Mr. David Taylor:

I thank the Chairman. I very much welcome the invitation and the opportunity to share my experience insofar as it is relevant to the committee's deliberations. I am the chief executive officer and chairman of a non-statutory fostering agency, Foster Care Ireland. We currently meet the needs of 26 children in 18 placements. My background is technical and managerial, and I have 35 years of public sector experience.

This submission outlines the role of fostering in the State’s care for children whose families cannot care for them. Tusla currently subcontracts the provision of less than 10% of foster care placements to the six non-statutory fostering agencies in Ireland. I will talk about the challenges and rewards of fostering, focusing on the support the State offers to foster carers. In my conclusion I will make suggestions for improvement in State support for foster carers, with particular reference to the benefits of recognition, the index-linking of the fostering allowance and the introduction of pension credits.

Foster care is the lowest-cost short-term response to caring for children who cannot rely on their family. Whether through relative foster care or placement with foster carers, fostering closely resembles the family structure familiar to most children that is at the core of our society. Tusla has the responsibility to safeguard children and provide for children in need. It recruits, trains, supports, and supervises foster carers with whom it places children. There are non-statutory providers of fostering services, that is, fostering agencies that recruit, train, supervise and support foster carers in providing placements for one or more children. The service is provided directly to Tusla and the non-statutory providers account for a growing, but relatively small percentage of foster placements.

While there are differences in scale and structure between the statutory and non-statutory fostering bodies, they each operate to the same framework, observe the same standards and aim for similar outcomes. Acknowledging that there are ownership preferences, it is worth recalling that monopolies, left to themselves, can become self-serving. With competition and a healthy tension in the sector, providers can collaborate, co-operate and compete to drive service innovation and adaptation to the benefit of all. The delivery costs under either model of ownership or market dominance are at the very least comparable. Members will not be surprised if I claim that the non-statutory model, being smaller, less bureaucratic, more agile and responsive, delivers a superior service under contract to Tusla, as is evidenced by inspection results and independent research commissioned with other non-statutory agencies in the sector.

The recent history of fostering in Ireland shows a decline in the number of Tusla-provided placements. This decline has been partially offset by an increase in the number of placements through the non-statutory providers.

This is against a background of a rising demand for placements driven by demographic and social trends. The availability of foster care placements must improve if the demand is to be met. A failure to do this can only result in poorer outcomes for children with higher direct and indirect costs for the State. Common to both statutory and non-statutory organisations is the challenge of recruiting, training, supporting and retaining a sufficient number of foster carers. In this presentation I concentrate on the aspects of recruitment and retention of most interest to the committee.

A decision to commit to fostering is as multifaceted as buying a house and greater, arguably, than deciding to change career or employment. It invites compromise; compromise in making a decision that will bring rewards and entail constraints, and will only be possible if enabled. The rewards are intrinsic to the process of fostering and being an active agent in the development of another human being. The constraints are immediate, bearing as they do on personal space, time, freedom and the need to prioritise others. Among the enablers are the training, support, collegiality with other foster carers, financial allowances and support and recognition that the current State framework promotes.

The pool of available placements is not static - it grows with recruitment of new carers and shrinks as carers retire. With each retirement there is a loss of capacity and of valued experience. Early retirement can be precipitated by weak enablers or the emergence of more attractive employment options. The costs of recruitment are high and comprise advertising, inquiry progression, training and assessment. Typically, there is a 1% yield of qualified carers from the initial inquiries we receive. Inquiry progresses through a home visit, completion of a detailed application pack and assessment by a professionally qualified social worker. There is training and, finally, approval at a Tusla area foster care committee. Fallout can occur at any point in the process, at a greater sunk cost the later it happens in the process. With such high recruitment costs there is an economic incentive to retain foster carers for as long as possible.

Although not ideal, many foster care placements can be for the duration of the remaining childhood. Making a good match between child and carer is at the heart of what we do, and it is in the child’s interest that the match endures as long as the child needs the placement. Two of the most frequent criticisms of the care system are the frequency with which placements break down and the frequency with which social workers change. Stability is a huge factor in a successful placement. It is linked with carer resilience secured through careful recruitment and is sustained by training and professional support.

The committee has a direct interest in and can influence the evolution of the enabling framework, particularly how and when the framework adapts to the current need to attract and retain foster carers. The financial support to foster carers in the form of the fostering allowance and the recognition that their work receives are salient in any decision to commence or cease to foster. As the committee heard, foster carers of children over 12 receive a tax-free payment of a fostering allowance of €352 per week. This amount has been fixed since 2009, over which time inflation was 9.8% and is now rising rapidly. As a positive enabler or incentive, it is weakening, and the weakness must be addressed for capacity to be retained.

Foster carers who would prefer fostering to working have to weigh up the consequences for their pension entitlement. In the absence of pension recognition for fostering, potential carers may opt for employment. This is on the grounds that there will be future pension benefits when their needs will be greater. The fostering allowance and pension credits are two critical factors in the decision to foster and to cease to foster. The adjustment of one and the introduction of the other, in particular a pension entitlement, could rebalance a decision in favour of fostering as a desirable activity that will benefit society and, by retaining foster carers, the overall costs of fostering.

Recognition is a powerful reinforcer and motivator. It has tangible and intangible dimensions. Recognition of qualifications brings status and respect. Recognition and awareness of outcomes brings societal approval and reinforcement. Pensions credits, to which family carers are now entitled, leave foster carers feeling, by comparison, overlooked and underappreciated. This year’s fostering week brought television coverage of successful fostering outcomes that reached out to many and improved the image of fostering in marked contrast to the high profiling of institutional failings that received so much news coverage. This rebalancing is to be applauded and the imagination of those involved is exemplary.

To conclude, Foster Care Ireland supports all efforts to improve the image, societal regard and tangible recognition of the growing professionalism of fostering. There is a prima faciecase for the adjustment of the fostering allowance, at a minimum in line with inflation. The provision of a pension entitlement proportional to the fostering allowance would help to level the playing field to make fostering more attractive and improve recruitment, retention, service level and cost at a stroke.