One of the major concerns for local authorities regarding the implementation of the UASC Reform Programme has been the ongoing difficulties that local authorities have in managing the support needs of appeal rights exhausted (ARE) former UASCs once they turn 18.

Difficulties arise for local authorities in dealing with cases where the individual's asylum claim is finally determined as refused but there is a delay in UKBA removing that individual. Although Schedule 3 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act (2002) provides that most individuals become ineligible for leaving care support at this stage, local authorities are required to assess whether leaving care support needs to be continued to avoid a breach of the Human Rights Act.

Local authorities often find it very difficult to make these decisions because there is a lack of detailed statutory guidance on how they should apply the human rights test and because of a general unease about individuals being made destitute; which could also lead to costly legal challenges if support is stopped and local community cohesion issues if there are increased pools of people from abroad with no access to support or work.

Crucially, a `positive' human rights assessment does not currently make the individual eligible for funding under the terms of the UKBA Leaving Care Grant. In addition, as the legislation currently stands, former UASCs are not eligible for Section 4 support if a decision is made on their asylum case before they turn 18. Local authorities are therefore often left with a statutory duty to support these individuals but receive no funding to provide these services as a result of the individual's immigration status and have no alternative support options available to them (i.e. Section 4 support).

The LGA and member local authorities have consistently raised the problems associated with post-18 leaving care funding as an issue of concern and a stumbling block to the UASC Reform Programme with UKBA.

The `post-18 issues' sub-group of the UASC Reform Steering group (jointly chaired by the LGA and the ADCS with input from UKBA) have explored several possible solutions to this problem e.g. a potential change to the current legislation so that the responsibility for the support of ARE former UASCs once they turn 18 is transferred from local authorities to UKBA.

The `UASC Leaving Care Legislation Options' paper developed by the `post-18 issues' sub-group is attached (see Item 4, Annex A).

However, to date, a proposed alternative model of support and funding has not been formally agreed by the LGA and members and submitted to UKBA as a way of moving this issue forward.