Supporting Long-Term Foster Care Placements in the Independent Sector

This document describes an evaluation of an innovative project by Match Foster Care aimed at improving long-term foster care outcomes by delegating statutory duties to the agency and providing comprehensive services. The University of East Anglia (UEA) team conducted the evaluation, comparing Match with a traditional agency, using quantitative and qualitative methods. Results showed potential benefits such as consistent support and positive relationships, but the evaluation was limited by a focus on process and faced challenges like local authority reorganizations. The project showed promise for positive market disruption and community benefits, but further exploration is needed. The evaluation of the Innovation Programme (IP) in Children's Social Care also highlighted the integration of roles and the potential for long-term cost savings, despite short-term financial savings not being evident. Positive outcomes included a consistent social worker presence and professional satisfaction, but complexities such as role overlap were noted. The document concludes that the IP is promising but requires more comprehensive evaluation to fully understand its impact, with recommendations for future policy and practice. **This summary was written by an AI model and therefore should not be considered a definitive summary of the report. If you are aware of inaccuracies, please email evaluation.registry@cabinetoffice.gov.uk.**

Description

• Lead department: Department for Education (DfE)
• Evaluation stage: A complete evaluation report
• Other departments: No other departments listed
• Evaluation types: Process evaluation
• Process methods: Focus groups or group interviews; Individual interviews; Other
• Grant information: This intervention is not distributing funding via a grant
• Government Major Project information: This intervention is not a major project
• Policies: No policies provided

Event Dates

• Event Name: Publication of final results
• Event date: October 2016

Evaluation Costs

• Cost: Not provided

Evaluation sharing

• Link(s) to published report(s): Yes
• Links to evaluation plans: No link provided
• Findings: Not provided
• Permission to share confirmed: Yes