The cost of double children’s houses but care can be poor

The cost of residential care for vulnerable children in England has almost doubled in five years, but many children still do not receive appropriate care, according to a report by the guard for independent public spending.

The National Audit Office (NAO) claims that the councils spent an average of £ 318,400 for each child placed in a home for children in the year ending in March 2024.

But these enormous sums do not represent a value for money, concludes the report.

“I don’t know where the money is spent,” said Ezra Quinton, now 20, who remembers broken windows and broken glass in the showers of one of the care houses in which he was placed.

Ezra, who is now working with Ceth, a careful care work, was first in care at the age of nine.

Originally from the Grand Manchester, he remembers having been transferred to another house every few months, often several kilometers from the place where he originally lived.

He thinks that he had up to 60 different investments and although he spent most of his life in Salford and Stockport, he lived in Wales, Liverpool, Crewe and Leeds.

His education was considerably disrupted, but he obtained C notes in all his GCSE.

At a house, the windows were on board due to broken windows.

“We were told to wear shoes if we wanted to take a shower because they did not clean the glass correctly,” he told BBC News.

The NAO report found that the cost increase was taken by a record number of children taken into account, the growing complexity of their needs – and a market focused on profits.

In 2023-24, the councils spent 3.1 billion pounds sterling for residential investments, on a market that the report described as “dysfunctional”.

He indicates that advice finds it difficult to find enough appropriate investments, arguing that this allows many private care providers to choose the children they take, depending on the amount of support they need and the amount of profit that allows.

The report is based on previous research which has shown that the 15 largest suppliers of children’s houses making average profits of more than 22%.

The author of the report, Emma Wilson, says that several factors contribute upwards, but with the overwhelming majority (84%) of children for children for profit: “It is really important to resolve that the balance between the supply of care and the demand available.”

She wants the Ministry of Education to be more to supervise a market which, she said, failed children in residential care.

“The NAO report concludes that the residential care system for maintained children does not offer a value for money. On the one hand, costs have doubled over three billion in the past five years, while many children are not in appropriate contexts,” said Wilson News.

The report underlines how, in March 2024, two thirds of children in residential care were in houses outside their local authority and almost half (49%) were more than 20 miles from the house.

The Ministry of Education said in a statement: “Vulnerable children across the country have long been disappointed with years of drift and negligence in the social care of children, which this report is naked.”

He added that he “led the greatest reform ever reform of children’s social care” to “break the cycle of the children’s crisis” – highlighting his planned recruitment of more family assistance workers and new legislation aimed at ending profits in care.

Clare Bracey, Ceth’s acting director general, says that the report “raises once again the lid on the exorbitant profits that are made by providing houses to our most vulnerable children”.

“This market failure leads to the most unforgivable failure [for] The future of children we are responsible for …

“Children supported cannot wait. Urgent measures must be taken now,” she says.

But some small households for private children in private insist that they do not make excessive benefits.

Sara Milner, who created Cherry Wood Children’s Home in Surrey four years ago, after a career in care for local authorities, staff said 80% of costs.

“The costs we invoic to local authorities reflect our direct costs and we make moderate margins … But obviously, we must be able to make profits to be a viable business and offer security in the future of young people, which is obviously very important when you do this type of work,” she told BBC News.

With the request of high places, she had also hoped to invest in a second home for children, but says that current pressures, including the cost increase and the recruitment difficulties, mean that it has been delayed.

The government has already declared that it planned to limit the profits that private companies can make, but the Children’s Homes Association, which represents the providers of tax payment in the United Kingdom, argues that the houses managed by the Council can in fact be more expensive.

“We know that official data show that local authorities’ costs are higher,” said association director of the association Mark Kerr.

“So, if there is a question of value for money, the independent sector probably demonstrates more quality / price ratio than local authorities,” he added.