Private child care under fire in wake of £150m bill

YORKSHIRE local authorities are under pressure to reduce their reliance on privately-run children’s homes after spending £150m on fees in just three years.

As the annual costs for two Yorkshire authorities passed the £10m mark, politicians are backing calls for major changes to the private care system which sees hundreds of young people from Yorkshire sent to homes across the country.

There are concerns that children in private care, often many miles from home, are more vulnerable to sexual exploitation, such as the horric cases reported last year in Rochdale.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

According to Ofsted there are just under 100 private care homes across Yorkshire, with clusters in disadvantaged areas with cheaper property prices, heightening fears that children may be more vulnerable to abuse.

Several local authorities in Yorkshire are sending increasing numbers of children to specialist homes outside their area with councils chiefs admitting that they do not know the locations of some private homes. Information sharing is often patchy and small homes can open without planning permission.

Weekly costs for some homes are over £5,000 per child and those authorities with large numbers of vulnerable children in care are facing huge increases in bills.

Leeds Council’s annual bill for external residential provision reached £14m last year, double the bill for 2009-10, as the number of Leeds children in private care outside the city rose to over 100 and those in private care locally tripled to 24.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Doncaster last year spent almost £12m on residential and educational placements, up £2m on 2009-10, as the number in private care outside the town remained at well over 100 a year.

Senior councillors are backing calls for tougher regulation and curbs on what some see as a ‘monopoly’ enjoyed by private providers.

Bradford councillor Ralph Berry, executive member for children’s services, believes major changes are overdue.

His authority invested millions in five new local council care homes and has managed to keep the private care budget to around £4m a year, last year sending just 16 children outside the district.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Coun Berry said there was a ‘lack of accountability’ with private care homes because local children’s services were often unaware of the locations of homes on their own doorstep.

He claimed the industry enjoyed a ‘monopoly’ which meant they could charge excessive fees and was unhappy with the location of at least one home in his city.

“I’m not against private sector homes per se but in some areas local authorities have to use them as a first resort. There is a lack of accountability.

“The time is right to have a discussion. The private sector has us by the proverbials and can charge whatever they like.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Keighley Tory MP Kris Hopkins said Bradford had saved itself a lot of money by investing in its own children’s homes.

“It does require councils to make some very careful strategic decisions about what is most important. The care of children has to be paramount. Sometimes you can invest to save the taxpayer a huge amount of money.”

Leeds councillors have also expressed serious concerns.

Following the Rochdale care home abuse scandal, a special Leeds committee conducted an inquiry into private care homes. Councillors worry that small-scale homes are able to open without planning permission and without notifying councils.

Councillor Judith Chapman, chairman of the Leeds inquiry, has written to Children’s Minister Edward Timpson calling for tighter regulations, saying the current inspection system did not go far enough.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

A Department for Education spokesman said it had set out urgent reforms to protect children and address some very serious weaknesses. He added: “There are good children’s homes and excellent care workers but it is clear that far too many of the most vulnerable children in society are at risk of being exposed to harm and danger.

“We want to get rid of an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ culture which sees residential care as a last resort, instead of protecting vulnerable young people and giving them the best possible start in life.”