselling sessions it’s just enough to bring everything up to the surface but not to help them manage that long-term, as one staff member put it: ‘Enough time to break all the eggs without getting anywhere close to making the omelette’.” - Cyrenians

A few respondents noted that capacity within local authority departments was limited. They mentioned that contacting adults who have been out of care for several years could be difficult and require even more staff to prevent a negative impact on working conditions and staff experiencing burnout. CELCIS suggested that improved financial resourcing and expanding workforce capacity would require a commitment at the local and national levels.

Staff training

The need for staff to receive trauma training and upskilling to ensure they can meet their clients’ needs was mentioned by several respondents. Respondent emphasised the importance of trauma-informed training to assist professionals working with adults with care experience. COSLA reiterated that in order to fully support young people with care experience, “a fully resourced, trained and supported workforce is required.”

Stigma

Some respondents suggested that stigma around care experience could affect the take up of services.

“Embarrassment and fear of being judged by society. Society, on the whole, is quite happy to bury its head in the sand and ignore care experienced people or judge them for their actions rather than their past. Persuading society that this is something worth investing in has been, and will continue to be a challenge.” – Individual

Hesitancy to re-engage

A hesitancy to re-engage with social work was a challenge noted by some organisations and a few individuals. They thought that this may make connecting with adults more challenging, especially re-engaging with people who prefer not to be contacted either due to past negative experiences of the care system or who do not wish to be defined by their care experience. Local authorities particularly noted that peoples’ experiences of care are not singular, and consideration needs to be given to how the person feels they were treated. East Lothian Council Children’s Services highlighted that people may not want support, which raises a further challenge to engagement.

“In delivering aftercare support we intend to offer a ‘no wrong door approach’, but when adults don’t feel comfortable opening any door, this is obviously made more difficult.” – Stirling Council

Suggestions and recommendations

Some respondents provided recommendations to assist in the design of services which could provide support to adults with care experience. A few recommended speaking with people with lived experience, consulting on what services they need and how best to work with them. The Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration endorsed this approach.

CELCIS recommended taking a “no wrong door” approach. This would include multidisciplinary teams; an approach also endorsed by another organisation. Aberdeen City Council recommended a lifelong link worker service and adjusting language of the eligibility criteria to remove mentions to age, such as ‘at 16’ and ‘at 18’ and make it more compatible with relational practice. Parenting across Scotland called for funding for organisations that already provide support to adults with care experience who are experiencing homelessness, substance use, mental health problems and offending, such as Scottish Families Affected by Alcohol and Drugs and Families Outside.