One of the UK’s largest for-profit care chains has been accused of failing dozens of vulnerable children by shutting 28 residential homes, with staff warning they are struggling to find placements for all the children.
Outcomes First Group, which is owned by private equity firm Stirling Square, is planning to close a string of children’s homes across the Midlands and southern England by 5 May. The homes are understood to accommodate more than 60 children, placed in the care of the private group by councils including Bristol, Cheshire and Enfield in London.
A whistleblower with knowledge of some of the threatened homes said she felt closures would be harmful and disruptive for children, who could be moved to larger homes run by the group or even returned to councils if places cannot be found.
“It’s dreadful. The children have built relationships with the staff. They have got schools. They are getting therapy. And now they have to move somewhere else,” she said. “It’s incredibly damaging for them.”
The private group, which is the fourth largest provider of residential places for looked-after children in England, made a profit of £5.5m in 2021, up from £3.5m the year before.
This comes amid growing concerns about the sudden, large-scale closure of homes run by private firms, which over the past three decades have largely taken over children’s residential care in the UK. Regulators have warned councils might have to step in and find placements that could be a poor fit for children’s needs.
At least seven of Outcomes First’s homes at risk of closure are rated good or outstanding by Ofsted, while two are rated inadequate. The whistleblower claimed the chain’s smaller homes were being targeted for closure because they were not as profitable: “This is a prime example of why this ownership model should not be anywhere near children’s lives. Profits are driving this decision.”
The latest Ofsted report for one of the threatened homes, which is rated outstanding, says the staff provide a nurturing, caring environment for the children, with bedrooms and communal areas personalised with art, photographs and achievements. The report notes one child’s sibling lives a short distance away in another children’s home so they can stay in touch.
One staff member said that they have been told they have to be out this week even though they have not found anywhere for the children. “There are no placements for any of them to go to. We have been told that there is no leeway on the dates and we are desperately worried about them and what will become of them.”
The moves would make children feel more insecure, claimed the staff member. “We have children who we have built good, trusting relationships with. What are they going to think when we have to tell them? How will they ever feel secure in their next placement? Being in care is meant to help them, not make things worse.”
Some of the children include those due to start GCSEs, siblings living in nearby homes who could be split up, and a recently settled four-year-old.
A manager said they had been on group calls trying to find placements. “It’s felt like people are bidding on our kids, it’s been horrible. If the children have difficulties or have lots of risks, then no one wants them,” said the manager. “We are going to have a situation where some can have transitions to new places but others will be left to the last minute because nobody wants them. It’s heartbreaking.”
Chris Wild, a care-experienced member of the government’s independent care review, said children’s futures should not be at the mercy of market forces. “It’s repugnant that vulnerable kids can lose their homes because a private company decides the market conditions are unfavourable,” he said. “The government should step in. Their trauma will come back. It will be absolutely devastating.”
A spokesperson for Outcomes First said: “We have made the difficult decision to close some homes to consolidate our services in light of the market challenges. The homes are being offered for purchase as a priority to local authorities and, alternatively, other parties in the residential care sector.
“Full support has been provided for these children who are all being transitioned smoothly to other homes within the group or alternative local authority-appointed settings. Exceptional circumstances for young people who, for example, might be sitting exams, are being accommodated on an individual basis.”
