how fostering really is

[maypole1]

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/27/diary-of-a-foster-parent

this is like my life

she made it sound extremely hard work but rewarding.

Omg it's so frightening. Sws don't care. Are you with private or LA ? We are assured they don't withold information when trying to place children. Have you had that happen to you? We are going to panel in February and after reading that I am doubting that our LA are actually telling us the truth.

i am with the LA this is just one persons point a view.

As lo depending on what La you work for i know my LA would try and give me all the info because they dont want the placement breaking down its more work for them.

but sadly i have had children dropped off to me from diff rent LA and didn't hear hid nor hare from the child's social worker

don't be scared its like every job some people are just not very good at their job my sw is fantastic cannot fault her and she is the one that supports me if the child's social worker isn't 100% most supporting sw are very good also it can very much depend on the case to how able a child's sw is able to deal with it.

Also don't forget you can say no to any child just like in the story if you don't feel you know all the info and what you get from it all even after all that she is still fostering so take heart in that.

Thankyou for your clarification freak out over with now.

I think that the foster carer in the Guardian must be fostering for an IFA (Independent Fostering Agency) who are essentialy businesses run for profit, though with the blessing of successive governments who love privatisation in any shape or form!

If the carer in the article was a l.a. carer she would not be having a child placed 300 miles away? (can't remember the exact distance but it was something ridiculous. LAs only use IFAs when they can't place in their own authority or neighbouring authorities. IFAs charge cash strapped LAs enormous amounts for providing placements and do pay their foster carers more than LA carers, but make a handsome profit. If the LA has a child to place and the only place is miles and miles away provided by an IFA then their backs are against the wall and they have to accept that placement.

The carer in the article says she is angry with the judge because he madeit clear to the LA that theymust find an "in house" placement as the father could not be expected to travel 300 miles for contact. I think the judge made the right decision. As for the carer's views about birth parents who should not be allowed to have contact, that is a very hot potatoe and most sws don't really agree withmaintaining contant and know thatit upsets children, but the problem is that until the final hearing, when the decision is made about the child's future, the child could be returned home. Therefore birth parents do have the right to (indeed it is enshrined in law) maintain contact with their children (almost always supervised at a contact centre). I have to say that in some cases this is inthe best interests of the child, because they can think parents have disappeared off the face of the earth if they don't see them and these troubled children will not be able to process this confusion.

I think the carer inthe Guardian should be angry with successive governments that have applauded the use of IFAs and not given any thought to the notion that children can be placed many many miles from their home. You will no doubt know by now that I am angry with IFAs - some of them have become millionaires and it is wrong in my view.
Also I suspect the IFA didn't give her all the details about the case, fearing that she would not take the placement and they would not make a fat profit. Rant over!!

My thanks go to the thousands of LA foster carers who earn less money but foster children within their own la or a neighbouring one and know that they get paid much less than IFA carers, but soldier on regardless. They are worth their weight in gold. Just a pity there weren't more of them.

I was going to post a reply but can't possibly post anything as amazingly eloquent as nananina...

I'll just agree then

Why thank you Attilla - it was a rant realy because I feel so strongly about IFAs. I worked as a fostering sw and tm mgr of a fostering & adoption team for 25 years (now semi retired) and it was a great wonder that we kept foster carers once the IFAs came along, offering them 3 times as much money as the LA could afford to pay. The worst of it was, our carers knew this, but out of loyalty most of them stayed with the LA. I don't blame carers who go to the IFAs - I just don't think this kind of privatisation should have been allowed by governments.

One cheeky bugger who started an IFA actually called a meeting in the home of one of our carers and tried to "recruit" as many of them as he could and he was a right plonker. Fortunately many of them thought he was glib and smarmy and uninformed, but some of them started to foster for him. He is a complete pratt but has made an absolute fortune and drives a porche!

Better stop there or my blood pressure willbe raised!

I work for an IFA who are charity funded. So not ALL Directors of IFA's get rich quick.

www.tactcare.org.uk/pages/en/about_us.html

I fostered for LA for 16 years. The support we, and our foster children, have with TACT is far superior to that of LA.

When a child is placed with IFA they come with a package of support - regular visits from social worker, support with contact, built in support from ed psych, CAHMS or play therapist etc

Most children do not receive the support they deserve when placed with LA foster carers, as LA claim they do not have the funding. This is to the detriment of children and their carers.

Most of our LA foster carers have joined IFA's - not for the money but for the invaluable support. This is why LA's are constantly recruiting foster carers. Also most social workers last between 12-18 months with LA before transferring to IFA's - again because they feel undervalued within LA and are given more support within the fostering team with IFA's. Other SW's burn out extremely quickly and seek employment elsewhere (well away from social services).

Fishtank - I can well believe that the support you get from your IFA is far superior to the |LA support. I realise of course that the child comes with a packet of support, and you are right to say that a lot of children placed by LAs are disadvantaged because they do not have the same degree o support. The thing is though that it is the LA that PAYS for all this support, not the IFA.

When I retired a few years ago, IFA placements were charging LAs 3 or 4 times the cost of an "in house" placement. I do understand why LAs carers move to IFAs and I'm sure some do for the extra money (which is quite understandable) and the extra support as you say.

LA foster carers continually asked why the LA could not pay as much and provide all the extra support, because we did when there was no other placement. As a manager I constantly brought this matter to the attention of senior managers, but the answer was always the same, that funding was just not available. Even when we were warning Snr Mgrs that unless they found a way of paying a similar rate as the IFAs they would lose significant numbers of carers, they would not budge, and I became really frustrated at this.

I don't really understand what you mean by an IFA that is charity funded - haven't had time yet to look at your link. All IFAs are businesses by definition - though I accept that some make bigger profits than others. They all charge LAs way in excess of what the LA pay their carers, so where does the money go, if not into the pockets of the directors/shareholders whatever?

My gripe is with successive governments that applaud any kind of privatisation, even where profits can be made from vulnerable children.

NanaNina.

I can well understand your frustration.

BUT not all IFA's are making huge profits. Our IFA is charity based. The money that the LA are paying is geared toward the children/young people who, for whatever reason, cannot be placed "in house".

For example we have had children/young people who have been victims of serious consistent abuse. So much so that these children cannot be placed in a LA foster home, with other children, because of the risk posed to the other children.

These children/young people have been moved out to IFA's where they, absolutely rightly, receive a package of support geared to their individual needs.

If these children were to be placed within LA foster care they would still need the same level of proffessional input, thus still costing the LA a huge sum of money.

It is not necessarily the IFA foster carers who gain (as you quite rightly state) the huge amount of money - or in our case the IFA. The money is shared between the proffessionals needed to make life more bearable for the victims of abuse - ed psychologists, play therapists, children's advocates, psychiatrists, councellors etc.

In our case we loved being foster carers for our LA until we were attacked every which way - just because we did not agree a point with our SSW. The children in our care suffered emmensely as a result. LA staff stuck together and made our, our children's and foster children's lives a misery for the most ridiculous of reasons. We made an official complant (on several matters) and our complaints were all upheld.

We went on to adopt the two children we were caring for - against the recommendation of the LA. The Judge, in his summing up, tore a strip off the managers of the child protection team and the fostering team. These two Managers were disciplined over this case.

I appreciate your concerns over SOME IFA's but sometimes foster carers have no option than to join IFA's. I can assure you we did not join an IFA for the money!

In fact by the time we pay tax and insurance stamp (as IFA foster carers are legally obliged to) we receive little more than we received as LA carers. The big plus for us being with IFA is the support we receive, and as we have two (adopted) young children matching is vital.

I do not wish to offend but in our experience of fostering with LA, matching was not given due consideration. And when things go tits up the LA are always quick to blame the foster carer.

So we have aquired two children at no cost to the LA and we have a 5 year old in placement (IFA placed). We receive £250 a week. For this we have to transport the child 50 miles 3 times a week for contact, plus transport him to various proffessional appointments weekly.

Fostered child sees an ed psych, play therapist and councellor weekly. He also has an advocate from Barnado's to speak for him re contact with parents, grandparents and older siblings because his SW does not take on board the child's distress at contact when I convey the change in his behaviour directly before and after contact. The contact supervisors and Children's Guardian are requesting that contact be minimised because of the distress caused to the child during contact.

TBH I think that if the LA SW's (especially managers)listened to the concerns of their foster carers they would not need to spend the amount of money on recruitment drives. If they offered support and understanding to their carers then there would be more chance of their carers staying with them.

Seventeen of our LA foster carers have resigned this month! When I recall our experience of LA fostering I am really not surprised. Disheartened for the children who need quality care. But I can well understand that there is only so much a foster family can take.

Also our experienced SW's are leaving in droves because they are so frustrated with the beaurocracy their job now entails. Most SW's become SW's to make a difference to children's lives. Sadly they cannot spend time with the children because of the paperwork and red tape they are bogged down with.

Fishtank -very interesting post. Your LA must be some dumb twits to lose foster carers with 16 years experience. So sad that so many sws and mgs still have such unrealistic expectations of foster carers, (one of my favourite sayings when chidren's sws came to me with trivial complaints was "they are not Mr and Mrs perfect, they have the same human failings as you and I" - stopped them in their tracks for a bit at least! Also sadly some sws and mgrs (the insecure ones in my view) still see foster carers as "lesser mortals" who should always agree with them and not dare to challenge.

Glad you got to adopt your children and the sws got their come uppance in court which it sounds like they deserved.

Don't know which IFA you are with and they are certainly not paying you anything like IFA foster carers were getting 5 years ago (£300 - £400 per child per week)and I don't suppose you know how much your IFA is charging the LA. The cynical part of me wonders if they are in fact making a good profit because they are paying their carers less, but then of course yu have the support of other profesionals which is so vital, BUT it is still the LAs that are paying for this support via the charging rates of the IFA.

I absolutely agree with you that matching considerations are not given a great deal of importance in LAs - children's managers just want fostering mgrs to find a placement. I got into many wrangles with children's managers on this basis. Also agree that mgrs do not listen enough to foster carers or demonstrate their appreciation for the way in which foster carers cope with very very disturbed and vulnerable children ad young people.

Have to say that our LA did our best and provided opportunities for carers to do their NVQs with a local college, held annual evenings for foster carers with food and drink and got the Director out of his hidey hole to come and express his appreciation. We also put on summer picnics for carers and their own families and foster kids, and paid for all carers and their families and foster kids to go to a local pantomime. I know this is not the same as ongoing support on a day to day basis, but we had to fight hard for the money for these events.

As you say now with the cuts in public services, social workers will be even thinner on the ground and it is no surprise that more and more carers are going to IFAs which is what the government wants.

At one stage I was so frustrated I challenged the Chief of Operations to make all fostering sws and managers redundant and pay for all children to be placed via IFAs. Needless to say they didn't like this idea and no doubt loads of my colleagues wouldn't either, but I was just so fed up with the fact that some loyal carers were staying with us and not getting the support or the extra money provided by the IFAs but paid for by the LAs.

Anyway I wish you well in your future with what sounds a very good IFA. Are you willing to say which IFA it is? I am sometimes asked to do a/ments abd Form Fs for IFAs and some of them are better thab others Mind I don't look for work any more - I am 67 and think I've finally come to the end of my career and prefer caring for my grandchildren these days.

Hi NanaNina. Yes we are with The Adolescent and Childrens Trust (TACT).

Our Children's Services Manager is a dimwit of the highest order!

I wish there were more Managers like you who really want what is best for the child. Before I left the LA (This time last year) they decided that it "Would be a waste of money to continue the Childrens Chrsitmas party because children do not need parties anymore".

I am so glad I am out of there! As I have previously said the support we get from an IFA is paramount to us continuing the fostering task. The money after paying tax and insurance is more or less the same as LA payments.

As an IFA foster carer we receive payment pertaining to the child's needs. If we have a 3 year old with no issues we receive less than if we were presented with a 15 year old with drug/alcohol/abuse issues. It really depends on the level of support the Child/Young Person needs.

I am also with TACT and they are brilliant. Any money they make they put back into services. Our social worker is always available and has plenty of common sense. I can't think of a single negative! Go TACT!

Hi Claire. I agree TACT are brilliant! I cannot believe the differnece in the support we receive from them as opposed to LA. Whenever we have a new placement we get a phonecall EVERY DAY for at least two weeks just to see how we are all coping!

With the LA we were lucky if we had a phone call or visit every 6 months? There were times when our placements started and ended before we had communication from Child's Social Worker or our Supervising Social Worker - and our shortest placement was 8 months! And they call that Children's Services!

I think it depends on your LA though. We get a visit from our supervising SW every month (more if we wanted) and I 'speak' to the fc SW a couple times a week via email - we see her every couple of months as well.

i was head hunted by a private agency but i refused.
i have no desire to transfer from la to private.
ok the support isnt fantastic but i do not want them harrassing me every ten minutes. i know they are there if i need them.
in my expereince it is the childs social worker that is always a nightmare to get hold off and that is true of every placement i have had!

the lady who did the article wrote it very well and it was a true account of fostering as far as my experiences go.
for the record with people saying they often do not get any info regarding the placement, you should always be given a PIR prior to taking any child into your home as without it it is an ilegal placement!
as such you could lose your approval.

I work in Childrens Services and I would just like to clarify that our authority does have LA foster carers who live >300 miles away from our authority... not many, but some.

just to back haskell up i had a placement form hastings and i live in lancashire!

contact was a nightmare but fortunately only once a month!

Yes, I agree we have carers who live all over

The main area that I find a problem is when a concern is raised about a looked after child all the social workers are so jumpy they immediately start to defend themselves. The carers who work for IFA have social workers who can defend them. Working for a LA all the social workers have to stick together to defend their LA incase it all gets into the media. This isn't always in the best interest of the children. Social workers do have a tricky job but unless they open up to dialogue then carers will inevitably keep leaving because if they raise a concern they are threatened with deregistration, on very flimsy ground sometimes. Rather than IFA perhaps the LA could split into 2 camps so the social workers looking after carers don't feel obliged to agree with children's social workers?

I am a foster carer for IFA but have had no referrals for nearly a year and have a double room spare
Should I move to LA and take a pay cut but be full up or stick this out

Fairydust do you get paid if you don't have a placement ?
Really surprised you haven't had a placement for a year.

Fairydust - what age range are you registered for? Nearly a year is a long stretch, it would hardly amount to a pay cut if you had palcements working for LA and surely they would be delighted to take you onto their books.

Sometimes an arrangement can be reached between providers who pay for your file rather than taking you through the whole pre registration routine. This saves loads of time. Perhaps ring fosterline to ask about that?

If you have 2 spare beds then LA would be able to place a couple of siblings with you which they are always desperate to keep together.

Do stop to think if you would be ok with the support from LA SW's, it is not nearly as individually tailored as IFA SW's. Also, placements are not always as meticulously matched to FC's.