Government concern over ‘formalised’ emergency Tusla accommodation

The child and family agency, Tusla, wanted to allow private companies provide residential care for children without having to first meet certain registration requirements governing care homes, records show.

Department of Children officials privately raised concern that the proposals from Tusla could be seen to “formalise” emergency arrangements.

Tusla’s increasing reliance on special emergency arrangements, where children are housed in B&Bs, rental properties or holiday lets, has been criticised by children’s rights groups, politicians and judges, who say they are unsuitable for vulnerable young people in care.

An internal department briefing, seen by The Irish Times, said the “unregulated” emergency placements “may not adequately meet the needs of children”.

Jacques Nienaber says Leinster got it wrong in three areas against Toulouse

---

‘Parenting and work takes up every minute I have. I’m losing myself’

---

Miriam Lord: No dissenting voices as Dáil rubber-stamps decision to recognise Palestine

---

Michael McDowell: Irish ‘sneaking regarders’ of Trump are naive about the threat he poses to democracy

---

Kate Duggan, Tusla chief executive, recently said there were about 160 children in care in these emergency arrangements, about 100 of whom were unaccompanied underage asylum seekers who arrived from Ukraine and elsewhere.

A shortage of places in group care homes and foster carers, as well as a rise in cases of young people with increasingly complex behavioural problems, has driven an increase in the numbers in the special emergency arrangements, known as SEAs.

Records show Tusla wrote to the department in March this year proposing a legal amendment, to allow private companies provide residential care without having to first meet certain registration requirements governing care homes. The change would see private companies accommodating children in care be able to “retrospectively” meet these requirements, up to a month or more after becoming operational, it said.

A July 12th department briefing warned the proposal “could be considered to seek to formalise” special emergency arrangements, which it noted “may not adequately meet the needs of children”.

The briefing from officials said the proposal would also mean “vulnerable children could be placed with private organisations without oversight for a period of up to three months”.

The department said it had initially understood from Tusla that SEAs were “only for children with specific needs” that could not be met in group care homes or with foster carers.

However, the briefing said it appeared this cohort was just one of several groups being housed in the emergency placements.

The briefing, released under the Freedom of Information Act, said a shortage of available beds in residential group homes and in foster care was “one of the drivers” behind Tusla’s reliance on SEAs.

A department spokesman said regulations governing residential care placements were an “important safeguard” in providing safe and high-quality accommodation.

“The department continues to work closely with Tusla on an ongoing basis to ensure that the legislative and safeguarding framework continues to be sufficiently robust to protect children in care from evolving risks,” he said.

The department was considering the proposal from Tusla around the registration requirements for private residential care providers and emergency arrangements, he said.

A Tusla spokeswoman said the emergency arrangements were typically provided by external providers.

While private providers ordinarily register accommodation with the agency before caring for children, there was a current exception where a child was at risk of homelessness and Tusla was “satisfied that there is no accommodation available” elsewhere in the system, she said.

“If it is later determined that this placement is a suitable ongoing placement for the child, the provider will then be required to register that setting as a children’s residential care centre,” the spokeswoman said.

Tusla was looking for a change to the Child Care Act “to provide additional clarity to the exemption”, as well as ensure proper governance over the emergency accommodation, she said.