Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill: child rights and wellbeing impact assessment

Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment Template

1. Brief Summary

Guidance: See section 2.1.2, pages 12-13 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information)

Type of proposal (Please delete as necessary):

• Bill
• Scottish Statutory Instrument
• Decision of a strategic nature relating to the rights and wellbeing of children

Name the proposal, and describe its overall aims and intended purpose.

In 2020, the Scottish Government promised that all children in Scotland will grow up feeling loved, safe and respected. The Government promised to achieve this by implementing the conclusions of the Independent Care Review by 2030. At the point of concluding, the Care Review has listened to over 5,500 experiences. Over half of the voices were children and young people with experience of the ‘care system’, adults who had lived in care, and lots of different types of families. It was their stories that guided the Care Review and it is their experiences that shaped everything the Care Review has concluded.

Since 2020 a large amount of work has been undertaken to help keep this Promise. This work has focused around ensuring that the right support is available to families at the right time, whether through the Whole Family Wellbeing Fund; the introduction of the Scottish recommended allowance for kinship and foster carers which benefits more than 9,000 families; or the end of the placement of children in young offenders institutions in Scotland.

This Bill has been informed by the key findings of The Independent Care Review, combined with the wide range of engagement and consultation work that has been underway throughout 2024 and 2025. This consultation once again highlighted that every child’s journey through the care system will be unique and the support they need will vary depending on these circumstances. Throughout this work, the focus has remained on the voices of those with care experience. As set out by the then First Minister at the start of the Promise journey:

“the priority when a child needs our care must be the provision, not of a series of placements or arrangements driven by the needs of bureaucracy, but of stable, safe, secure, loving homes that allow them to experience the joys and normal challenges of growing up, and to fulfil their potential in life.”

In order to allow for these relationships to form, the Bill looks to make legislative changes in eight key areas. Each of these changes falls at a different stages of a child’s potential interaction with the care system, from the Children’s Hearing Redesign, to expanding the support available to those who are transitioning out of children’s services and into adulthood. The changes included in this Bill are only part of the wider work being done across Scotland to keep The Promise and only reflect the legislative changes that need to be made in order for this work to proceed at pace.

The eight key areas which are included in the Bill are:

• Extension of eligibility to receive Aftercare support.
• Introduction of a right to advocacy for children, young people and adults with care experience.
• Guidance on the language of care
• Legislative steps to tackle profit from residential care
• Strengthening the not-for-profit principle in relation to foster care
• A national register for foster carers
• Redesign of the Children’s Hearing’s System
• Extending the statutory responsibility to Integrated Joint Boards in the development of Children Services Plans

Start date of proposal’s development: October 2024

Start date of CRWIA process: January 2025

2. With reference given to the requirements of the UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 (Annex 1), which aspects of the proposal are relevant to/impact upon children’s rights?

Guidance: If there are no aspects of the proposed which are deemed relevant to the UNCRC requirements, please give a short explanation of that here and contact the CRWIA team to discuss your response to this question. See pages 13-16 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information.

• Extension of eligibility to receive Aftercare support.
• Introduction of a right to advocacy for children, young people and adults with care experience.
• The language of care, including a definition of ‘care experienced’
• A national register for foster carers
• Redesign of the Children’s Hearing’s System

Provisions relating to the not-for-profit principle in foster care and Children’s Services Planning Partnerships have been assessed as having no impact on children’s rights and wellbeing.

Provisions relating to profit in residential care have been assessed as having no direct impact on the rights of children and young people.

3. Please provide a summary of the evidence gathered which will be used to inform your decision-making and the content of the proposal

Guidance: It might be that no aspects of the proposal are deemed relevant, and therefore, no evidence exists relevant to the assessment. If that is the case, questions 3, 4, 5 and 6 can be answered as ‘not applicable’ and question 7 can be answered as ‘no impact’.

Where consultation and engagement was carried out please tell us what you did (survey, focus groups etc) and a summary of what was said. If relevant include any key direct quotes. See pages 16-19 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information.

Evidence from: Consultations and engagement

Aftercare

The ‘Moving On’ consultation sought views on changing Aftercare eligibility. Respondents strongly supported expanding it to all formerly ‘looked after’ young people. Support came from individuals, local authorities (e.g., Aberdeen, East Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire), organisations such as CELCIS, Who Cares? Scotland, Aberlour, Barnardo’s, Clan Childlaw, and Public Health Scotland. Many called for properly resourced expansion, particularly for those in kinship care (under Section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995), adopted children, and those looked after at home.

Engagement sessions reinforced this view, with young people and practitioners arguing that eligibility should reflect care experience rather than an arbitrary age.

Key quotes included:

• Young person: “Remove the 16+ rule. A child could be in care for years but lose support if they return to family before 16, while someone in care briefly after 16 gets help. That’s unfair.”
• East Lothian Council: “Adopted children, kinship care placements, and those who return home before 16 miss out on crucial bursaries and support.”
• Dumfries and Galloway Council: “Young people in kinship care, adopted, or whose care status ended too early face the same challenges as care leavers but don’t qualify for help.”
• CELCIS: “Aftercare should be available to all young people with care experience, not just ‘care leavers’.”

A young person who left care before 16 shared how returning home led to homelessness, as they were ineligible for Aftercare.

Petition 1958 called for Aftercare to be extended based on need rather than age.

Guidance on the Language of Care

The Promise sets out while it is not a legal term, ‘care experience’ is a term that has a special and different meaning for many of the people who identify with it. This includes infants, children and young people, and adults who may choose to identify as care experienced. The Promise highlights that a universal definition of ‘care experience’ will help to normalise care as more people can understand and relate to it. The Promise also sets out that language is important in normalising care experience and can address stigmatising assumptions, attitudes and behaviours that can impact on all areas of a child or young person’s life, now and into the future.

A public consultation ‘Developing a Universal Definition of Care Experience’ was open from October 2024 to January 2025. The consultation sought views on the need for a universal definition of ‘care experience’ and what the potential impacts of this could be, as well as seeking views on the wider language of care and how this could be improved.

The consultation received 42 written consultation responses from 71 individuals and 71 organisations. The involvement of children and young people was commonly mentioned by respondents to the consultation, such as local Promise Champion Boards and through Our Hearings Our Voice, an independent children and young person’s board for the Children’s Hearings System. Of the organisational respondents, 41 had duties as corporate parents under the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. Scottish public bodies defined as corporate parents include local authorities, health boards and post-16 education bodies for further and higher education.

Consultation respondents were broadly supportive of creating a universal definition of ‘care experience’, with 80% of all respondents agreeing to some extent that this is needed. A range of reasons were provided to support the view that a universal definition of care experience would have a positive impact. This included that a universal definition would bring consistency in the understanding of care experience across sectors and services and be particularly useful in relation to multi-agency partnership working.

Responses also indicated that people felt that existing language can be unclear or inconsistent, be stigmatising and create barriers. The involvement of children and young people was commonly mentioned by respondent to the consultation, such as local Champion Boards and Our Hearings Our Voice, an independent children and young person’s board for the Children’s Hearings System. Specific initiatives mentioned included:

• Language Leaders, a collaborative group of young adults with lived experience and professionals from across the children’s hearings system, who have produced ‘Principles of Language’.
• A Language and Communication Group in East Dunbartonshire’s Health and Social Care Partnership that engaged with care experienced people, foster carers and practitioners to understand issues and concerns regarding language used across social work and wider services.

A programme of engagement was undertaken with stakeholders and the care experienced community to support the consultation. Stakeholders from a range of sectors and organisations engaged in this process including health, local authorities and the third sector.

To further support engaging the voice of care experience, Who Cares? Scotland (WC?S) were awarded a contract through the Children and Young People Participation (CYPP) Framework to lead engagement with care experienced children and young people. The CYPP Framework was developed as part of the UNCRC implementation programme to respond to the growing need for children and young people’s participation in decision-making and policy development. Through a trauma-informed approach, WC?S engaged with a total of 48 care experienced individuals aged 9 to 25 years old covering the 4 consultations relating to the Bill. Through this engagement, the majority of participants agreed the definition taken from The Promise is fully reflective of care experience. Several participants felt that any definition should be inclusive of all ages and types of care experience and care journeys. Hopes for the future for care experienced individuals included greater inclusion, genuine agency, appropriate lifelong support, and better, fairer life.

Advocacy for those with Care Experience

The Promise sets out that care experienced children and adults should have the right and access to independent advocacy, at all stages of their experience of care and beyond. In 2022, The Promise Scotland undertook work to scope a national lifelong advocacy service and published their findings in a report ‘Scoping and Delivering A National Lifelong Advocacy Service For Care Experienced Children, Adults And Families’. Published in February 2024, the report scoped the core issues and identified the core principles that should underpin a national lifelong advocacy service and provided proposals and recommendations to inform next steps.

The Scottish Government has since taken forward engagement with key providers to further scope and the advocacy landscape in Scotland for care experienced people. This includes considering the feasibility of the recommendations and potential resource requirements.

Who Cares? Scotland also produced a report covering their own scoping work around potential approaches to provision lifelong advocacy for people with care experience. This is one of the calls for change in their Lifelong Rights Campaign, which was launched in 2023. The campaign stated that rights for people with care experience must be laid out in policy and legislation to address the additional barriers and that support to realise their rights must be available at any stage throughout their lives. Who Cares? Scotland also launched an Action on Advocacy campaign in March 2025, which includes calls for a statutory right to advocacy for people with experience of care.

It is not intended that the legislative changes will cut across or duplicate existing bespoke entitlements for advocacy services. For children and young people the existing advocacy provision provided through the Children’s Hearings System will continue to be pivotal, as well as the current local authority led advocacy. However, scoping work has identified that while there is significant existing provision for children and young people with care experience in local authorities, there is inconsistency in terms of the level of provision. Work is underway to further develop the picture of existing advocacy support and where there are differences in support available.

Future of Foster Care Consultation

On 24 October 2024, the Minister and the First Minister launched the Future of Foster Care consultation. The consultation was open for 15 weeks and closed on 6 February. In total, 99 responses were received – 55 from individuals and 44 from organisations, with the majority of organisational responses submitted by local authorities and health and social care partnerships. Other responses came from advocacy organisations, Independent Foster Agencies (IFAs) and representative bodies. A significant number of responses also reflect lived experience of foster care, either directly or through organisational representation. 89 respondents have consented for their responses to be published on the Scottish Government’s Citizen Space platform.

In parallel, officials undertook a broad programme of engagement events during the 15-week consultation period. This included six online sessions with professionals and stakeholders, attended by over 80 participants, and in partnership with The Fostering Network, eight events with foster carers - three online and five in person, reaching over 150 carers. The Minister attended one in-person session in Renfrewshire to hear directly from foster carers.

Engagement with children and young people was supported through the Scottish Government’s children and young people’s participation framework. Who Cares? Scotland and Barnardo’s were contracted to lead this work across all four Promise-related consultations, including this one.

Officials also led direct engagement with care-experienced children and young people, including with The Fostering Network’s Young People’s Advisory Board, Falkirk Champs Board and Heavy Sound in East Lothian, to ensure their voices were reflected in the analysis.

Children’s Hearings Redesign

The Scottish Government consulted on the recommendations of the Hearings for Children report from July to October 2024, receiving 105 responses. While not all respondents answered every question, the consultation provided a broad range of views that have informed legislative development.

Key sources of evidence included the Hearings for Children report, public consultation feedback, and input from children and young people through Our Hearings, Our Voice and other organisations. Further engagement was commissioned from Who Cares? Scotland and Barnardo’s, which highlighted concerns around attendance at hearings, the need for child-centred processes, and the importance of accessible language.

The consultation addressed several legislative areas, including:

• Statutory referral criteria – There was broad support for modernising language, with concerns over terms like “control” and “treatment,” though legal bodies warned against losing specificity.
• Removing automatic “Relevant Person” status – Many supported granting hearings the power to remove this status in cases where it conflicts with a child's rights.
• Child attendance at hearings – Most respondents agreed that attendance should not be mandatory but noted the importance of balancing child welfare with procedural fairness.
• Amplifying children’s voices – There was strong support for a statutory process ensuring children’s views are considered, though some questioned the need for legislative change.
• Post-referral discussions – While many favoured this approach, some raised concerns about adding another meeting and potential safety issues.
• Advocacy services – Responses varied, with suggestions for an opt-out model, greater clarity on advocacy roles, and flexible provision, including for very young children.

The consultation analysis highlighted key insights from children and young people, gathered through Our Hearings, Our Voice, Who Cares? Scotland, and Barnardo’s. Their views emphasised the need for a more child-friendly, supportive, and flexible hearings system:

• Attendance at hearings – Children wanted the choice of whether to attend, and if so, how and when they participated. Concerns about attending included anxiety, distress, and intimidation, while benefits included having their voices heard and feeling included. Alternatives such as a trusted adult presenting their views or submitting them in writing or via video were suggested.
• Child-centred processes – Participants stressed that hearings should be tailored to the individual, with proper preparation beforehand. They called for more empathetic and skilled panel members, as well as the option for breaks during hearings.
• Hearing environment – Children suggested making hearing centres more age-appropriate and less formal, with separate waiting areas for different attendees.
• Language and communication – They wanted simpler, more respectful, and non-stigmatising language in hearings. They emphasised that the tone of communication was as important as the words used, with all adults needing to show empathy.

The Grounds Process

Many respondents, including children, families, and professionals, expressed concerns that the current grounds process is intimidating, complex, and feels accusatory rather than supportive. Children often struggle to understand the language used, and families find the process overwhelming. One respondent noted: “The HSWG has heard that there are significant issues with how grounds are framed and understood and the processes for establishing them. Instead of there being a rights-based approach which places the best interests of a child front and centre, establishing grounds can feel transactional, adversarial, and traumatic for children and their families. Grounds for referral can sometimes have the feel of a criminal charge confronting parents with their alleged failings, making it difficult for them to readily accept that a referral is in the best interests of their child.” There was broad agreement that reforms should simplify and streamline this process, ensuring that grounds are established in a separate step before a hearing. Many called for a more relational approach where families engage in discussions with reporters earlier, allowing for better understanding and a less distressing experience. The report emphasised: “A more relational way of working to agree grounds and confirm the Statement of Facts should be encouraged, where the Reporter exercises professional judgement to determine when children and families might be able to discuss grounds.”

The Reporter’s Ability to Call a Review

Professionals and stakeholders generally supported giving the Principal Reporter discretion to call a review hearing when new information arises, preventing delays in necessary interventions. As one respondent stated, “There is currently no freestanding or self-initiated legal power for the Reporter to require a review hearing.” Many respondents expressed frustration about the current limitations, which hinder timely action. However, concerns were raised about ensuring fairness and setting clear criteria to prevent unnecessary reviews. It was emphasised that the new power should be used only when “there is significant new information pertaining to an existing CSO or ICSO and only if it is clear that the child, family or implementing authority would not progress a review.”

Remuneration of Chairing Members

Panel members and stakeholders recognised that the increasing complexity of cases has placed significant demands on chairing members. While some respondents valued the traditional volunteer-based approach, many supported introducing an element of remuneration to improve retention, availability, and decision-making quality. One respondent reflected: “Although respondents highlighted the importance of the original voluntary ethos of the panel system, many acknowledged that given the increased complexity of the role of chairperson, the number of cases, and the additional workload and responsibility demanded by the role of chair in comparison to other panel members, it may be beneficial to introduce payment (beyond expenses alone) for the chair.” Young people, in particular, emphasised the importance of maintaining a sense of care and commitment from panel members, regardless of whether they are paid.

A Single Decision-Maker for Procedural Matters

Views on allowing a single decision-maker for certain procedural decisions were mixed. Some professionals supported the change as a way to reduce delays and streamline hearings, while others raised concerns about maintaining fairness and transparency. As one consultation response noted: “Adopting an approach which allows for procedural hearings to be heard by a single member would be consistent with the approach taken in other tribunals.” Many respondents agreed that, if implemented, there must be safeguards to ensure impartiality and consistency.

Enhanced Powers of Exclusion

Children and young people strongly advocated for clearer and stronger exclusion powers to ensure that hearings are safe spaces where they can speak openly. Many reported feeling intimidated when certain individuals, such as aggressive or disruptive family members, were present. One young person shared: “They often feel intimidated when certain individuals, such as disruptive or confrontational family members, are present at their hearings. They shared that this can prevent them from speaking openly about their needs and wishes.” Professionals and panel members also supported this reform but stressed the need for fair procedures to prevent misuse of exclusion powers.

Overall, the consultation revealed a consensus on the need for a more child-friendly, streamlined, and flexible hearings system. Responses emphasised the importance of balancing procedural efficiency with fairness, transparency, and meaningful engagement with children and families.

The Hearings for Children report recommended that “interim orders must be in place for a length of time that is in the best interests of the child and bespoke to their needs. The Sheriff and Panel Members should be trusted to make appropriate orders without the need for mandatory reviews at short intervals of time.”

We consulted on the issue of extended time limits for ICSOs, and this was well supported. The most frequently mentioned advantages of increasing the 22-day limit were that it would save people from having to attend multiple hearings (which was felt to be particularly stressful for children and families) and that it would allow more time to resolve issues, to see evidence of progress, and to gather information.

4. Further to the evidence described at ‘3’ have you identified any 'gaps' in evidence which may prevent determination of impact? If yes, please provide an explanation of how they will be addressed

Guidance: See page 19 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information.

Consultation engagement events with stakeholders from a range of sectors and organisations, including health, local authorities and the third sector have engaged with younger children through respective organisational routes. Respondents were not asked directly about the involvement of young people in preparing their responses, 11 organisations provided information highlighting the contribution of young people or people with lived experience. Opportunities to capture the views of children as policy is developed and the preparation of regulations will be actively sought.

Work to consider the definition of Care Experience, was supported by a programme of engagement undertaken through the Children and Young Persons Participation Framework. This work was led by Who Cares? Scotland and Barnardo’s and aimed to capture the views of children and young people aged under 26 years. A number of engagements events including facilitated workshops sessions in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness and Dundee. However, for a number of reasons the level of participation was lower than hoped and did not fully capture the views of children under 12 years old. In implementing the legislation statutory guidance will be prepared through a collaborative approach including children and young people of all ages.

Advocacy provision across Scotland is varied and generally subject based. In recognising that time spent in care as a child can have a lifelong impact on outcomes and trauma the legislation aims to open a right to access advocacy support at anytime. It is noted however that there is a lack of data on the number of care experience people over 40 years old as a result of how this has been recorded post 2009. There is also specifically a lack of data on anyone care experienced above the age of 40 or those who have experienced kinship care arrangements with no social work involvement. This means targeted engagement with the over 40 age group has been limited and will require further engagement to determine impact. Although this does not directly influence the determination of impact on children, it is a consideration for this age group.

5. Analysis of Evidence

Guidance: Please explain what the evidence told you about the impact of the proposal on the rights and wellbeing of children and young people. See pages 19-20 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information.

Aftercare

The Scottish Government recognises the challenges for young people with care experience who are moving on into adulthood and independent living. At any age and for any young person, moving on from home is a challenging time but when there are limited support networks in place, the challenge can be exacerbated.

Young people with care experience may have experienced adversity in their early life. The Independent Care Review highlighted and recognised the links between those with care experience and the increased risk of poor mental health, addiction, homelessness and exploitation. Care experienced people are reported to be over one and a half times more likely to experience financial difficulties and have more than double the chance of experiencing homelessness, mainly before age 30.

The Scottish Government is committed to keeping The Promise to all care experienced children and young people. In March 2022, the Scottish Government published the Promise Implementation Plan, which sets out the actions and commitments that will be taken across the Scottish Government to keep The Promise by 2030. This includes a continued commitment towards ensuring that young people moving on from care are provided with person-centred support to enable positive transitions from care to more independent living. Ensuring that the right level of support is readily available and easily accessible for young people moving on into adulthood is essential.

The evidence from the ‘Moving On’ from Care into Adulthood consultation highlighted that there are currently gaps in support for young people with care experience transitioning into adulthood. There was a general consensus that extending eligibility for Aftercare more widely will have a positive impact on the rights and wellbeing of children and young people in Scotland. Respondents to the consultation specifically mentioned certain affected groups of young people, including children and young people in section 11 kinship care arrangements previously looked after, young people who are adopted and those looked after at home.

The policy will extend Aftercare based on an assessment of need to children and young people aged 16-25 who were previously “looked after”^[1] before their 16th birthday. This includes where a child has been through the Children's Hearings system and was subject to a Supervision Requirement with or without any condition of residence or was at any time placed by a local authority which made a permanence order under section 80 of the Adoption and Children Act 2007. This will also include those accommodated under section 25 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 (including disabled children and Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children) and those who left secure accommodation before their 16th birthday.

Aftercare is designed to embed an approach which recognises the importance of relationships and puts the needs and wellbeing of the young person at the centre of the support they receive. The type of Aftercare advice, guidance and support required, and the way it is provided, will differ for individuals.

By widening the eligibility for those who can receive Aftercare subject to an assessment of their needs, the intention is to frontload support for those who need it at a time when it is most needed. By upstreaming support, the intention is to improve outcomes for young people with care experience by supporting positive transitions into adulthood and helping them to thrive in adulthood.

Guidance in relation to the language of Care etc.

The Promise tells us that the term care experience has special and different meaning for many of those who identify with it, and that a universal definition of care experience will help to normalise care as more people can understand and relate to it. The Scottish Government committed to working with partners to develop guidance to promote understanding by public authorities of care-experienced persons and their experiences, and to promote best practice.

The Promise also tells us that language is important in normalising care experience and can address stigmatising assumptions, attitudes and behaviours that can impact on all areas of a child or young person’s life, now and into the future.

Who Cares? Scotland (WC?S) and Barnardo’s were awarded a contract through the CYPP Framework to lead engagement with care experienced children and young people. The programme of engagement covered four consultations; Children’s Hearing System Redesign; 'Moving on' from care into adulthood; Developing a universal definition of ‘care experience’ and Future of foster care. WC?S and Barnardo’s engaged with a total of 48 care experience children and young people throughout the programme from age 8 to 26.

Common themes evident in responses to these questions reiterate the importance of providing more equitable services to those with care experience and making it easier for them to access services. Respondents highlight the importance of using terms and language that capture the lived experiences of being in care and that do not encourage stigmatisation or discrimination. Commonly mentioned disadvantages included concerns that rigid definitions may exclude some people with care experience or that oversimplified terms may be too vague.

Advocacy for those with Care Experience

The Promise Scotland were tasked by Scottish Ministers to undertake work to scope a potential national lifelong advocacy service for care experienced people and their families.

The Promise Scotland published the ‘Scoping and Delivering A National Lifelong Advocacy Service For Care Experienced Children, Adults And Families’ report in February 2024. The report was developed with advocacy providers and sets out a path towards delivery of a four phased approach to operationalising lifelong advocacy for care experienced people.

The report scopes the core issues and identifies proposed core principles that should underpin a national lifelong advocacy service. It sets out a recommended path towards delivery, proposing how this approach should be operationalised and what can be done in order to realise the conclusions of The Promise.

Who Cares? Scotland (WC?S) launched a campaign in October 2023 for lifelong rights for all care experienced people. The calls to action in the campaign include; extra protection for care experienced people of all ages to access their rights and independent, relationship-based, lifelong advocacy for every care experienced person in Scotland who needs it.

As part of the campaign WC?S have developed their own scoping report ‘Keeping the Promise and Lifelong Advocacy: Respecting Rights for All Care Experienced People’, independently of The Promise Scotland scoping work, which provides potential approaches to provision lifelong advocacy for care experienced people, including some costed options. The options also include additional proposals, regarding mental health support and marketing.

The reports produced by The Promise Scotland and Who Cares? Scotland were developed in partnership with relevant organisations and young people with care experience, and provide useful proposals and recommendations to inform next steps.

Further engagement and scoping work has been progressed to increase understanding of the support and advocacy landscape with advocacy providers to understand how a lifelong advocacy service for care experienced people could be delivered and what the potential impacts of this could be.

Register of Foster Carers

Respondents supported creating a national register of foster carers. Those who agreed felt this could strengthen regulation and benefit carers and children by improving the status of carers and leading to better matching with children. Respondents felt it would be important to make sure data in a register is protected and kept up to date. Respondents most commonly felt a register should be managed by central government, with other suggestions including the SSSC, AFKA (who hold the adoption register) or the third sector. However, several thought a national register is not needed because current processes work well or because creating and maintaining a register would take too much time.

Several thought that including details about training and skills development on a national register could be useful. Reasons for this included that it could mean carers do not need to repeat training if they move to a different area, and that it could make it easier for foster carers to focus on learning and development. However, others were worried it could put pressure on foster carers to do more training or make fostering too much like a job.

Respondents felt a national approach to matching children with carers would be helpful. They felt it could help keep children close to the area they know and ensure they have the best match with carers. While most agreed, some were worried it might be hard to put into practice and could cause problems with current placements. Ideas were also shared about how the Scottish Government could help local authorities plan resources for foster care. Suggestions included making better use of existing data, sharing information, developing a common data set, and making sure data requirements are not too complicated.

6. What changes (if any) have been made to the proposal as a result of this assessment?

Guidance: See page 20 in Internal CRWIA and SoC for more information.

No changes have been made to the proposed legislation as a direct result of this assessment, however, policy development of the proposed legislation has been informed by the consultations and engagement carried out with children, young people, families and organisations working with these groups. In this way, the potential impacts have been considered through the policy development and has influenced the policy directions presented for legislation.