Agenda item

(1)       Ms Robson introduced the report and pointed out that the Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People (UASCYP) Service had achieved much since the last report to the Champions Board, but there was still more to do.  It was important to be realistic about what was possible to best meet young people’s needs.

(2)       Mr Reymond highlighted the challenges around providing young asylum seekers with the education that would be most useful to them in adult life.  Being accepted for, and embarking upon, vocational courses often required a young person to be able to read and write English to a higher standard than they could realistically achieve, and the school environment was not necessarily the most productive or appropriate for some young people.  The service needed to achieve the right combination of life skills and language skills which would prepare young asylum seekers and give them maximum scope to benefit from any opportunity which was open to them.  Even if they were ultimately repatriated to their country of origin, they would be as well prepared as possible during their time in Kent.  The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) had supported a pilot of an independent living skills course to help with this preparation.

(3)       In response to questions, Ms Robson, Mr Reymond and Mr Brightwell explained that:-

(a)       Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People and Looked After Children were able to access careers advice from the Connexions Service in the same way as could any other young person;

(b)       Although the Asylum Seeker Duty Team made thorough records of a young person’s country of origin, language and circumstances of arrival, the immediate concern was to look after a lone young person who was confused, traumatised and malnourished after a long journey, and who had possibly also been abused.  Their first need was for a thorough needs assessment.  Any country experiencing war or crisis at any time would generate numbers of young unaccompanied asylum seekers, and Kent was inevitably in the front line as a destination for them as they crossed mainland Europe;

(c)        The recent Joint Area Review (JAR) had praised Kent’s UASCYP Service and the work undertaken to protect and support young people;

(d)       Befriending or ‘buddying’ initiatives were important in supporting young asylum seekers, and a project by the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders (NACRO), being piloted as part of the Riverside Project in Gravesend should improve outcomes for young people.  Evaluation of this pilot would help plan future work;

(e)       Members praised the difficult and emotional work undertaken by the UASCYP Team on a very restricted budget.  The work of the team had no precedent to follow and had to try out initiatives and test what worked.

(f)         Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People following courses at Kent colleges were generally positive and well motivated and provided good role models for other young people.  Once in the education/training system, they were able to access the same social networking and choices of career path as could others in their peer group, and in the same way; and

(g)       Members expressed interest in, and asked about the possibility of, visiting the Appledore Centre to see the team’s work at first hand.

(4)       RESOLVED that:-

(a)       the progress made in developing and extending the education provision for Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People be noted, with thanks; and

(b)       the ongoing discussions with strategic partners to ensure better outcomes for this vulnerable group, and the commitment set out in Kent’s Pledge to Looked After Children, be supported.