This document summarizes findings from a study of out-of-home care standards in Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The study found that almost all jurisdictions in these countries have published foster care standards, though they were recently developed. The standards differed considerably across jurisdictions and were shaped by each context. Six types of standards were identified. Interviewees saw standards as generally positive, but implementation has issues. The summary then briefly outlines the out-of-home care systems and standards in the UK, Ireland, and Canada.

1. Out of Home Care Standards in Canada,
Ireland and the United Kingdom
Iain Matheson (Wellington, New Zealand)
Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies Conference
2-4 August, 2010
Sydney, Australia

2. Presentation Overview
 Three contexts
 Findings from international research into foster care
standards
 Discussion of some issues in relation to the UK, Canada,
and Ireland:
 OOHC system
 Sets of foster care and residential care standards
 Key features of standards

3. Context One
Matheson, I. (2009). Foster care standards: A four country
study. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Child and
Foster Care Federation.
 Selection of Aus., Can., Ire. and UK
 Mixed methods approach
 Literature review
 Analysis of 31 sets of standards in 18 jurisdictions
 38 telephone interviews across 12 jurisdictions
 Sampling
 Jurisdictions - national/state/provincial/territorial

4. Context Two
 Quality4Children standards for out-of-home child care in
Europe
 Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children (formerly
UN Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Conditions of
Alternative Care for Children)
 National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children
2009-2020 and development of National Standards for
Out of Home Care

5. Context Three
standard /'stænded/ n. & adj. —n. 1 an object or quality or measure serving as a basis or example
or principle to which others conform or should conform or by which the accuracy or quality of others
is judged (by present-day standards). 2 a the degree of excellence etc. required for a particular
purpose (not up to standard), b average quality (of a low standard). 3 the ordinary procedure, or
quality or design of a product, without added or novel features. 4 a distinctive flag, esp. the flag
of a cavalry regiment as distinct from the colours of an infantry regiment. 5 a an upright support, b
an upright water or gas pipe. 6 a a tree or shrub that stands alone without support. b a shrub grafted
on an upright stem and trained in tree form (standard rose). 7 a document specifying nationally or
internationally agreed properties for manufactured goods etc. (British Standard). 8 a thing
recognized as a model for imitation etc. 9 a tune or song of established popularity. 10 a system by
which the value of a currency is denned in terms of gold or silver or both. b the prescribed proportion
of the weight of fine metal in gold or silver coins. 11 a measure for timber, equivalent to 165 cu. ft.
(4.7 cubic metres). 12 Brit. hist. a grade of classification in elementary schools, — adj. 1 serving or
used as a standard (a standard size). 2 of a normal or prescribed quality or size etc. 3 having
recognized and permanent value; authoritative (the standard book on the subject). 4 (of language)
conforming to established educated usage (Standard English). multiple standard a standard of
value obtained by averaging the prices of a number of products. raise a standard take up arms; rally
support (raised the standard of revolt), standard-bearer 1 a soldier who carries a standard. 2 a
prominent leader in a cause (Oxford English Dictionary).

6. Foster Care Standards: A Four Country Study
Findings
1: Almost all jurisdictions in the study had published
foster care standards - some had more than one set.
2: In most jurisdictions, the publishing of sets of foster
care standards was a very recent development.
3: There were considerable differences across the sets
of standards.
4: The context in each jurisdiction was critically
important to how the standards were shaped.

7. Foster Care Standards: A Four Country Study
Findings...continued
5: Six types of standards identified:
 Best Practice
 Expected Practice
 Minimum Practice
 Practice Principles
 Ambiguous
 Mixed.
6: Interviewees saw standards as a positive development but...

8. UK OOHC Systems
• England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
• Local authorities provide care and also purchase from NGOs
and a large private sector
• Very strong central government involvement
• Some current practice and policy issues
– Professionalisation of foster care
– Kin care levels traditionally low but growing fast in some areas
– Strong ‘current’ focus upon integrated working, leaving care and
education
– Rights of children and young people
– Current budget cuts

9. UK Standards
• First Key standards in leaving care, 1996 (England & Wales)
• UK national standards for foster care, 1999 (UK)
• National care standards: Foster care and family placement
services, 2002 (England)
• Children’s Homes: National Minimum Standards. Children's
Homes Regulations, 2002 (England)
• Fostering services: National minimum standards of foster
care, 2003 (Wales)
• National care standards: Foster care and family placement
services, 2005 (Scotland)
• National standards in leaving care, 2007 (England)
• Training, support & development standards for foster care,
2007 (England)
• National care standards: care homes for children and young
people, 2005 (Scotland)

10. Characteristics of UK Standards
• Wide range and mix
• Includes statutory standards and comprehensive registration
and inspection regime
• Different bodies in each country, e.g. the Office for Standards
in Education, Children's Services and Skills (England)
• Statutory standards are minimum standards although grading
systems have recently been introduced (England, Scotland)
• Statutory foster care standards focus upon the fostering service
as an organisation – written in first person to children/young
people and foster carers (Scotland)
• UK national standards for foster care (1999) still in use?

11. Republic of Ireland OOHS System
• Recently re-structured
• Care delivered by central government (Health Services
Executive), NGO sector and a very small private sector
• Central government (HIQA) inspects residential facilities and
fostering services
• Historically more reliant on residential care
• Some current practice and policy issues
– The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (Ryan report)
– Budgets
– Kin care
– Asylum seekers

12. Republic of Ireland Standards
National Standards for Children's Residential Centres (2001)
National standards for special care units (n.d.)
National minimum standards for fostering services (2003)
Draft national quality standards for residential and foster care
services for children and young people (2010)

13. Characteristics of Republic of Ireland Standards
• Current (2003) fostering standards have a lot of strengths but
there were some implementation issues
• New draft standards have integrated residential and foster care
• New draft standards strike a balance between articulating high
level standards and outcomes, and providing clear, detailed
and substantive criteria
• Awaiting outcome of the consultation exercise

14. Canadian OOHC Systems
• 13 Provinces and Territories – significant diversity
• Care delivered by Ministries/Depts., Health Boards, Children’s
Aid Societies and First Nations agencies
• Very limited Central government role in OOHC
• Strong role for third party accreditation bodies for residential
and foster care
• Some current practice and policy issues
– Professionalisation of foster care
– Growth in kin care
– Foster family recruitment
– Care of aboriginal children and young people

15. Canadian Standards
Standards of Excellence for Family Foster Care Services,
1995 (CWLA)
Provincial and territorial standards - various
External accreditation standards (including):
• Canadian Accreditation Council accreditation process &
standards manual, (2008)
• Council on Accreditation standards, (2010)

16. Characteristics of Standards
Provincial foster care standards tend to:
– Have developed incrementally and be relatively ‘low key’
– be integrated into the government organisation
– foster family practise management tools and
– have limited aggregated monitoring and reporting in place
External accreditation
– Includes Council on Accreditation and Canadian Accreditation Council
– British Columbia and Alberta require that any agency contracted by
the government to offer services to children be accredited
Others
– Licensing standards
– Residential complaint standards, for example as developed by the
Office of the Child and Youth Advocate in Ontario

17. Ten Personal Thoughts on Good OOHC
Standards
1: The purpose is clear and the 7: Support with funding and
standards are consistent with this associated infrastructure.
stated purpose. 8: Clear logic model and
2: Part of a package of integrated monitoring/evaluation
measures. framework.
3: Indigenous children central. 9: Build upon our evidence base
4: Develop collaboratively. and what we know as
5: Recognise some differences practitioners, managers and
between residential and foster researchers.
care and also foster care and kin 10: Don’t duck the hard issues
care. e.g. relationships and warmth.
6: Include aftercare.

18. Thanks!
For further information, a copy of this presentation or a copy
of Foster care standards: A four country, please contact
Iain Matheson at iain@mathesonassociates.co.nz