Meita you said that with Concurrent Planning you could look at individual cases and each one would be different and I agree. My knowledge, like you say your knowledge, on this matter, is theoretical in that I looked into it.
You said there might be a child for a concurrency placement where there is a real chance that the child gets to go home. I am not sure this is the case, it might be, but our social worker told us/implied that only children where there was a very high likelihood they would need to be adopted would be put forward for Concurrent Planning.
The best place to find out what is available is to ask your county/LA/VA (not even sure if VAs do it but someone may know) or if you are not yet with an LA to ask around.
You can also look at Coram which is based in London and I think (not know but think) this was one of the first to kind of pilot this idea.
Planning
My understanding is that Concurrent Planning means planning for more than one thing at a time. So the first option is always that the child will go home with birth mum if this is possible, secondly a family member will be looked for who can bring the child up, if neither of those choices are possible the person who has been 'fostering' the child in the Concurrent Planning placement will be able to adopt them (assuming nothing else is amiss/problems or whatever).
Please anyone knows more correct me if I am wrong. Although the first choice is that baby goes home with birth mum if possible this is unlikely to happen because if it was likely to happen the child would be in foster care or in a mum and baby foster place where the mum can be assessed.
My understanding is that if doing Concurrent Planning you would be eligible for fostering allowance, which is not the same as a salary but is money and, of course, you would have to OK with your work. Apparently once the placement changes to adoption from 'fostering' you would be able to start adoption leave and would not be eligible for fostering allowance. I have been told that the law may change next year so that this needs to be available to all but at the moment I guess you just need either an employer who is willing to give you unpaid leave, or to be self employed or to be able to give up work.
We chose not to do it for three main reasons; we have a birth child and have talked for 18 months about a new brother or sister. If we had known that we might consider Concurrent Planning we would have said we were looking after a child and then if it all went through said here is a new brother or sister! Maybe that is not the way to do it, I don’t know but having talked about it in a fairly certain terms we could not face putting our 9 year old daughter through that uncertainly. That is just us, not criticising anyone else who does it. As I say if the birth child/older child does not expect it to be definite then it is not putting them through the uncertainty.
Secondly, concurrency requires a level of involvement with birth family which I was not sure I was really ready for. It involved taking child to see birth family etc which might be harder to do (I need to be back to collect my kid from school etc but other reasons for me I might have found that hard) and of course it is all time away from bonding with them yourself but these are selfish reasons I am not very proud of! 
Lastly it requires a flexible enough employer or the need to give up work; the former might be true but the latter definitely not!
I think Concurrent Planning is a brilliant idea 
I hope it will be a reality for many more children, I have only really heard of it in relation to babies and very young children. It saves the child having that step of foster carer between birth mum and adoptive family and I feel for that reason is more child-focused and better.
In our area there was only one or two examples of it so far but we said we were interested and were told when it was really up and running people could opt for concurrency or regular adoption and just see which opportunity because available first, so no adopter would sit and wait for concurrency, unless that was what they wanted, if you see what I mean.
BUT must say again, this is what I have heard and read and NOT what I have experienced.
I must say for very young children I do think it is a good idea and very young children tend to sleep in the car so travelling time would actually possibly not be bonding time but just nap time, so might not be such a trouble, but there could be other reasons it would work better for some adopters than others.
Have not read all these just used my friend Dr Google!
Planning/
Planning
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16208011
Just be aware some things that will pop up will be from USA.
Phew, masses of information from an uninformed person! Just check it all out with your social worker in your area because I may have it all wrong!!