Future of foster care: consultation analysis – updated final report

8. A National Register for Foster Carers

The consultation paper sets out and requests the views on the development and maintenance of a national register or database of foster carers (Q29 to Q33). Suggestions for a national register or database were raised in 2022 within the ongoing Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry (SCAI). A range of options for a national register were presented in the consultation paper, such as options for it to sit independently from national and local government. The paper suggests that a national register could increase public protection, improve the ease of mobility across fostering agencies and increase safeguarding for children. It was noted that a register could support a national approach to planning and matching foster carers with children and young people.

Q29. What are your views on a national register for foster carers in Scotland?

Four fifths of respondents left a comment at Q29. Many expressed support for a national register, noting it could enhance regulation and safeguarding and benefit carers. However, it was also noted that it may not be necessary and that it could be too resource-intensive.

Enhanced regulation

Many expressed support for a national register leaving brief comments suggesting it is needed, would be beneficial, and is a good idea. It was felt that a national register could improve service quality, information sharing, monitoring, and data collection. Attendees at one event also felt this way, viewing it as a way to prevent out-of-area placements,

Several respondents noted that a key positive of a national register with a centralised approved carer list could be enhanced regulation and improved safeguarding of children. A current gap in regulation in this area was highlighted. One respondent suggested the national register could be used to investigate carers where standards are not upheld and to standardise qualifications, accountability, reviews, and training.

“I think it's important that foster carers are regulated in the same way other childcare workers are” – Individual

“A key benefit of the proposed national register would be improved safeguarding by sharing registration decisions nationally. There is no national register currently, and this means that a carer who has been deregistered or has resigned prior to deregistration could move to another area and re-register if they withhold information without any previous concerns or information being shared or known to a different agency or service. The main function of the register must be for sharing information regarding registration decisions nationally to support safeguarding.” – Centre for Excellence for Children’s Care and Protection (CELCIS)

Benefits for carers and children

Some respondents highlighted potential benefits for carers of having a national register, particularly that it could increase the status, recognition and value placed on the role. It was also felt that a national register could support communication with, and development opportunities for, carers, and increase their ability to transfer to other local authorities.

A reduction in bureaucracy and administration was noted by some respondents as another potential benefit of a national register. In particular, it could reduce assessment duplication if carers move between services or local authorities and facilitate transfers. A small number suggested it could maximise the use of carers due to there being fewer gaps in placements and helping to support matching.

National register is unnecessary and resource-intensive

Conversely, several respondents expressed the view that a national register was not needed or necessary, suggesting it duplicates existing safeguards and processes that do not need to change or provides little benefit or improvement. Participants across engagement events shared this view.

“In terms of regulation, there are already clear processes for approving and reviewing foster carer registration through fostering panels. All fostering services are regulated through the Care Inspectorate. It is therefore unclear what the national register would contribute to this.” – COSLA

“We already have robust safeguards in place such as references from previous agencies and local authorities as part of assessment and transfer processes. We would question what an introduction of a national register would do that we are not already doing.” - Aberlour

Some respondents generally disagreed with the national register. This included individual comments that it could be unhelpful and not the right approach to improving safeguarding, that it could have a negative impact on the recruitment of future foster carers, and concern about how it would work in practice given a current lack of consistency nationwide. Some respondents commented that a national register would be too resource-intensive. In particular, the cost to the government to implement, additional bureaucracy, and challenges in keeping the national register up to date were noted, as was a call for resources to be prioritised on care over a national register.

Suggestions for implementation

Various suggestions for implementing a national register were made by several respondents. Learning from other national register approaches, such as the Safeguarders Panel in the Children’s Hearing System, was recommended when developing this proposal. Suggestions included the need to ensure that a national register is:

• Confidential, with appropriate safeguarding and data protection.
• Kept up to date.
• Developed with organisations representing foster carers.
• Set up so carers can view and comment on their file.
• Including the skills, experience and learning undertaken by carers.
• Able to be used for matching.

Some respondents did not want the register to be used for matching, stating they wanted matching to remain local and using current systems, and expressing concern that a national register could lead to national matching. This is discussed further in Q32. A few respondents expressed caution that the national register needs to clearly benefit children and not act as a barrier to the recruitment of foster carers.

Need for more information

The need for more information was raised by several respondents and a small number suggested further consultation. They expressed a view that the benefits and purpose of a national register were unclear and between one and a few respondents each called for more information on:

• The risks of a register and mitigations.
• Data protection, safeguarding and consent issues.
• Whether easier or improved matching would be possible through a national register.
• What information would be held, who would have access to the register, and who would be responsible for maintaining it.
• Clarity on the alignment with existing arrangements, such as with the Care Inspectorate activities and Fostering Panels.

Other comments

Other singular comments were made, including a desire for easier mechanisms to transfer between agencies but not through a national register, and a suggestion for regional registers rather than a national register.

Q30. If a register is introduced where should the register be held?

Just under two thirds of respondents commented at Q30. Various views were detailed, and there was no clear consensus on where the proposed national register should be held.

Central government

Some thought the register should sit within government, with respondents either specifying the Scottish Government, government-level generally, or central government. Comments stated this would be necessary due to the level of information and learning provided by the register, because the government is responsible for funding social care, and that it should not be held by an independent organisation.

Specific suggestions

Some respondents suggested specific independent organisations. Suggestions included AFKA, which holds the adoption register, The Fostering Network, a professional body, and the third sector, with others simply calling for an independent body to be responsible.

“The register should be held by a third sector organisation who can coordinate information sharing and support of data being held in a safe and well-managed way.” – Adoption UK Scotland

Suggestions for a register to be held by the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) were highlighted by some respondents, noting they have the structures and processes for registering childcare workers. Some respondents commented that a register should be held nationally or centrally – though not necessarily by government - so that information is consistent and transparent, noting it could be resource-intensive for local authorities to manage. A small number suggested it could be held by The Care Inspectorate as they inspect fostering services. Holding it at a local level, such as within local authorities or IFAs, was suggested by a small number.

Other comments

Some respondents were unsure and requested further information on who would have access, the purpose of a register, and data protection, or called for further consultation. A few commented that the register should be held securely. One respondent commented that carers should know who has accessed their information and why, while another commented that the national register should be able to be accessed by local authorities.

Q31. What are your views on the potential to linking continuous professional development to a register?

Three quarters of respondents left a comment at Q31. While positive comments were most common, a variety of perspectives were detailed.

Reduction in training repetition and further benefits

Several respondents made general positive comments and agreed with the linking of continuous professional development (CPD) to a register. It was mentioned that this linking could be useful for the sector by reducing the repetition of training when foster carers relocate, giving greater priority to CPD and providing oversight of skill levels.

As noted by some respondents, the linking could help demonstrate carer knowledge and skills. It could allow for consistency in training and quality of care for children, show carers’ experience, and identify instances of a lack of CPD. Some also suggested that making access to training and CPD easier could improve the quality of care being provided.

“I think this would be helpful when looking at the skills and experience needed to best support individual children and young people.” - Individual

Considerations if implemented

Other factors to consider regarding the linking of CPD to a register were made by some respondents. This included:

• The need for training records to be kept up to date on the register.
• Whether it could support matching.
• Concerns it could negatively impact foster carer recruitment and retention.
• The need for CPD to be consistent and monitored for quality

Some respondents questioned whether, given the lack of employee and professional status of foster carers, they should be required to undertake CPD. However, there were also comments that this could be a positive step towards a more formal status and a few respondents made general comments that CPD is already expected.

Providing additional support to address barriers to CPD was advocated by some. This included suggestions for paid study leave to complete CPD, childcare availability, supporting carers to learn in styles suited to their own needs, ensuring there is mandatory CPD and upskilling, and making foster carers feel supported through training.

Reasons for disagreement

Concerns with linking were made by some respondents. It was thought this could over-professionalise foster care, create additional pressure and burdens on carers and potentially result in some being disadvantaged if they only have mandatory training. There was a concern that a record of training or CPD may not be accurate or kept up to date.

Some respondents expressed the view that linking a register with CPD is not necessary or that existing processes are sufficient and should be kept as they are. Brief comments disagreeing with this suggestion were made by some respondents, with comments that it would not work for foster carers and would have little benefit. Another theme was that linking to CPD or other training could be unfair to some carers who might not have as much formal training but do have more experience, knowledge, and skills. Respondents noted that experience and testimonials are also important. A few felt that IFAs or local authorities should be responsible for recording their own carers’ training and CPD.

“I feel there is a lot of pressure on training which I agree is necessary, but the number of training courses attended does not determine how good the carer is” - Individual

Other comments

Some respondents requested further information on the purpose and benefits of linking, whether this would support matching, whether carers would be disadvantaged, details on how the current CPD systems work, and what information would be held on a national register before considering whether it should be linked to CPD. One commented that a national framework of learning would be helpful instead.

Q32. What are your views on a national approach to foster care placement matching?

Three quarters of respondents commented at Q32. A range of views were detailed, with a focus on supporting placement matching that best suits children’s needs.

Prioritise the right placement matching

Several respondents highlighted the need for foster care placement matching to focus on ensuring a placement matches the needs of each child. Support for a national approach was given, if it was to result in better matches; however, there was also a concern that this may not be the case. Respondents emphasised the need for lasting, happy, successful, culturally matched placements and for matching to happen more often. Alternatively, Staf highlighted the need to be open and honest when matching had not worked well, such as where relationships became strained after the ‘honeymoon’ period, to allow healthy exploration and a change in placement if necessary.

“The full matching process is critical in getting it right for children and families for it to be successful match and therefore a database would need to ensure that a database is limited and matching needs to be progressed through the relevant agency or authority.” - Aberlour

Support children to remain close to their home, community and local area

Several respondents advocated for children being kept close to their homes, families, and communities. They felt a national approach could conflict with this priority and current commitments which are in place to support continuity in children's lives in terms of consistency of services, existing relationships with family and peers, and education. Similarly, several respondents suggested that placement matching should remain at a local level and not through a national approach. Comments supported retaining local placements, concern that a national approach could make this more difficult, and that it may result in more out-of-area placements against the best interests of children.

“This has to be done at a local level. A national approach to matching would cause significant confusion, blurring of boundaries and legal status leading to risks and lack of clarity around who is responsible for what. There are already challenges experienced locally when a child is being cared for in our area but is the responsibility of another local authority area being cared for in an IFA.” – West Lothian Council

“A key proposal within this consultation is that children in need of foster care should be kept in their local community wherever possible and multiple moves, which can destabilise a child and further traumatise them, should be minimised. There is compelling evidence that multiple moves and placement instability is a predictor of negative development outcomes for children and young people. CHS fully support any work to address the availability of stable, foster placements in a child’s local community so they can maintain friendships and key relationships which lead to better outcomes.” – Children’s Hearings Scotland

Reasons for agreement with a national approach

Brief comments in support of a national approach to placement matching were a recurring theme. Some respondents thought a national approach would be useful for national matching or relocating, where local placement options are not possible or suitable, or where a national relocation is better for the child - for example, for safety reasons, where there is no contact with birth family members or when a child wants a fresh start in a new area. One respondent highlighted that foster carers and their skill sets in a different local authority might better suit the particular needs of some children.

“All children in Scotland must be treated equally, regardless of which local authority they reside within. For this reason, we believe a national approach to foster care placement matching could be a positive move, if it is linked to ensuring there is an end to inconsistency in funding and support for children depending on which local authority they live in.” – Barnardo’s Scotland

Concerns and considerations

Several respondents disagreed with this proposal. This included comments that a national approach would not support matching, concerns about challenges and complexities in implementing this proposal, and a concern that this could disrupt placements.

“Disruption of foster care placements is harmful to both the child and the foster carers and increases the possibility of future disruption to the child. It should be avoided as far as possible. A national approach to foster care matching simply would not have the flexibility to respond to immediate need and be nimble enough to cope with changing demand.” – Scottish Association of Social Work

Some respondents requested more information. This included how a national approach to foster care placement matching aligns with keeping children and young people in their local community and maintaining connections and the benefits and scope of a national approach. Other less common reasons for disagreeing included:

• It is unrealistic in practice as placements tend to occur in crisis management rather than through matching.
• This approach could create additional bureaucracy and system complexity, reducing efficiency.
• Local authorities are reluctant to share resources with other local authorities.
• Placement matching should be done by those well known to the child and with the child’s voice taken into consideration.
• That this proposal is unnecessary and that the current system is sufficient.

Q33. How can the Scottish Government support local authorities with resource planning of foster carers including building an evidence base and data on placements, which also includes those outside local areas?

Just under two thirds of respondents commented at Q33. A range of themes was evident depending on how respondents interpreted the question.

Benefits from improved data collection

In terms of building an evidence base, a recurring theme was the need to improve data collection through improved data sharing, developing an agreed data set across the country, and to better use existing datasets and information collected. It was suggested that improved data collection could support the understanding of the number of carers and placements, support analysis and the identification of trends, and enable the comparison of data across the country. It was noted that the Care Inspectorate already has data which could be used. However, one respondent suggested that the questions they use for data collection need improvements to support data accuracy. Another respondent commented that extra data requirements should not be too cumbersome for local authorities.

“Scotland is yet to systematically prioritise the kinds of data that will allow for a fuller assessment of quality in practice that will drive better support for workforces to make a meaningful impact in improving the lives of children, young people and families. This includes how data is collected, collated, and used for improvement purposes. Learning from approaches to foster care in Wales highlights the importance of robust data for performance management, understanding outcomes for children, and having a continuous improvement mindset (Foster Wales 2021).” – CELCIS

Some suggested practice changes that may be needed to support better data collection, such as supporting social workers and carers to complete forms and record information.

Other comments

Some called for greater funding and investment to support local authorities with resource planning (see Q36). A small number of respondents commented that a national register could have a role in resource planning. One respondent questioned whether the Scottish Government should have a role in data on placements to support local resource planning.