Ms Jennifer Gargan:

I thank the committee for inviting EPIC to speak to the heads of the aftercare Bill. As an organisation which works directly with young people in care we are acutely aware of their particular vulnerabilities, especially as they approach 18 and begin their transition to independence. Approximately 500 young people each year "age out" of the system and move into aftercare. As we know, all young people need the continuing support of their parents and families to successfully move from childhood to adulthood, even those who grow up in stable, secure, loving environments and are as well equipped as possible to embark on an independent life. Young people in care are different in this respect as they often do not have the assurance of a safety net of family to turn to when the going gets tough. Unlike their peers, who often live at home until their mid-20s, they have an accelerated transition to adulthood at 18. Not only have many of them had traumatic childhoods marked by neglect and instability, but they are more likely to have had multiple moves when in care and more likely to leave care without the confidence, skills and educational qualifications of their peers in the general population. This puts them at greater risk of unemployment, dependence on social welfare, early parenthood, mental health problems and homelessness.

The State, as corporate parent, must take on the responsibility, as any parent would, of ensuring that children and young people are well prepared to successfully make that transition and are supported in doing so in order to achieve positive outcomes after care. This means that the State should plan for their futures, as all good parents would. Publication of the heads of the Bill is therefore a welcome first step in the right direction of strengthening aftercare provision. However, we must go further by including in head 2 a provision for the assessment process in order to inform the preparation of the aftercare plan. This would ensure legislative provision for the assessment of the needs of each young person and early identification of services and supports required when young people reach the age of 18.

Planning for aftercare is a process, as Ms Tinsley has indicated. It should begin at 16 with an assessment that should be holistic and realistic in looking at the needs of the young person. It should consider practical skills required to live independently but also the range of social, educational and health needs of the young person. In doing so it should identify where the young person needs supports or additional preparation and guidance in developing other skills and abilities. This is incorporated into the leaving care plan, which will aid the preparation of the young person for leaving care and help put in place the resources and services needed when he or she reaches 18. It is a crucial that this begin at 16, in plenty of time to undertake this work with the young person. It must be completed at least six months before the young person turns 18 in order to allow time for the person to feel settled and ready for this monumental stage in life. Many young people have come to EPIC weeks or sometimes days before their 18th birthday with no aftercare plan and no idea where they will leave once they reach 18.

The assessment process is necessary to inform the preparation for leaving care plan and ultimately arrive at the development of the aftercare plan. The aftercare plan cannot be divorced from the context of this ongoing assessment, preparation planning and review process. It is essential that every effort is made to engage with a young person in the assessment and planning process, and there is a much greater likelihood that when a young person is actively involved in the planning process, he or she will continue to engage with the aftercare worker and services after reaching 18. Implementation of the aftercare plan is the next phase of the process and should be regularly reviewed and revised as necessary; it should also be monitored to ensure the best possible outcome for the young person. However, we are concerned that there is no reference to implementation of the aftercare plan specifically in the Bill. In the absence of any legislative provision in the Bill for implementation, we are concerned that the supports and services required to meet the needs of this vulnerable group of young people, as identified in the aftercare plan, may not be effectively delivered.

Having an aftercare plan is no guarantee of receiving an aftercare service. In concluding I will detail the stories of two young people we have met through our work. They have had very different experiences of aftercare, which indicates the necessity not only of aftercare supports but also the impact of having stable aftercare accommodation on the long-term outcomes for young people. Stephen is now aged 25 and has been involved with our service for a number of years. He was taken into care at 15, having suffered years of emotional and physical abuse at home. He was placed in residential care because of his age and for the first time in his life he had stability, routine and was supported in going to school on a regular basis. He did well in school, completed his leaving certificate and expressed a desire to go to college. He was the first person from his family to go to third level education. He decided to study law and the HSE referred him to an aftercare service. When he was 18 he moved into supported accommodation, was provided with financial supports and had his education paid for. He completed his law degree and then went on to complete his professional legal training and exams. He qualified as a solicitor last year. During all this time he had consistent aftercare support, stable accommodation and a regular income.

Sarah, on the other hand, was not so fortunate. She is now 24 and was taken into care when she was eight. She was in foster care for several years but this did not work out for her. Subsequently, she had many moves and numerous social workers. She was in residential care until 16, when she became pregnant. She had few supports at this time and moved into private rented accommodation with her boyfriend. After her baby was born her boyfriend was sent to prison and Sarah had no option but to move in with his family. This did not work out either and she again moved into another apartment. As she was now over 21 and had not previously engaged with any aftercare services she was not eligible for any aftercare support. She coped reasonably well for a while but when things became really difficult she asked for her child to be taken into respite care. She suffered isolation, loneliness and depression, and she found it more and more difficult to cope. Her child was in and out of care and she could not maintain her home. Finally, her child was taken into full-time care. She became reliant on alcohol and drugs, and she is now homeless, living on the streets and struggling to overcome her addiction. From the age of 16 Sarah had no supports and was unable to access them at a later stage when she needed them.

We welcome the improvements and acceptance that there is a responsibility to provide aftercare services after a person reaches 18. We are heartened that there has been much progress in this area but although we firmly believe the legislation will strengthen aftercare supports for young people, it is vital that legislation be further strengthened to include assessment, as outlined, with reference to implementation thereafter.