Different Realities in Europe Comparative overview of five countries Ingrid Höjer, Helena Johansson Department of Social Work, Margreth Hill, Department of Pedagogy, University of Gothenburg

Do welfare regimes matter? Denmark and Sweden: Social democratic England: Liberal Spain: Corporative – Strong family orientation Hungary: transition – between socialist and strong family

Basic similarity – universally available compulsory schooling lasts 9 – 12 years Post compulsory education lasting 1 – 3 years Little attention to particular needs of children from a public care background

Difference in recognition and approach in policy documents Education on the political agenda in all countries England: more policy documents specifically focusing on children in care and education Denmark, Sweden and Spain: Emphasis on equal access to education for everyone Sweden: emphasis on cooperation with parents of children in care – family oriented services

Very limited research regarding children and young people in care and education – as well as young people leaving care ( Denmark, Hungary, Spain and Sweden) England – more research – but from a social care perspective – not an educational perspective –Most research concentrated on outcomes of placements England is the only country (of the five) where detailed statistical information on the educational attainment of children in care is published annually.

Types of knowledge base for working with children in care: Social pedagogy –Denmark, Hungary, Spain Social work –England, Sweden

Children and YP in care Residential care Foster care Other kinds of accomodation Percentage of children in care Denmark40 %49 %11 %1 % England14 %71 %16 %0.5 % Hungary50 % -0.8 % Spain (1) (Catalonia) 48 % (24 %) 52 % (43 %)(33 %)0.6 % Sweden25 %75 %-1 % (1) The data are more disaggregated a Catalan level than Spanish level. Foster care is mostly kinship care. Other kinds: supported flats, pre-adoption, living at home under legal supervision,)

Aspects of ethnicity: Different approach in the five countries – e.g. in England “race” is always “ticked” – but never in Sweden and Spain In Hungary – Roma children specifically vulnerable Unaccompanied asylum seekers Often high achievers in England In Sweden – fewer YP with immigrant background in upper sec. educ. and univ. In Spain – most of them only work

General support for YPLC Denmark: No special attention – but new law focus on importance of education England: All LA have Leaving Care teams Hungary: Education as eligibility for after care provision, financial support to buy a home Spain: No specific policies, except the post-care services in few autonomous communities like Catalonia, Basque Country Sweden: No specific policies – but slowly increased awareness

How to achieve educational goals for YPLC – different approaches Denmark: More individual support England: Increased awareness of need for support; avoid disruption of placements, economic support for education Hungary and Sweden: education as a criterion for staying in care after the age of 18; individual support Spain: increased awareness of need of support after the age of 18 because of the good outcomes of the post care services.

Consistency – regardless of welfare model Variability of local practices and outcomes Separate administrative responsibility ; “schooling” – education departments “care” – welfare departments Only England has addressed this division – Is this conceptual compartmentalisation a reason way education for children and young people in care has been a neglected area?