Section 20 and Leaving care support for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (DCSF 19/05/09)

Dear Sir or Madam,

Can you please email be an electronic copy of:

1) The names of the local authorities/councils who are not
implementing Section 20 of the Children Act, in situations when
they have a duty to do so and are instead using Section 17, as
discussed below:

"There is also evidence that some councils are still not adhering
to
the Hillingdon judgement and are inappropriately using
section 17 of the Children Act 1989 to provide limited
support, such as temporary accommodation, instead
of providing care and accommodation for looked after
children under section 20."

From: Sub section 232. Page 55 - Safeguarding children
The third joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to
safeguard children 2008
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/localauthorities/...

2) The names of the local authorities/councils/areas which are not
complying fully with leaving care requirements, as discussed below:

"In some areas, JARs
found that compliance with requirements for leaving care
was lower for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children
than for other care leavers in the same area."

From: Sub section 233. Page 55 - Safeguarding children
The third joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to
safeguard children 2008
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/localauthorities/...

Notes:

LAC (2003)13: Guidance on accommodating children in need and
their families

“where a child has no parent or guardian in this country, perhaps
because he has arrived alone seeking asylum, the presumption should
be that he would fall within the scope of section 20 and become
looked after, unless the needs assessment reveals particular
factors which would suggest that an alternative response would be
more appropriate. While the needs assessment is being carried out,
he should be cared for under section 20.”
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsands...

Behre & Ors, R v Hillingdon London Borough Council [2003] EWHC 2075
(Admin)(HC) confirmed that UASC under 18 should be accommodated as
looked after children under s20 of the Children Act 1989."
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/localauthorities/...

: Your correspondence

Please ensure that any of your general correspondence,
acknowledgements or holding letters etc are included or
cut-and-pasted into the body of the email messages, using plain
text, rather than as attachments. As this will mean your
correspondence is much easier to access, read and respond to.

: Accessibility:

When providing any information disclosures please provide it in the
original unrestricted format such as:

a. MS Word .doc or Rich Text Text .rtf format or equivalent
(suitable for disclosure of email messages)

b.Spreadsheets in MS Excel .xls format or equivalent

c.Presentations in MS Powerpoint .ppt format or equivalent

or converted to Portable Document Format (PDF), ONLY if none of the
above formats are available

if you only have a paper version (hard copy) available, please
provide a Digital Photo Copier Scanned version in PDF format. If
you do provide disclosures in PDF from a Digital Photo Copier Scan,
please state that you have done so because no other format, such as
a, b or c above, are available.

If you need to redact text elements of any disclosure can you
please ensure that the rest of text based information remains
accessible to a Screen Reader.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_reader>

Please ensure any electronic disclosures are absolutely free of any
Document limitations or controls, such as making them Read-only,
Encrypted or Password restricted, as this is likely to render them
less usable on a general basis and more specifically, inaccessible
to Assistive Technology.

Please do not send any information in compilation archive formats,
such as .zip.

Providing correspondence and disclosed information via these means
will help ensure that text based information is accessible for use
with a Screen Reader or a Magnifier for none text based information
and will prevent any further and separate representations under the
Disability Discrimination Act. If you are unable to meet these
reasonably practicable accessibility requests please state why and
provide a copy of any internal information, such as a policy relied
upon that would explain such a decision.

Yours faithfully,

Cassidy, J

Dear Sir or Madam,

In connection with part 1 of my request:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

can you confirm or deny whether any of the local authorities under
discussion, includes those listed below?

Birmingham City Council

Hounslow Council

London Borough of Hillingdon

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

Kent County Council

Manchester City Council

Oxfordshire County Council

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council

West Sussex County Council

this is due to the fact that within a report they commissioned,
they do make mention of the use of Section 17 Children Act support:

"Section 17: Those receiving support under Section 17 do not
necessarily receive any of the
support provided under Section 20.They should be provided with ‘a
range and level of
services appropriate to those children's needs’. In the past local
authorities commonly used
Section 17 to provide unaccompanied children with financial support
and accommodation,
which ranged from supported lodgings to a B&B, a privately rented
shared house or
a hostel."

The Legal And Policy Framework For Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking
Children Care Leavers (UASC)2 (2.1) Page 7
Unaccompanied care leavers and asylum seekers report
http://www.kent.gov.uk/publications/coun...

Yours sincerely,

Cassidy, J

Dear Sir or Madam,

RE: 2009/0044865
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

This is to remind you that my information request is now overdue a
response. By law, the response had to be prompt but no later than
17 June 2009.

Yours sincerely,

Cassidy, J

Dear Sir or Madam,

Further to you letter, posted at:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/hi...

please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Department for
Children, Schools and Families's handling of my FOI request
'Section 20 and Leaving care support for unaccompanied
asylum-seeking children (DCSF 19/05/09)'.

It appears to me that I have requested information you do hold but
thus far you have not provided any reason why you refuse to
disclose such. Specifically via the following email:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

I provide quotes from the DCSF report 'Safeguarding children The
third
joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to safeguard
children 2008' - these quotes suggest to me that the DCSF has
information/evidence in it's possession that it knows of named
specific local authorities which are not complying with Children
Act Section 20 and the Hillingdon Judgement and using Children Act
Section 17 possibly illegally.

"...evidence that some councils are still not adhering
to the Hillingdon judgement and are inappropriately using section
17 of the Children Act 1989 to provide limited support, such as
temporary accommodation, instead of providing care and
accommodation for looked after children under section 20."
From: Sub section 232. Page 55 - Safeguarding children The third
joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to safeguard
children 2008
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/localauthorities/...

Once again I request that you provide me with the name of the local
authorities you have reported in Sub section 232. Page 55 of the
aforesaid DCSF report.

Can you also please provide me with the names of the local
authorities/councils that the DCSF report have a lower level of
compliance with Leaving Care requirements for for unaccompanied
asylum-seeking children
than for other children.

"In some areas, JARs found that compliance with requirements for
leaving care was lower for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children
than for other care leavers in the same area."

From: Sub section 233. Page 55 - Safeguarding children The third
joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to safeguard
children 2008

If you are unable to provide this information can you please
arrange for a errata to be issued for the DCSF 'Safeguarding
children The third
joint chief inspectors’ report on arrangements to safeguard
children 2008' report, as it seem unwilling to provide any evidence
or information it hold for the above quoted allegations.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

Yours sincerely,

Cassidy, J