Length of court cases mainly to blame for delays in adoption, says Ofsted report

April 2, 2012

The most significant cause of delay for children needing adoption is the length of time it takes for cases to be completed in court, a report by Ofsted has concluded.

The Right on Time report surveyed nine local authorities and tracked 53 adoption cases in detail. A further 36 cases were randomly sampled.

It found that:

The average time taken to complete care proceedings in the cases inspectors examined was almost 14 months;
Although there were some delays caused by issues such as a lack of suitable adopters or weak planning, these were generally not as significant as those caused earlier by delays in initiating and concluding care proceedings;
A high number of cases studied by inspectors had been subject to repeat or late assessments of parents or members of the wider family. “The time taken to carry out these assessments often had a measurable and adverse impact upon the timely granting of an order allowing the child to be placed for adoption,” Ofsted said. “It added months, or in some cases years, to the time it took to secure the new family that the child needed”;
In many of the local authorities surveyed, the fragile relationship between social workers and the judiciary system meant that social workers felt they lacked credibility and status in the court arena;
Additional and duplication of assessments ordered by the courts “did not always contribute to a greater understanding of a child’s needs or result in differences of recommendations compared with the initial assessment”;
Not intervening early enough, and cases being left to ‘drift’ prior to care proceedings, were also key factors that hindered successful adoption in the cases reviewed;
Some children had been known to children’s social care for a considerable length of time prior to care proceedings being initiated. “Typically, these cases were characterised by long-standing concerns about either neglect or emotional abuse, or both,” Ofsted said. “Delays jeopardised good outcomes for children. The children were older when they entered care, and their life experiences had resulted in some significant behavioural challenges for potential adopters."

Ofsted said it had found many good examples of practice where local authorities had worked to minimise delays. It added that overall, there was good parallel planning when children were taken into care or about to be placed for adoption.

“Most of the cases tracked showed a clear commitment to early planning for adoption at the same time as rehabilitation was being pursued,” the watchdog said. “This ensured that if children could not go back to their birth family then the process for adoption was already in place.”

Interviews with adopters found that the majority were happy with the overall service that they received. “Most did not feel that they had experienced significant delay, although nearly all considered that there had been some kind of delay, however minor,” Ofsted said.

The report also concluded that processes for matching children with adoptive placements were “generally robust”. Also, of the authorities surveyed, there was little evidence of delay caused by an unrealistic search for a ‘perfect’ ethnic match.

John Goldup, Deputy Chief Inspector at Ofsted, said: “For children who need the love and stability that an adoptive family can offer, what matters most is that they get that chance, in the right family, with the minimum of delay. Local authorities have a huge responsibility to play in achieving that. But this report highlights that one of the most important things we need to do if more children are to have the chance that they need, when they need it, is to get the court process right.

“Decisions to place children for adoption are not easy. They are life-changing decisions that social workers and the judiciary have to make. However, the focus must always be on the child and what is best for that child. Part of that is looking at how we can minimise delays wherever possible when adoption is the right decision.”

Goldup said Ofsted’s report highlighted a range of key issues that local authorities needed to address. “Much of this needs to be done in partnership with the judiciary and Cafcass, the court welfare service,” he said. “[The report] urges the Government to act with urgency to implement the recommendations of the Family Justice Review which will tackle some of the root causes of delay in the system”.

In response, Matt Dunkley, President of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, said: "Successful adoptions are the end of a complex process involving some very difficult decisions about assessing parental capacity, managing risk and the best outcomes for these vulnerable children.”

He pointed out that the adopters interviewed for this report clearly understood the challenges involved and were, in the main, content with the services that they received.

But Dunkley added: “[We] know that this process can sometimes be slow and unwieldy, in part because of the number of different agencies involved. Social workers, the judiciary, Cafcass and other agencies need to work together to remove unnecessary delays.”

He said directors of Children’s Services would be keen to discuss these findings – and those in a recent report on the quality of expert witnesses – with the judiciary and Cafcass as part of local efforts to increase the speed of decision-making in the courts.

However, he added that some of the fundamental reforms proposed in the Family Justice Review would require changes to legislation. “We would urge the Government to press ahead with its commitment to making this happen,” Dunkley added.

The Right on Time report can be downloaded here.