No a RO is not the same as SGO. The only way you can be sure of ongoing funding and with the LA still being on the case is by way of the children being long term/permanently fostered by you. This used to be quite a usual route to permanency for children, until finance became such a big issue.
Many LT foster carers were encouraged to apply for Residence Orders because it meant the the case was closed and there was a big saving in terms of social work time. Also the RO allowance is discretionary and can be changed, stopped altogether, though sws don't always tell people that this is the case. In fact some of them don't even know!
Also you share the PR with the birth parents even though you are in the "driving street" - there are still quite a few things that sws don't tell people e.g. the bps have a right to know where you live, a say in the child's education . I know of a recent case on here of a woman who holds a RO for a child and has recently found out how much influence the bps can have when the child is on a RO. SWs like ROs because they don't have to do long reports and they can be granted via the courts without too much trouble. Then they can wave you goodbye and leave you to sort out any future problems. The rationalise all this by saying "it isn't right for a child to spend his/her lifetime in care" and in one sense that is true, as they may never really feel secure in your care. They will have to have 6 monthly reviews etc and will still be in the Looked after system. Callme a cynic but this was never really talked about until constraints on budgets, and suddenly L-T foster carers were being asked to apply for ROs and as I said before were not told all of the things they needed to know in some cases, to inform their decision about whether or not to apply for a RO. Also birth parents can apply to the court at any time for the RO to be varied so that the children can be returned to them. In most cases it is highly unlikely that they would be successful, but they have the right to do this.
SGOs - relatively new legislation and and came into effect in Jan 2006. In my view this is a much better route to permanency than ROs. The reason I say this is because the sw has to complete an assessment of needs for these cases, including financial need. SWs don't like them because they take longer to do, a very comprehensive assessment - the issues to be covered are similar to those for l-t fostering but are actually laid down by parliament.
Re finance - SGO payments are discretionary, and there is something in the legislation that states that SSDs should pay allowances similar to fostering allowances for the first 2 years of the making of the SGO. Also there is something in the legislation that "no placement should break down because of lack of finance" but this is tricky because if you were inneed of finance after 2 years I am not at all sure how you would get the matter back into court - I think this could only be done by judicial review and you would need a lawyer for that.
The other plus is that the bps have very little PR - the only things you cannot do as the holder of an SGO is
Change the child's surname
Take the child out of the country for longer than 3 months
Apply for an adoption Order
Unless there is consent from the bps.
The other thing is that bps have to have "leave of the court" before that can apply for the children to be returned to them and this means that the judge has to be satisfied that there has been a significant change in the circumstances of the bps before he/she is willing to hear the case. Also of course the length of time you have had the children will be a big consideration as they will (hopefully) be securely attached to you.
If there are issues about contact etc the sws can ask for a 1 yr supervision order to the made alongside the SGO which in theory means that they will still be there to intervene when necessary, though just how much they will be able to help is open to debate, with the pressures upon sws at the moment. This is only going to get worse with the govt's planned spending cuts on public services.
SO to be honest the only way you are going to be sure of finance and support is to remain as permanent foster carers. You will need to really dig your heels in over this. If you talk about financial support, they may well assure you that it is avaiable with a RO but not that is discretionary and as I said many sws don't even know this.
I worked for a LA SSD for 25 years and have worked independently for 5 years (retired 2 years ago) and I used to assess kinship carers mostly (relatives wanting to foster another relatives child, rather than the child go to strangers) Once I had done my assessment i was out of the picture, but I used to tell families not to be dragooned into applying for a RO, but I was not always sure what happened as my involvement ended after the a/ment and the LA took over. One woman contacted me though and said "Oh we went to a big meeting and they've "put us down for a RO!" They had no idea that the LA cannot force people down this route because they cannot make the application themselves.
You can google ROs and SGOs but a lot of it is written in legal language, but there will be guidelines which are written in a more understandable way.
Having said all this you may have no trouble with your LA and they will be happy to approve you as permanent foster carers - great if that's the case but being forewarned is being forearmed!