Broken system: foster child allegedly assaulted by male care worker

Government-contracted agencies are failing to communicate or respond to calls from parents and foster carers, an Office of the Children's Guardian review has found.

It also found they are not properly or correctly recording important information, and are failing to share "risk of significant harm" (ROSH) reports within their own organisations.

One woman who spoke to the Newcastle Herald said she had lived through exactly those failings as the foster carer of a boy with Autism spectrum disorder.

The woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of the child, said it started when she asked for respite care for her foster son, for just the second time in eight years.

She said she complained when she realised he was not being given the medications he was prescribed while experiencing suicide ideation, and missed critical specialist appointments.

The service provider refused to return the child, and refused to provide the woman with information, while he cycled through three different hotel placements with "a revolving door of strangers", she said.

The woman was later limited to "highly supervised" visits, despite no previous complaints.

She eventually saw the boy at school, where she said his hair was "filthy" and he complained about being hungry.

The boy said he was being taken to the supermarket and asked to meal plan. He gained six kilograms in two months in agency care because "he would just eat junk food for every meal", she said.

"He would eat M&Ms for lunch, and they would let him have energy drinks that come with a warning not to be consumed under 15."

During his time in the agency's care, he told staff he had been indecently assaulted by an adult male "carer" at one of the hotels where he'd been staying.

"But they did nothing," she said. "I did not find out about it until ... I got him back and he told me himself."

She later discovered the child had tried to phone her "many times", but was not allowed.

"But there was one clear time he fell out of a car and onto the curb. He screamed for 35 minutes for me and they refused to let him call me. They didn't take him to a doctor because they believed it was crying because he was emotional ... but then didn't offer him any emotional support either .. .not even letting him call his mother."

She received an apology in an email from a youth worker/administration support person at the agency who said she could "only imagine" how unsettling the experience must have been.

Anyone with the name the child referred to was removed from his care to protect him, and the allegation would be investigated, the email said.

An external carers' assessment of the foster family found the woman and her husband should remain carers, but move agencies.

However, in a system where there has not been enough oversight of what service providers are doing, moving is not straightforward.

Service providers have been repeatedly criticised for being non-responsive to requests for information from parents, foster carers and the state government itself.

Another foster carer, who looks after four children with disabilities and who also cannot be named, says it has taken her years to change agencies.

Her provider is paid money for each of her foster children's placements for case management and other services, she said.

But they were not upfront about the family's financial entitlements, and did not pass on funds meant for the children's needs, she said.

"I was just on the basic carer stuff and they didn't really provide anything extra, which I now know they should provide," she said.

"They just didn't acknowledge any of the kids' needs, didn't help me get anywhere. And you can't do it on your own. It's not like when you are a regular parent."

She had to fight for the children's disabilities to be assessed and diagnosed, and then "nothing changed", she said.

"And then I found out that, because they were higher needs, we were entitled to greater funding ... which (the kids) hadn't been getting at all.

"They are meant to provide yearly case plans, cultural plans, financial plans ... but they never did them. Our emails weren't being answered, or phone calls. I did everything by the book."

There was also a battle for her foster children to access external therapists, rather than those employed by the same provider, she said. Family visits were not properly managed, and she received little or no support.

After complaining to the NSW Ombudsman, she received a response from a senior investigator.

The investigator said the service provider acknowledged that in one 12-month period, casework with the family was conducted via email only with "very little face to face interaction and time spent" in the family's home.

"The Care Teams did not adequately support you in your care of the children," the letter says.

"You were also responsible for the children's NDIS plans and how this support was provided within your home."

In 2021, the family received two visits by a caseworker - to view the children at the school gate. The provider admitted they did not provide enough support. They didn't do enough to make sure the children's family visits were successful, and they didn't talk to the children about family time, or any aspect of their life.

Their care team also failed to consult the foster parents and therapists working with the children, the Ombudsman's office said.

The agency was to issue a formal apology, hold a meeting with DCJ about the family's transfer to another provider, develop policies for family visits in line with legislative requirements and children's needs, develop financial support policies specifying how funds are to be distributed to carers of children they case manage, and provide more training to care teams.

But, she says, she never received an apology, and continued to battle for months for a transfer.

"They just know no one can really hold them to account," she said. "I'm embarrassed because I brought friends into that agency and now they're in worse situations than I was."

Their cases are not isolated, according to academics, caseworkers, parents, foster parents, the Department of Communities and Justice as well as the NSW Minister for Family and Communities Kate Washington, who all agree the system is 'broken'.

Their concerns include a lack of accountability, and an over-reliance on high-cost emergency care placements with terrible outcomes.

They have also highlighted the many issues associated with a high level of demand being placed on untrained and inexperienced staff, high work loads and caseworker vacancy rates, poor communication, and a dearth of foster carers.

The recently released Hughes review, conducted off the back of a child protection case made public by children's court magistrate Tracey Sheedy, made 24 recommendations.

DCJ says it is undertaking "significant system reform" acknowledging there is "much work to be done".

"This far-reaching reform will tackle issues that go well beyond the recommendations from the Hughes review," a spokesperson said.

It has so far progressed on 23 of the 24 outcomes, and have completed some, including requiring care agencies to provide evidence of casework team meetings, coordination supports and activities at least fortnightly.

They have established mechanisms to allow the Children's Court to raise concerns directly with the department, and improved dialogue between the department and court officials around policy, program, practice, and developments.

The Department says it has also 'enhanced' its alternative care arrangement approval and monitoring process to oversee casework and support districts to achieve "positive and timely exits", and improved referral process into intensive therapeutic care arrangements.

Support is available for those who may be distressed. Phone Lifeline 13 11 14 or 1800-RESPECT 1800 737 732.