RCHiP_Report_1-3-07

West Midlands Strategic Partnership for Refugee &
Asylum Seekers Support (WMSPARS)
Refugee Children & Young People Integration Partnership
R-Chip
Informing the West Midlands Regional Refugee integration Strategy for
children and young people.
March 2007
Laurence Chester
Marchbid Ltd
rchip@marchbid.com

2
Refugee Children & Young People Integration Partnership
Informing the West Midlands Regional integration Strategy for children and
young people
Table of contents
Introduction
Acknowledgments. …………………………………………………………………………………………...4
Background ………………………...…………………………………………………….............................4
Every Child Matters. ………………………………………………………………………………………….5
Convention on Rights of the Child. …………………………………………………………………………6
Executive summary
Heart of community integration. …………………………………………………………………………….7
Key areas of engagement …………………………………………………………………………………...8
Recommendations ……………………...…………………………………………………………………….9
Chapter One – The Project Challenges
What is integration? ………………………………………………………………………………………...12
Host community perspective ………………………………………………………………………………12
Impact of asylum process ………………………………………………………………………………….13
Perception of preferentiality………………………………………………………………………………...13
Chapter Two – Consultation Methods ...………………………………………………...……………..14
Chapter Three – The Questions
Q & A ………………………………………………………………………………………………………...16
Analysis …………………………..………………………………………………………………………….23
Summary of responses …………………………………………………………………………………….24
Chapter Four – Housing & Community Planning
Transition …………………………………………………………………………………………………….25
Local Area Agreements & Strategic Partnerships ……………………………………………………….27
The importance of partnership …………………………………………………………………………….30
Chapter Five – Capacity Building and Funding
Mainstream resources ……………………………………………………………………………………...31
Refugee Community Organisations ……………………………………………………………………….31
European Social Fund ………………………………………………………………………………….…..33

3
Chapter Six – Unaccompanied Minors
Terminology ………………………………………………………………………………………………….34
Rights and entitlements ………………………………………………………………………………….....34
Home Office “UASC Reform Programme” ………………………………………………………………..36
Chapter Seven –Education
Common Assessment Framework …………………………………………………………………….….39
Education and Inspections Act 2006 ……………………………………………………………………...39
Creative Partnerships …………………………………………………………………………………..…..42
Libraries …………….………………………………………………………………………………..…..…..43
Key points ………. ……………..……………………………………………………………………………43
Chapter Eight– Conclusion
Dispelling Myths ……………………………………………………………………………………………..45
Identity & integration ………………………………………………………………………………………..46
Key principles ………………………………………………………………………………………………..46
Evaluation of integration strategy ...………………………...……………………………………………..48
Working in partnership with refugee communities ………….………………………………………….. 49
References …………………………………………………………………...……………………………. 50
Appendix ………………………………………………………………...………...………………………. 52

4
Introduction
Acknowledgements
This report has benefited from the contributions from a range of agencies in the statutory and
voluntary sector as well as people from local communities across the West Midlands.
We are very grateful for the invaluable advice and guidance from Katy Kellet (Starting Point
Bolton) and Christine Herrick (Bedfordshire EMAS) on the section concerned with Education.
We would also like to thank the Home Office Social Policy Unit and the partners within the
West Midlands Strategic Partnerships for Asylum & Refugee Support. Without the support of
David Barnes (WMSPARS) and his team, this work would not have happened. The biggest
debt of gratitude, however, is owed to the children and young people who gave their unique
and personal contribution to this report.
In structuring and writing this report, we have tried to make it easy to read. We, however,
acknowledge the limitations of its potential readership due to only being produced in English.
Background
The purpose of RCHiP has been to assist in identifying the key integration needs that are
specific to children and young people who arrive in the West Midlands as refugees. This will
then inform further development of the ‘children and young peoples’ section of the West
Midlands Regional Integration Strategy for Refugees. RCHiP was originally funded by the
Home Office Social Policy Unit and is the result of a partnership between the West Midlands
Strategic Partnership for Asylum & Refugee Support (WMPSARS) and Marchbid Ltd, an
independent social sector consultancy.
WMPSARS supports and advises the West Midlands Local Government Association on policy
issues relating to asylum seekers and refugees. It comprises of representatives from the
voluntary, private and statutory sector.
Following an interim report, which was produced eight months ago, this report includes a
greater focus on direct engagement with children and young people within the context of new
developments in policy and regional strategic priorities. A further piece of work has been
completed by WMSPARS and Marchbid Ltd in partnership with Loughborough University and
Community Integration Partnership called What About Me! It reviews the service provision for
women refugees and asylum seekers with children 0-5 years old and the findings from this
research should be considered in tandem with RCHiP.

5
During the late 1990’s, the number of asylum seekers arriving in the United Kingdom (UK)
began to steadily rise. Dover acted as the main port of entry and, as a result, Local
Authorities in the South East and London found themselves having to support the new
arrivals without additional central government funding. To ease the pressure of rising
accommodation costs and the impact on local services, many London Boroughs began to
disperse asylum seekers to other parts of the Country, housing them under contracts with
private providers. Little or no communication between the placing London Authorities and the
receiving Authorities took place; hence it is difficult to know exactly how many asylum seekers
arrived at a particular location under these ad hoc arrangements.
In 2000 the Government launched the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) to formally
disperse people who were seeking asylum and assessed as being destitute around the UK.
The West Midlands quickly grew into one of the major dispersal areas, with a significant
percentage of people seeking asylum being housed in the region during the last 6 years. It is
difficult to calculate how many refugees (those in receipt of a positive asylum decision), there
are in the West Midlands as there are no region wide data collecting mechanisms. However,
current work is being undertaken by the Children & Young People Services as part of the
Strategic Partnership Team to address this in part. They are seeking to identify sources of
information such as schools, which record numbers of refugees and asylum seeking children
for the purpose of claiming grant funding of £500 per child as well as community groups. This
is important as it enables the planning of focused and responsive support services.
Over the past couple of years somewhere between forty and seventy thousand people have
come to the West Midlands to seek work from Eastern Europe. This has further changed the
climate in which refugees live and how they are perceived.
Every Child Matters
RCHiP undertook a series of consultations with children and young people as well as
organisations that work with them with the purpose of seeking their views on how the
Regional Integration Strategy can support them in meeting the five outcomes outlined in
Every Child Matters (DfES 2006):
Within Every Child Matters is the acknowledgement that these outcomes are interdependent.
• Be healthy
• Stay safe
• Enjoy and achieve
• Make a positive contribution
• Achieve economic well-being

6
We have endeavoured to place the views of children and young people at the centre of this
report and avoid assumptive thinking. The themes of the five outcomes recur throughout the
report and form the key benchmark of progress in terms of children and young peoples’ social
inclusion and equality.
Convention on Rights of the Child
In 1989, the United Nations adopted a human rights treaty for children (all those aged 17 and
under) – the Convention on the Rights of the Child. This sets out all the things children need
to lead a fulfilling and dignified life – right to survival and development; the right to be heard
and taken seriously; freedom of expression; privacy; protection from all forms of violence;
play, leisure and recreation; and education that develops their personality and talents; an
adequate standard of living; and so on.
Article 12 of the Convention emphasises the rights of
children to be heard. Indeed, this has been increasingly
reflected in UK legislation since the Children Act 1989
and is a core principle of the Every Child Matters,
including the Children Act 2004 and Youth Matters: The
Next Steps, 2006.
The Convention places obligations on governments to
implement and uphold children's human rights. In December 1991 the UK Government
ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. However, the UK has a reservation in
regard to Article 22. Many view this
‘reservation’ as a primary cause of a current
confusion when trying to reconcile Every Child
Matters with contemporaneous immigration law,
(See - Immigration Act 1971, Immigration Act
1988, Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act
1993, Asylum and Immigration Act 1996,
Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act
1997, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999,
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002,
Asylum and Immigration Act 2004). Also, - The Race Relations Act 1976 and Human Rights
Act 1998, The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, The Equality Act 2006).
Article 22
“States Parties shall take appropriate
measures to ensure that a child who is
seeking refugee status or who is considered
a refugee in accordance with applicable
international or domestic law and procedures
shall, whether unaccompanied or
accompanied by his or her parents or by any
other person, receive appropriate protection
and humanitarian assistance in the
enjoyment of applicable rights set forth in the
present Convention and in other international
human rights or humanitarian instruments to
which the said States are Parties….”
Article 12
“States Parties shall assure to
the child who is capable of
forming his or her own views
the right to express those views
freely in all matters affecting the
child, the views of the child
being given due weight in
accordance with the age and
maturity of the child….”

7
Executive Summary
Heart of community integration
The successful building of positive relationships between children and young people from the
range of diverse communities that form the West Midlands is the key to building harmonious
communities for all. Refugees, although a statistically small percentage, are an important
part of these communities.
The overwhelming majority of those consulted within this project saw language acquisition as
the single most important factor in assisting integration. What agencies may often not
recognise is that this not only applies to the child/young person themselves, but also to the
adults who care for them.
Children and young people say the key to integration is:
a) Language acquisition.
b) Help for their parents/carers to learn English.
c) To feel physically safe in the street and at school.
d) Greater public awareness of the circumstances that bring people to the region to seek
asylum and subsequently settle as refugees.
e) Opportunities to alleviate the impact of poverty through employment opportunities.
f) Opportunities for them (with indigenous peers) to mix together in safe environments and
have good places to live.
It is a testament to the integrity of the majority of residents within the Region that so many
children and young people speak of the warmth and support they have been offered by
members of all communities. However, there are still challenges that need to be met to
ensure that all children and young people share the same opportunities and are able to fully
contribute to the growth and prosperity of the communities where they live.
The key findings of this report illustrate that although much work is being undertaken around
the region to develop closer relationships between communities, this has not been consistent
and often without consideration of the newest members of those communities who have
arrived from overseas, such as refugees.
In order to tackle the risk of social exclusion, it should be recognised that refugee children
and young people are best placed to inform others of their needs and so should be central to
the development of policies and strategies that affect them as well as their evaluation.
Refugee children and young people are especially vulnerable to the effects of social exclusion
as a result of the process they have been through to arrive in the region and the multiple

8
prejudices they often face related to being identified as ‘asylum seeker’ or ‘refugee’. Terms
that originally held sympathetic inference are now regarded by many in a pejorative way. This
is tragic as the implications lead to personal suffering and loss of aspiration amongst some
families who are at their most vulnerable.
Accessing resources represents a significant challenge for Refugee Community
Organisations. Funders are also unclear on how to work with RCO’s. Some of the most
important and effective work is being undertaken by RCO’s who are struggling to come to
terms with the demands of capacity building and fiscal management (Bloch, A 2002; Griffiths
et al 2005).
On arrival into the region as an asylum seeker, many receive a basic ‘welcome pack’ of
information regarding basic rights and responsibilities along with very basic orientation
support. However, this is of inconsistent quality and has lacks focus on the specific needs of
children and young people.
The regional integration strategy will need to correlate with wider existing policy and strategy
such as the Local Development Framework, Local Strategic Partnerships and Local Area
Agreements. The Local Government White Paper 2006 sets the challenge for ensuring
inclusive participation from groups who are often described as ‘hard to reach’. RCHiP report
seeks to be a resource in informing how local services can respond to drivers as far as it
relates to the needs of refugee children and their families/carers.
Key Areas of Engagement
RCHiP highlights the following challenges that the West Midlands Integration Strategy for
children & young people should engage with;
• Recognise the additional barriers that children face as a result of the asylum process
that is unique to them especially in regard to the point of transition from asylum
seeker to refugee.
• Seek ways of overcoming those barriers in a way that means they have the same
opportunities as other children and young people in the Region to achieve the five
outcomes of Every Child Matters.
• Provide clear information about why refugees come to the region and what happens
when they arrive in order to promote better community relations.
• Evaluate current mainstream community cohesion initiatives to ensure the needs of
refugee children and young people are considered.

9
• Offer support to Local Strategic Partnerships and others concerned with community
consultation to promote engagement with refugee children and young people.
• Ensure information is fed back to refugee children and young people regarding
outcomes of consultations.
• Review how funding is accessed and distributed to organisations offering support to
refugee children and young people with a view to ensure that identified ‘need’ is
verifiable and that ‘deliverables’ are transparent and reflect the regional integration
strategy objectives.
• Offer support to build capacity within community organisations working with refugee
children and young people especially in regard to management skills, fiscal
competency, fund raising and project development and evaluation.
• Recognise the need for parents to be able to communicate with and understand the
institutions their children and young people engage with.
• Improving dialogue with schools and colleges in order to identify how they may assist
in supporting the objectives of the regional integration strategy e.g. supporting
parents learning English, student mentoring, challenging bullying etc.
• Targeting services to areas with higher density of refugee children and young people
by working in partnership with Children & Young Peoples services at strategic
regional level. Service development plans and regional development plans relating to
sustainable communities should be responsive to this data.
Recommendations
1) Developing WMSPARS role. As the WMLGA coordinating body for the region,
WMSPARS could be resourced to coordinate ‘key services’ when responding to the
needs of refugee families at point of arrival into the region (as asylum seekers) - as
well as at point of transition. They would liaise with ‘Children Services (especially
schools and colleges), Housing and Health to maximise operational efficiency and
ease the process for families. WMPSARS may assist with inter agency information
sharing (with due consideration of Data Protection issues).
2) A child/young person specific ‘welcome to our region’ information pack. This
would assist young people sense of orientation to the Region. It would include child

10
friendly information that explains some local customs and landmarks. A pack
developed in partnership with refugee young people would be likely to prove most
effective in terms of process and outcome.
3) No move ‘post positive’ decision. The regional integration strategy should promote
the development of partnerships with housing providers to ensure that when a family
receives a positive decision, they are able to either remain in their NASS
accommodation under different tenancy terms as would apply to all members of the
community, or that, when appropriate, alternative permanent accommodation is
available in the same area so children and young people can maintain their networks.
Clearly this would be counter productive for families where they have endured
prejudice and community hostility.
4) Political leadership. WMSPARS Refugee Integration Strategy requires support from
local government at the highest strategic level to maximise its effectiveness. Political
vision that recognises the potential benefits that refugee children and young people
offer to communities across the region will not be disappointed. The drive for
education and commitment to strong values that promote personal development
positively are likely to offer both social and net fiscal benefits for the region. This
reflects the historic nature of the West Midlands.
5) Education partnerships. The regional strategy should look to support local
education authorities/schools consortia in developing partnerships with voluntary
sector organisations to develop supplementary school provisions that promote
integration, especially in regard to language, citizenship and sustaining cultural
heritage. The development of Extended School ‘lifelong learning’ provision may offer
refugee families further support and the strategy should seek to ensure that their
needs are appropriately taken into account (see Rutter, J 2006).
6) Mixed service. The regional strategy should recognise that whilst some children and
young people value the services offered by dedicated refugee community
organisations, this cannot be assumed. Hence, a combination of dedicated and more
responsive mainstream service provision is required with ‘buy in’ from all
stakeholders. Support should be offered to ensure that the Youth Service and other
departments charged with implementing the objectives set out in Every Child Matters
are fully inclusive and offer appropriate provision for refugee children and young
people.
7) Capacity building community agencies. Focus sustainable funding (ESF) and
professional development options to the community agencies that support refugee

11
families. The benefits of this approach would offer sustainable cost and operational
efficiencies in the short, mid and long term – especially where this relates to language
acquisition.
8) Youth representation. The success of the strategy will be determined by the
experience of refugee children and young people as well as their ‘non refugee’ peers.
This should be reflected by ensuring young people continue to be involved in the
development and evaluation of the regional strategy.
9) Media. The impact of media representation of refugees is significant in terms of
wellbeing and safety of children and young people. Attention should be given to
developing media strategies aimed at young people.
10) Refugee community organisations. Those which can evidence being fully inclusive
and genuinely representative, should play a key role in informing strategic policy as it
effects families within their own communities.
11) European Social Fund. Special attention should be given to issues that effect
young refugee’s access to employment and how European Social Fund Objective 3
funding may assist.

12
Chapter One – The Project Challenges
Within this section are some of the challenges RCHiP faced in achieving project objectives.
An immediate issue is that there is no standard definition of the term ‘integration’ and, people
have differing ideas and feelings about being identified as a ‘refugee’.
What is integration?
The Home Office offers the following definition in relation to its publication ‘Integration
Matters’: Integration takes place when refugees are empowered to:
• Achieve their full potential as members of British Society
• Contribute to the community
• Access the services they are entitled to
(Integration Matters 1.10, Home Office 2005)
Integration Matters makes the point that refugees are not a homogenous group (ad loc 1.12).
It also clearly sees integration as something that can only apply to those who have gained
refugee status.
The Refugee Council, in its response to Integration Matters, offers a slight variation to the
‘definition’ and provides its perspective on principles that should apply.
They, like many other agencies, see integration as a process that starts the moment
someone arrives in the country even prior to a positive immigration decision (asylum
seekers).
Host community perspective
From a ‘host’ community perspective there is confusion regarding the immigration status of
people in their neighbourhoods. Many do not differentiate between economic migrants from
It follows that this integration strategy does not cover asylum seekers whose applications are either still
being considered or have been rejected. The Government does accept that the experiences of asylum
seekers before they are recognised as refugees will affect their later integration in a number of ways. In
that sense, it is quite true to say that ‘integration begins on day one’. Asylum seekers will learn much
simply from being in Britain and from their contacts with officials, voluntary workers and neighbours; their
knowledge of English will improve; and many of them will benefit from the Government’s Purposeful
Activities for Asylum Seekers Fund. All this is to be welcomed. But integration in its fullest sense can
take place only when a person has been granted refugee status so that they can make plans, including
those for employment. That is why it makes sense to concentrate resources available on that group. (Ad
loc 1.7)
“Integration is a term that can evoke different associations, but actually is a two- way process, which
places demands on both on the receiving society and on the refugee. As such, integration is not
assimilation. For the refugee, it requires a willingness to adapt to the lifestyle of the host society without
having to lose his or her own cultural identity. In return, the host society should be prepared to accept
refugees as equals and work to ensure they have the same access to resources and decision-making
processes as the national population.”
(http://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy/position/2004/integration.htm)

13
Eastern Europe, traveller and Gypsy families and refugees. The range of views expressed by
young people regarding new arrivals to the UK ranged from hostile to empathic. Those who
had personal contact with refugees were more positive than those who relied solely on media
and parental views. There was broader consensus when discussion of rights and
entitlements took place. Most children and young people from host communities were
unaware of the entitlements of asylum seekers or refugees, with most (including a percentage
of those who were empathetic) assuming preferential services were provided to them,
especially in regard to accessing housing.
Impact of asylum process
The asylum process is a very difficult time for children and
young people as it inhibits a sense of wellbeing. They
describe feeling as being in a state of limbo with little
security or permanence. From a refugee children and
young people’s perspective, it is essential that they feel
valued as an equal part of their community at the earliest opportunity if the five outcomes of
‘Every Child Matters’ are to be achieved.
In February 2005, the UK Government published a five-year strategy for developing a New
Asylum Model (NAM). The aim is to introduce a faster, more
tightly managed asylum process with an emphasis on
removing applicants whose claims have been rejected. The
Home Office aims to process all new asylum seekers within
the new model by March 2007. However, good legal
representation is very scarce and there is the fear of being
misrepresented.
Perception of preferentiality
The importance of a regional strategy to specifically address the integration needs of refugee
children has been recognised. Whilst it should reflect the additional challenges children and
young people face as a result of the asylum process it should also be sensitive of the need for
transparency in order to avert misdirected (or prejudiced based) criticism that would frame
this strategy as proposing that refugee children and young people get preferential services to
their peers. Our findings suggest that where this is a perception, it is counter productive to the
development of cohesive communities. It’s message should emphasis that the core objective
is to ensure that refugee children and young people have an equal opportunity to achieve the
five outcomes of Every Child Matters.
“When we first arrived in
Coventry, I had no idea where
we were and what was going to
happen. We arrived at night, it
was raining and I thought .. oh
my god, what is this place. I
could see my mum was very
worried. … that first night … I
will never forget it.”
Young woman, 15
My father is sad a lot. He is
used to working very hard, but
here they say he must not. All
we want to do is make money
and not beg from anyone!
Young man 15yrs.

14
Chapter Two – Consultation Methods
One Hundred and fifty young people were consulted in six separate events and a further 50
were spoken with, in informal settings. The ages ranged from 10-18 years and from 15
nationalities. The young people reside in Coventry, Wolverhampton, Solihull, Stoke and
Walsall. Although we are able to offer some statistical data regarding nationality, gender and
age some of the agencies did not provide this so it is incomplete.
The children and young people were asked to respond to specific questions (See Chapter
Three) designed to enable an open discussion about issues that effected their integration into
local communities.
The six meetings were with young people from:
Befriending Unaccompanied Minors Project: A Save the Children project, BUMP
promotes mentoring and volunteering with a focus on children who have been
separated from their families and seeking asylum in the UK,
Central African Development Action (CADA): A refugee led organisation that offers
assistance for people to access mainstream services. They also provide a range of
recreational and educational activities for children and young people,
Aston Pride: Aston Pride is the 10-year regeneration programme that was launched
in 2001 to improve the local area. The scheme focuses on the themes of Health,
Education and Lifelong Learning, Employment, Community Safety, Housing and the
Environment.
COCOA: a refugee led organisation who are working with Aston Pride to develop
greater refugee participation,
Stoke YMCA: Working with local young people who are homeless and/or at risk of
social exclusion.
The Growing Up in the West Midlands partnership offered us access to the range of
organisations they had within their network and afforded further ad hoc contact with
member groups.
Terms of Engagement
Refugee children and young people were described (in RCHiP Interim report) by many
mainstream agencies as ‘hard to reach’ and this is why services had not responded to their
needs adequately. Some of the barriers are logistical such as language. But young people
say that they often feel reticent about engaging with institutions or figures of authority due to

15
previous experience in their country of origin. Equally, when seeking to gain views about a
service or personal experience many may seek to give the questioner a response that they
think is desired rather than what is true. This may reflect symptoms of social exclusion such
as mistrust of authority and seeking approval. Many don’t want to appear ungrateful or
undignified by complaining but, when approached in the right way, the responses are very
often thoughtful insightful and rooted in intuitive common sense. Another inhibitor is reticence
in being identified as a ‘refugee’ or ‘asylum seeker’.
So what is the ‘right way to engage’? RCHiP adopted the view that it was essential that the
young person should know the person asking the questions and have their respect. The
means of seeking children and young people’s views should be appropriate to their age, be
culturally sensitive and come from a position of ‘shared opportunity for learning’.
Transparency in terms of being clear that RCHiP could promise no outcome other than to
make their views known to people who had some influence in some of the issues that
affected their lives. We held meetings with young people with adults they knew and trusted
being present as well as left it to some organisations to undertake the work on their own
especially where children were very young.
We utilised the access that refugee community organisations, youth work agencies have as
well as personal contacts to gain an ‘over the dinner table’ view. The latter approach involved
contacts and friends known to staff within the agencies taking part. The result was that we
found many young people were anxious to give voice to their experiences and their support
needs as well as promote a positive image of themselves. The most often expressed views
from young refugees were – ‘if people understood the truth they would not feel this way about
us’ and ‘all we want is to be given a chance’.

16
“So many of them come to our
country, and can’t be bothered to
learn our language, its disgraceful.
When I see them standing around
speaking their own language, I
can’t understand them. It’s rude.
Sometimes I’m sure they are
laughing at us English.”
Young women from Coventry,
aged 17
Chapter Three – The Questions
In order to give a structure for the young people to respond to that they felt comfortable with,
we firstly asked them whether they felt we were asking the right questions. Although some
variants were offered in terms of style, the core themes seem to be accepted as a reasonable
starting point for discussions.
Responses
What makes you feel Included in your community?
This question was meant to get refugee and non
refugee young people to talk about things that make
them feel that they are 'at home' where they live and
the things that prevent a sense of 'belonging'.
Speaking English: This was by far the most significant
issue for refugee young people as well the key concern
raised by their peers from host communities. From a host community perspective, a lack of
English language gave rise to a perception of
purposeful segregation and ‘ethnic superiority’. This
was an often repeated view which when pursued further
was less rooted in racism than lack of awareness of
wider circumstances.
Although children generally picked up English relatively
quickly, language did come up as an important issue for
parents who spoke of the difficulties in accessing good
lessons. Many found ESOL inadequate in terms of the
amount of lesson time available and quality of teaching. Another key issue was the lack of
available childcare so that mothers (exclusively in our research) could attend classes. The
result of this is an increased dependency by parents on
their children to be the main conduit between them and
the outside world. One result of this is the detrimental
effect on family dynamics often leading to parental
authority being undermined and undue levels of
responsibility being placed on children. We are aware
of young people having to communicate information to GP’s that parents feel is inappropriate
for the age/gender of the young person.
“Learning to speak English is the
most important thing. You can’t do
anything if you can’t understand
what people are saying at school,
in the street. What I find really
annoying is when English kids
think we are talking about them
just because I speak to my friends
in our own language, like we have
nothing better to do! Sometimes
its just easier, and I suppose
reminds us of home a bit.”
Angolan young man, aged 16yrs
“At school open evenings, I have
to interpret what the teacher is
saying for my mum as she does
not speak English. She hates this
and it makes me feel bad.”
Somali girl aged 12yrs

17
A Somali father spoke to researchers of how young
people he knows from his community are dropping
out of school, as their parents don’t understand
school reports or what teachers say at meetings.
The children themselves act as interpreters and do
not convey the concerns of the schools. This leads
to the total breakdown in communication between
school and home.
Friends: Many had made friends from the local community where there was a pre existing
mixed community. In these neighbourhoods their friends were from diverse backgrounds
including from other minority ethnic groups and white English. For those living in
predominantly white, socially deprived areas, this was far less likely.
As is common, young refugees generally met friends within
a variety of settings such as
school, faith based settings.
When the weather was good,
in public open spaces. For
many, local mainstream youth
work provisions were not utilised as they felt them to be
alienating or ‘unsafe’. Sports programmes they attended
were seen as very helpful to meet other refugees but these were generally provided by local
voluntary sector organisations such as refugee community organisations and as such did not
provide opportunities to meet indigenous children and young people. However, meeting peers
from similar backgrounds does engender a greater sense of local connection and belonging.
Most children and young people said they felt most comfortable with others from the same
cultural background or had shared the refugee experience.
In fact the shared recent refugee experience often
supersedes ethnic and cultural affinity. This was evident in
how ‘intergenerational’ relationships are evolving in some
communities. Although not the focus of this work, how
recent refugee arrivals are relating to children of those from
previous generations of refugees would benefit from further research as this may shed some
light on current assumptions regarding assessment of community needs and representation.
An obstacle that inhibits children’s abilities to form local relationships is the multiple moves
many have had to undertake post receiving a positive immigration decision. As asylum
seekers, the Home Office provides accommodation, which lasts up until a final immigration
“At my school, I got no help. It took me
the whole first term until I understood
anything that was going on. I think this is
really bad. There should be someone to
help you. Maybe extra classes or
something. The best thing would be if
there was someone in the class I could
have gone to ask if I was stuck.”
Congolese young man, age 14yrs
“I thought when we got given
our papers to say that the
Home Office believed us,
things would be good. But
now we’ve moved 7 times in
the past 18 months and I
think things will be ok now,
but my mum and dad have
found it very hard. I’ve lost a
lot of friends.”
Zahid 14
‘There are so many things to
think about when you come to
the UK such as the different
culture, it is not easy to be
included. We need people to
accept us to feel included’
Young man, Igor 17yrs
“I never told any of my
mates that I was an asylum
seeker ‘cause I new what
they would think”. Mustafa
11

18
decision is reached. Following this, twenty eight days is given for ‘move-on’ accommodation
to be found. As a result, many have to live in temporary accommodation pending a more
permanent address. A further difficulty is that those who are dependent on the local authority
providing housing may find themselves in a position of having to accept accommodation in an
area where they have no links. Families in some areas spoke of being placed in areas of high
deprivation and minimal cultural diversity. Where this has occurred, children speak of
experiencing racism, bullying at school and high levels of social isolation.
Meeting English people: Most children and young people wanted opportunities to extend their
social networks where this could be done without risk to their physical or emotional wellbeing.
We did not meet any young people who wanted to solely mix with people from their own
culture.
School: If the school was responsive to their needs and
offered language support, befriending schemes along
with teachers with sensitivity to their circumstances the
children felt more confident to engage with others from
different backgrounds. Academic progress was seen as
the primary tool in overcoming the challenges they
faced in terms of economic and social deprivation.
What makes you feel like you don’t belong?
CADA asked a group of young children to draw their feelings about what they found difficult
about life in the West Midlands. Most of the pictures depicted the bad weather and the
contrast with their own countries of origin. Follow up research indicates that the weather
provides a conduit for identifying wider challenges to social inclusion.
Whilst most of these headings mirror the experience of other very low income or economically
deprived families, there are some specific to refugees:
1. Lack of suitable school clothing e.g. coats As DfES grants for school clothing only
cover a one off cost for basic school uniform, if a child has no school coat or grows
out of their uniform there is no additional funding. It may prevent them from attending
school entirely. An additional consideration is the choice left to a parent who either
themselves or/and their child is not adequately dressed to cope with a harsh climate
when seeking to attend extra curricular school activities and meetings.
2. Appropriate nutrition Some families come from countries where their nutritional needs
are different. They may grow their own, or eat locally produced foods. For some, the
immune system can suffer significant challenges, especially children who are
“Language is a barrier; for
young children it is easier as
they have the facility to learn
quickly and can improve
themselves quickly. Young
people and adults need more
support to learn the language
and they need to be given the
right courses”
Community Worker

19
exposed to the range of viruses that indigenous children are more used to at school.
Vitamin deficiency may be an issue for some children.
3. Health information Not just access to Service information but understanding minor
ailments. An example is providing information about coughs, colds and flu (for
example) e.g. how they are transmitted and how to treat them. For some families, a
virus as simple as Flu can engender significant fear as the symptoms may resemble
far worse illnesses (such as Malaria) familiar in the country of origin. Informed
choices of if, how and when to access local health services empowers parents. This
is an especially sensitive issue as many have experienced significant
disempowerment in other regards.
4. Transport issues e.g. additional costs. As many are on low income, transport costs
can be significantly higher in winter due to bad weather and shorter days. Especially
where this relates to attending training courses, school etc.
5. Access to services. If parent and/or child do not have appropriate clothing, they are
less likely to leave the house to seek support. This means additional reliance on
telephone and supportive friends who speak English. Language acquisition becomes
more crucial in this context. In some families, children become the primary conduit for
imparting and receiving information. This can significantly disrupt traditional family
dynamics and place an unreasonable burden of responsibility on children.
6. Depression. Although there is a specific condition called SAD (Seasonal Affective
Disorder, a type of winter depression that affects an estimated half a million people
every winter between September and April; in particular during December, January
and February), anecdotal information would suggest that the totally different life-
styles, the lack of accessible communal space, reduced informal social interaction, as
well as the broader cultural and language barriers are far greater factors.
7. Budgeting for utilities. Heating bills and management of household utilities may be
unfamiliar to refugee families. Budgeting accordingly may be difficult especially as
(like indigenous peers) they may use ‘keys’ which are more expensive.
8. Drug use. One reason given for the misuse of Khat within the Somali community is
that it ‘heats the blood’ as many find the cold intolerable. One may also suppose that
the social isolation caused by the other factors outlined in this proposal may add to
this as a precipitating factor.

20
9. Employment. If children are sick with winter ailments, parents may have to stay home
from work to look after them. Seasonal casual employment is popular for many young
people (over 16) and is less available in the winter, which holds additional
implications for families.
10. Housing issues. Many refugee families live in areas of high deprivation in social
housing, hostels or low-end private sector accommodation. They may not be aware
of their rights when a repair is needed or have the language skills to seek assistance.
In harsh weather conditions, this may affect their health especially those who are
vulnerable.
The heating systems in the UK are unknown to many from new and emerging
communities. In cold weather, there are additional risks to families who may not know
how to operate their heating systems. Some use gas ovens turned on to full as a way
of heating their rooms or naked flames or gas heaters. Along with these high level
concerns are additional issues regarding the effect of overheating a house on the
health of children (especially babies).
11. Social isolation. Support services for refugee families may be some distance from
where they live. In good weather, informal networks flourish as parents and children
meet in parks etc. In bad weather most resources that are available have a cost
implication, which is often beyond the means of families.
12 Family instability Due to the lack of affordable
opportunities for parents to take children (or for
older children to go themselves) to places for
recreational activities, as well as other inhibitors
relating to those mentioned above, additional
pressures often mount at home.
Racism, Prejudice & Bullying
Children and young people repeatedly raised racism as a key concern. They tended not to
differentiate between asylum /refugee prejudice and the accepted definition of racism as set
in the Race Relations Act (1976, 2000/06). They cited the negative impact the media has on
their sense of wellbeing and how when the media spoke negatively about asylum seekers it
added to their sense of insecurity. They felt there is a direct link between this and subsequent
personal experiences of bullying at school.
Bullying at school was a recurring issue throughout this piece of work. Just as disturbing was
the view expressed by indigenous children that this is not particular to refugees but
widespread across the board. This sets a challenge to the regional strategy in how it supports
I get so bored. My mum wont
let me go out at night she says
it is too dangerous. I take it out
on her a bit; I know it’s not her
fault. I hate winter!
Young man 14 yrs

21
schools in responding to this, especially where refugee parents may face additional
challenges to engaging with them due to lack of knowledge of English language or of school
processes.
Do you know your neighbour?
This was to generate discussion about their understanding of
the sense of ‘neighbourhood’ and community.
For some children and young people referenced in this report, there are extra resonances
when discussing their relationship with their local ‘community and neighbours’. Those who
were forced to leave their communities of origin often still feel a strong affinity to them. Many
harbour strong aspirations to return one day when the
problems that exiled them are resolved. Whilst it is clearly
possible for children to form new bonds with their present
community, it should be acknowledged that the affinity
many feel to their previous community in no way dilutes
the loyalty they have to the place they have found refuge
in.
For some children and young people, the past is viewed as a bad memory that they want to
leave behind. They seek out surrogate cultural identities that provide a distraction from the
refugee focus. For some parents and elders this can be
perceived as a serious concern as it can lead some
young people to reject their family and community and
make them more susceptible to ‘isolation and bad
influences’.
Several group members had experienced physical violence from neighbours: “they throw
stones, smash glass, ‘smash everything in your house’,
slash tyres, write letters saying you must leave etc.”.
However, most young refugees we spoke to wanted to
meet local people and form friendships as well as make a
positive contribution to their local neighbourhoods. They
seek the available opportunities for their own personal
development.
Even at a neighbourhood level there are an array of different community dynamics,
sometimes complex and occasionally at odds with each other. Anecdotal information provided
described a mixture of dynamics such as – key families within communities who held
positions of authority within the community. Although these families are often seen as
positively contributing to the lives of many within their own communities, this was not entirely
“It is harder for older people
because of problems with the
Home Office, housing and jobs
‘they worry more about basic
living than getting involved in
society”.
Community worker
“The man in the local corner
shop is great, he lets my
mum pay him when she can
as we don’t have enough
money”. Farida, 13
“They come to our
neighbourhood, begging for
money. I haven’t got any so why
do they think they are entitled to
any’ response ‘How do you
know they are refugees’ –‘what
the difference they are all
scroungers’
Local young woman Age 18 yrs
Our neighbours are great. They
always help us and are very
kind.
Young woman 15, Wallsall

22
inclusive and at the cost of confidentiality. Also, ‘community standards’ relating to traditions
and expectations emanating from countries of origin may be applied to varying degrees of
informality. Local faith based groups and charities often acted as a channel for refugee
families to meet neighbours with some communities forming special groups to facilitate this.
A few people knew their neighbours but most did not or
when there was contact it tended to be superficial.
However, refugees and asylum seekers would
sometimes get a ‘nice neighbour’, who would invite
them to parties and who they could socialise with. It
was generally felt difficult to meet people of the same
age.
What does being British mean to you?
Even if they were not yet citizens, we wanted to explore the notion of 'Britishness'. Whether
they viewed this as just a name, a new identity, a good/bad
thing to be, or something they feel indifferent about.
The views ranged from an affinity with national identity to
total rejection of the idea of Britishness as anything other
than a name on a passport. Most indigenous young people
had not really given this matter much thought other than
when on holiday abroad. Those who were from black and ethnic minority communities were
most likely to have strong views about the prejudice they
experience and the difficulty in reconciling this with a sense
of ‘Britishness’. Overall, most associated with local identity
to a greater degree. However, in Stoke the young people
spoke of how they felt that they had lost their local identity
as a result of the loss of local industry and current
redevelopment which they felt no stake in as one young man said “My parents tell me of how
Stoke was special when we had the Potteries (Pottery industry) but that’s all gone now. Last
week I went to Manchester and it’s just a bigger version of Stoke. They do all this stuff without
asking if we want it. The only local loyalty I have is to Stoke City FC”
Most refugee children and young people, expressed loyalty to Britain, but did not feel ‘British’
in the sense of an identity. This may reflect the fact that the interviewees were new to the UK
(within 5 years) and still held aspirations to return to their country of origin one day. Others
just felt they were not welcome and unable to feel integrated into British society. Many
expressed frustration at not being able to ‘prove’ themselves as fully as they could as a result
of the institutional and social blocks they encountered.
“The council build all these
seven bedroom houses just so
refugees can have them,
we’ve waited two years to
move out of our s***hole, its
not fair” Birmingham young
woman 17yrs old
Due to language and culture,
refugees tend to ‘feel better
and comfortable’ with people
from their own community.
‘You can stay a year or 2 years
without meeting people here,
people just stay with their own
community’
“I feel embarrassed to go to my
own community for help and I
don’t speak English so I am on
my own – I don’t know my
neighbours” Mother of 6 year
old child in temporary
accommodation

23
Analysis
From children and young people who are born in the UK it
was revealing how once they had an opportunity to hear the
true circumstances of refugees and met with them, they
readily appeared to reassess former prejudices although
how this transferred to the reality of a wider social context is not clear.
Most children and young people spoke of their lack of opportunity to meet others from
different backgrounds and cultures. Local youth provisions were seen as intimidating to many
young refugees and not responsive to those whose English skills were still at an early stage
of development. The predominant ‘pop culture’ of some settings felt alien to some and
culturally inappropriate to others.
Schools are seen as the primary environment where
opportunities could be developed to assist in facilitating
integration. Education is seen as the key for gaining
acceptance from the wider community and securing
personal opportunities for economic wellbeing. This was
despite a wide range of non-academic ability in Sports and
Arts. Even though this came through very strongly, there is scope for further research into the
level of parental participation in schools as it seems that many parents are not able to engage
fully either as a result of logistical problems such as language, child care (especially those
with larger families) but also due to lack of awareness of
process as well as personal confidence.
The National Refugee Integration Forum Sub Group has
held a meeting with DfES regarding parental engagement
with schools in a way envisaged within the new Education
and Inspections Bill 2006. Prior to the disbandment of the NRIF further meetings were
planned and so remains an outstanding task for the Regional integration strategy to consider.
Communication is most
important between people from
different backgrounds. People
need to be friendly and get to
know each other. More events
mixing cultures are needed
where different people meet
and talk and exchange ideas.
Community worker, Aston
Its better to meet people from
your local area to talk about
these issues as there are
different problems in different
areas.
Local community worker - Stoke
“I think people here (UK) don’t
like refugees. If you are from
Eastern Europe it’s ok.
Refugees, no.” Young woman,
age 17

24
Sport and use of the Arts were seen as the most effective tools to enable positive interaction
with others. Although competitive sport requires greater consideration e.g. football “… a bad
tackle can lead to a fight between different groups. It doesn’t matter which team they are on”
Ali, 18.
Summary of Responses to Questions
What makes you feel Included in your community?
Speaking English.
Friends.
Meeting English people.
School.
Friendly neighbours.
Nice shopkeepers.
Things to do e.g. clubs, parks
What makes you feel like you don’t belong?
Weather
Racism
TV and newspapers
When politicians say bad things about refugees
Bullying
At school when the teachers are unhelpful.
Not feeling safe in the street
Do you know your neighbour?
Most knew some people in their neighbourhoods but the experiences of those placed in
predominantly white areas of high deprivation were more negative than those in ‘mixed’ areas. This
was a significant factor in how safe young people felt and if they felt they ‘belonged’.
In areas where good relationships had been formed, young people were very positive about how
this affected, not just theirs, but also their families’ sense of well being.
What does ‘being British’ mean to you?
‘I am grateful to Britain for helping me but I still feel (Country of origin) is ‘home’.’
‘To be British is to be free.’
‘How can I feel part of a racist country?’
‘I don’t know, it’s just where I live’.
‘I love this country, it saved my families life’.

25
Chapter Four – Housing & Community Planning
Transition
Housing is the primary issue in determining the integration experience for refugee families at
the point of transition. Families placed on a ‘no choice’ basis in an area as part of the NASS
dispersal programme are deemed to have a ‘local connection’. This means an entitlement to
access local social housing provision provided by the Council.
The process following a positive immigration decision is still fluid with some children
experiencing multiple moves from one temporary address to another. This clearly affects their
opportunities to ‘enjoy and achieve’. Some children spoke of suffering racism in their local
area. Sometimes this is solely colour based but also directed against anyone assumed to be
a refugee. As the asylum process itself leaves refugees with limited financial capacity, the
choices of where to live is often left to the local housing department of the area they were
dispersed to. Following a positive immigration decision, refugees are given 28 days to find
alternative accommodation and vacate the NASS provision.
In research undertaken by ICAR In dispersal areas, local people and asylum seekers alike
mentioned social deprivation in the areas where asylum seekers are housed as an important
cause of concerns. In areas such as these, where resources were already stretched, asylum
seekers were viewed as extra competitors and an additional burden on services.
(Understanding the Stranger 2004).
The wider perspective on the current crisis the UK faces in terms of meeting the challenge of
increasing house prices is well known. Refugee families are especially vulnerable to the direct
and indirect implications of this.
The average cost of a house in the West Midlands region currently stands at an all-time high
of £160,341 - an increase of 2.5% during the last year.
Although this includes high-end prices in places such as
Herefordshire, in Stoke prices are also rising from the
current average of £95,282
That average price has shot up by more than twice the
rate of inflation in the last 12 months. The knock on effect
is a sense of disenfranchisement such as that described
by young people we met in Stoke. In Birmingham and
Coventry young people expressed the symptoms of a
‘blame’ culture targeted at those most recently arrived in their community who are believed to
be ‘jumping’ the housing queue and the system that facilitates this.
Homes are more than shelter.
They provide access to a range
of services and to communities.
Housing also plays a major role
as an asset in household
balance sheets and in
household planning for their
financial futures. (The Barker
Review of Housing Supply,
Executive Summary 2004)

26
However, the reality does not reflect this perception. The National Refugee Integration Forum
Accommodation & Housing sub group expressed the following concerns in a submission to
the main Forum:
This has led to families being forced to make multiple moves after receiving a positive
immigration decision. In a recent children & young peoples workshop of the Home Office
'Refugee Integration 2006: Belonging Conference’,
young people spoke of the impact multiple moves has
had on them. This includes a loss of friendships, an
inability to feel settled increased experiences of
racism/prejudice and disrupted education. Some had
experienced eight changes of address in twelve
months. This reflects the experiences found by children
and young people in the West Midlands.
The West Midlands Regional Assembly has just
(November 2006) produced a guide – West Midlands
Regional Assembly, A guide to the delivery of
affordable housing in the West Midlands. Its purpose is
to encourage the provision of more affordable housing in the region. Within this framework, is
the opportunity to address the specific needs of refugee families to ensure the type of
accommodation, in terms of location and composition can reflect their needs as members of
Availability of accommodation for refugees is reducing. Refugees are waiting several months for
offers of accommodation even when accepted as homeless. 28 days is inadequate.
· There is still variable policy and practice by local authorities on acceptance of refugees as
vulnerable under the homelessness legislation
· Housing markets in the regions are changing – it can no longer be assumed that there is
low demand and a surplus of suitable public and social rented accommodation. Factors
include impact of the dispersal programme itself; large scale demolition programmes in the
regions; possibly the impact of changes in homelessness legislation preventing use of B
and B. The housing market has changed in many regions and surplus accommodation is
no longer as widespread.
· Regional and Local Refugee Integration Strategies need to be promoted to ensure
adequate importance is given to the housing issues – this is happening in Yorkshire and
Humberside now where implementation of the regional strategy, launched at the end of last
year, is now beginning. (NRIF Accommodation Sub Group 2006)
“The delivery of affordable housing
in both urban and rural areas is a top
priority for the West Midlands, and is
clearly acknowledged in both the
Regional Spatial Strategy and
Regional Housing Strategy. The
purpose of this Guide is to
encourage the development of more
affordable homes in the West
Midlands by sharing good practice
and information.”
Forward by - Councillor Rex Roberts
(Chairman, Regional Planning
Partnership) & Councillor John Lines
(Chairman, Regional Housing
Partnership), A guide to the delivery
of affordable housing in the West
Midlands

27
the community. The added difficulties in accessing affordable and social housing resulting
from the transitional stage that refugees face at point of final decision (i.e. gaining refugee
status) should be recognised in a planned way.
This approach would help in meeting the objectives set by the ODPM who were the lead
agency in forming the Local Development Framework strategy.
Local Area Agreements & Local Strategic Partnerships
Local Area Agreements are established as the delivery plan for the Sustainable Community
Strategy, defining the detailed outcomes that reflect the local priorities identified in a
Sustainable Community Strategies. Most Local Area Agreements are focused on four blocks
(where each block may have a number of thematic partnerships):
! Safer and stronger communities
! Children and Young People
! Healthier Communities and Older People
! Economic Development and Enterprise.
Community Strategy – Key Considerations
The Relationships between Community Strategies and Local Development
Frameworks (ODPM, October 2003) identifies good practice ‘pointers’ in terms of linking
community strategies and local development frameworks from both a policy content and process
perspective. The study identified several benefits from creating more effective relationships,
including:
– integrated approach towards future development within a local authority area based upon
sustainable development objectives;
– joined-up approach to community planning, allowing local development frameworks to gain a
clear understanding of community needs;
– recognition of local development frameworks as a delivery mechanism for community strategies
and other local initiatives aims and objectives;
– economies of scale in terms of working corporately and sharing resources in the preparation of
community strategies and local development frameworks, particularly processes e.g. monitoring,
sustainability appraisal etc;
– potential to resolve conflicts between community aspirations and national and regional policy
objectives by engaging with a wide range of stakeholders; and
–positive contribution that planners can make to the community strategy process.
(Planning Policy Statement 12 – Local Development Frameworks, ODPM 2004)

28
Not all areas have LAA’s in place yet, or Cohesion Plans within which Refugee issues may be
addressed. However, LAA’s whilst in the formative stage, underpins the governments
strategic community cohesion plans.
Regardless of the paths that have led children and young people to spend the most formative
stage of their lives within the West Midlands, development strategies should reflect the fact
that the communities we build today play an important part in forming their futures and the
communities of tomorrow. Currently refugee children and young people are under
represented in this process.
RCHiP was unable to identify any Local Strategic Partnerships that actively engage with
Refugee Community Organisations or take the special circumstances that bring refugee
children and young people to the West Midlands into account. Refugee Community
Organisations working in partnership with WMSPARS as the inter agency enabler and
facilitator may offer a channel to address this.
A Local Strategic Partnership (LSPs) is a single non-statutory, multi-agency body, which
matches local authority boundaries, and aims to bring together at a local level the different
parts of the public, private, community and voluntary sectors.
LSPs are key to tackling deep seated, multi-faceted problems, requiring a range of responses
from different bodies. Local partners working through a LSP will be expected to take many of
the major decisions about priorities for their local area.
SPs are central to the delivery of the New Commitment to Neighbourhood Renewal - National
Strategy Action Plan.
Why do we need LSPs?
Lack of joint working at local level has been one of the key reasons for lack of progress in
delivering sustainable economic, social and physical regeneration, or improved public
services, that meets the needs of local people. A combination of organisations, and the
community, working co-operatively as part of an LSP will have a far greater chance of
success.
To achieve these improvements, the Government, local authorities and other service
providers need to work co-operatively, change the ways they work, reallocate resources
and 'bend' their mainstream programmes to tackle issues that really matter to local
people. (Department for Communities and Local Government)

29
Statements of Community Involvement
The regional refugee integration strategy should look to enhance the work of local Planning
Departments in offering support and guidance in ensuring the voice of refugee families are
heard as part of the Statement of Community Involvement.
The Statement of Community Involvement sets out the standards to be achieved by the local
authority in involving the community in the preparation, alteration and continuing review of all
local development documents and planning applications.
The statement should be a clear public statement enabling the community to know how and
when they will be involved in the preparation of local development documents and how they
will be consulted on planning applications. Local planning authorities should set out in the
statement of community involvement how they will meet, or exceed, the minimum
requirements set out in the Regulations (The Town and Country Planning Local Development,
England Regulations, 2004).
This approach could ensure that the type of housing stock built and the commercial
development of areas could be more responsive to local needs in areas where there is a
significant refugee community as well as respond to the transitional housing problems
outlined above.
Refugee Housing Integration Project
The Housing Association Charitable Trust (HACT) – Refugee Housing Integration Project is
providing a valuable contribution to addressing the challenges that face refugee in accessing
housing in the West Midlands (amongst several regions). However, the capacity of this
project means that whilst representing ‘good practice’ it can only reach a limited group.
The programme aims to achieve more integrated neighbourhoods in which there is an increase in the
amount and quality of housing available to refugees.
It aims to achieve this by:
* integrating the housing needs and aspirations of refugee communities into mainstream policy and
practice
* increasing the capacity of refugee communities to enable them to participate in the development of
appropriate housing services
* developing sustainable partnership working between emerging refugee communities, mainstream
housing and related service providers, and long term communities.
We achieve this through:
* developing partnerships and networks
* delivering training and consultancy support
* giving grants.
(HACT – www.hact.org )

30
The importance of partnerships
The key to developing a responsive approach to the needs of refugees is to develop equitable
stakeholder partnerships that focus on best utilising the core competencies of each partner.
This in itself is a challenge and requires learning from all parties. For refugees, whilst
Community Organisations may be adept at engaging with their own community, they may
lack the experience in order to engage effectively with partner organisations. Also, Housing
Associations and Local Authority Housing Departments in many instances have struggled to
engage with Refugee Community Organisations effectively.
A problem in developing an effective strategy is the lack of available up to date data on where
refugees live and their family composition. Refugee status is not included in census data and
‘new communities’ tend to take time to settle in an area. School admissions data does record
this information and could offer part of the solution to this issue. However, the best sources of
information are the Refugee Community Organisations (RCO’s) themselves who have ‘on the
ground’ awareness of where people live and the issues that are affecting them.

31
Chapter Five – Capacity Building and Funding
Mainstream resources
To deliver an effective integration strategy, attention must be paid to how it can be resourced.
Current mainstream funding, whilst focusing on community cohesion, is broadly unresponsive
to the needs of refugee families.
There is no formal requirement for local authorities to have a designated response to ‘refugee
children and young people’ as a specific group. Furthermore, the case may be made that
funding streams that respond to the challenges of social exclusion and seek to implement the
five outcomes of ‘Every Child Matters’ may capture the issues that affect them. However, the
experiential reality within communities evidences that there are specific issues that require a
‘needs led’ response.
RCO Capacity Building and Funding
Refugee Community Organisations provide some of the most innovative and supportive
programmes for the young people they support. Whilst children and young people interviewed
clearly expressed their desire to meet and make friends with members of the indigenous
community, nonetheless this has to be from a point of support and security. As highlighted
above, some find Youth Service provision alienating and so RCO’s provide an important
resource. However, whilst some achieve outstanding outcomes from their work and offer
invaluable efficient services, others suffer from a lack of experience and core skills. RCO’s
engaged with RCHiP reflected this with some proving to be professional and able to engage
whilst others less so.
According to Sharon Palmer, Policy & Research Coordinator, Regional Action West Midlands,
RCO’s are “too competitive. Funding streams such as ChangeUp are designed to build
infrastructure. You can’t do this if you are competing with potential partners. Many RCO’s
suffer from ‘mission drift’ this is when their operational work does not match funding
objectives. This results from targeting funding in order to sustain the organisation rather than
those that match their core competency.”
RCHiP identifies that a key challenge to cross RCO co-operation is the reality that they are
not a homogenous entity. Whilst other voluntary sector organisations may be single issue
based, for RCO’s the breadth is far wider. Many deal with any issue that comes their way
from members of their community. Furthermore, some RCO’s do not feel aligned to other
RCO communities for social, political or experiential reasons. Inter generational differences
are prevalent with more established communities hostile to newer arrivals and/or vice versa.
Also, that whilst the experience of being a refugee may enable a sense of empathy with
others from similar experiences, it does not necessarily make a good voluntary sector worker,
fundraiser or manager.

32
For those from countries who have suffered infrastructure breakdown, getting to grips with the
‘culture’ and processes associated with accessing and managing public funds may require
support. This is a challenge which, if met would reap benefits not just for refugees but also for
the whole community. The depth of commitment to community wellbeing and responsibility
found within RCO’s is an example worth nurturing and extending as an example across
spectrum of organisations concerned with promoting community engagement.
The Regional Strategy Network (a regional strategy group for voluntary sector organisations
working with refugee and asylum seekers in the West Midlands) commissioned the Refugee
Council to report on how access could be improved for ‘third sector’ organisations in
accessing funding:
The purpose of this survey was to gain a better understanding of how specialist and generic infrastructure
organisations meet the needs of RCOs. As a result of this study a picture has emerged of a set of
organisations within the voluntary and community sector that is small, relatively new, run primarily
by volunteers, and lacking a substantial funding base. They are trying to provide services for a wide
range of community groups, sometimes representing small refugee communities within their area.
RCOs clearly have aspirations because they say they would like help across a wide range of needs
but, in particular, they want help to establish and grow their organisations. If they are successful in
accessing infrastructure support, it is most likely to be from an organisation that specifically supports
refugees or asylum seekers, from a faith-based organisation or from a small infrastructure
organisation based in their locality. Support from larger-scale infrastructure organisations is most
likely to come from a Voluntary Service Council or a Community Development Agency.
3.39 RCOs still find it hard to access support, with many barriers preventing their engagement with
infrastructure organisations, both those that help with organisational development and those that
should help with local engagement. The chief of these barriers is a lack of understanding of the
specific situation and needs of RCOs, a lack compounded by language barriers. In addition, RCOs
find it difficult to access the information they need to take advantage of the larger infrastructure
organisations which is something that infrastructure organisations need to reflect in their planning
now. The difficulty experienced by RCO in accessing support to grow, to access funds, and to
engage has been identified as a gap in the support provided by voluntary and community
infrastructure organisations. Most worryingly, this gap, if unaddressed, will perpetuate the inequality
identified in the ACD Strategy Paper. Infrastructure organisations wishing to address this, and not
sure how to start, could make good use of ideas contained in the Strategy Paper.
3.40. However, filling this gap is not solely the responsibility of the region’s geographic and generic
infrastructure organisations. As mentioned in 3.13 above, there is a debate going on currently
about the need, or otherwise, for thematic, specialist infrastructure. Our findings suggest that
without a formally constituted specialist infrastructure for RCOs the ‘refugee sector’ will find it
difficult to get heard. The Refugee Strategy Network might ask itself whether it should take the
lead in discussing this. (Summary: Commitment to Change: Improving Access to Third Sector
Infrastructure for Frontline Refugee Organisations, July 2006)

33
European Social Fund
The European Social Fund (ESF) is one of four Structural Funds designed to strengthen
economic and social cohesion in the European Union. The Government Office West Midlands
hold responsibility for this funding in the region. Refugee children and young people would
benefit from being able to, both, access existing mainstream programmes in an enabling way
that recognises the additional challenges they may face as well as a measured degree of
specific services provision targeted at the significant points of transition that relate to the
refugee experience.
V programme
The benefits of initiatives such as the V programme which is a new charity established in May
2006 to take forward the recommendations of the Russell commission would enhance
opportunities for refugee children and young people in general but especially those who are
‘unaccompanied’.
It s core objectives are to;
bring together young people, business, the voluntary sector and government in a
shared purpose, to make volunteering a valued part of young people’s lives; and
be responsible for coordinating the delivery of the recommendations, entering into
contractual relationships with key providers, either on an individual basis or through
partnerships.
(http://www.russellcommission.org/faq/index.html)
According to Katie Simpson (Russell Commission – V Programme Grants), “Further funding
opportunities will be available from early next year and projects supporting refugee and
asylum seeking children and young people are welcome. We have provided funding of up to
£300k for a couple of projects and smaller funds for others. We are at the early stages of
developing our programme and so are still considering some issues such as the duration of
funding projects”

34
Chapter Six –Unaccompanied Minors
Terminology
The term "unaccompanied minors" is used both by the United Nations Children's Fund
(UNICEF) and by UNHCR to refer to persons who are under 18 years of age or under a
country's legal age of majority, are separated from both parents, and are not with and being
cared for by a guardian or other adult who by law or custom is responsible for them. This
includes minors who are without any adult care, minors who are entirely on their own, minors
who are with minor siblings but who, as a group, are unsupported by any adult responsible for
them, and minors who are with informal foster families. (UNHCR 1997)
In the voluntary sector, terms such as ‘separated children’ and ‘lone migrant children’
‘unaccompanied children’ are other terms. Although the use of appropriate terminology can
be a point of contention based on the need to ensure that children are seen as ‘children first’
rather than be labeled by their immigration status, the important
issue is that services respond to their needs in accordance with
the Children Act 2004. They, therefore, become the concern of
the Local Authority for support under Section 17 or 20 of the Act.
Children and young people themselves often resent being labeled
by their immigration status and often well meaning services may not be accessed as those it
seeks to support as a result. This is not specific to unaccompanied children as this was a
view expressed by a significant (majority) of children and young people who RCHiP engaged
with. However, coupled with the multiple additional stigmatizing labels associated with
children from minority groups in public care this may act as yet another inhibitor to gaining
positive self esteem.
Rights and entitlements of children and young people in public care are seeking
asylum in their own right
The level of ‘implied entitlement’ is often the subject of
much discussion amongst professionals charged with
ensuring appropriate access to services and this
confusion emanates from the often contradictory direction
of immigration and child care legislature, especially as it
applies to the Leaving Care provisions. For the purpose of
this report whilst it is worth noting the significant additional challenges these vulnerable
children face in terms of feeling included into communities in the West Midlands, further
detailed information regarding rights and entitlements can be gained from the Guidance for
Social Workers, Personal Advisers and their Managers working with unaccompanied asylum
seeking children (UASC) Produced By the ADSS ASYLUM TASK FORCE – October 2005,
the National Children Bureau www.ncb.org, as well as the Children Legal Centre web site -
www.childrenslegalcentre.com. It is, however, a feature of this area of work that rights and
I hate it when people
say I’m a refugee,
makes me sound
scummy.
Yohannes, 16
I have been living here for 2
years. My life is here. If I am
sent home they will kill me, but
the Home Office don’t believe
me. How can I feel part of a
country that wants to send me
to my death? 17 yr old

35
entitlements change on a comparatively frequent basis and are subject to a range of specific
personal factors that require specialist individual focus. The services available to offer this
focus, such as solicitors or community based are geographically sporadic, inconsistent in
standards and overloaded with requests for support. Cuts to services offering this type of
support has added to the duress of children and young people caught up in these
circumstances and according to professionals engaged in this area of work, have a seriously
detrimental effect on their wellbeing.
Whilst in some respect children in these circumstances have the advantage of professional
support of the statutory services, nonetheless the increasingly
challenging legislature being imposed on asylum seekers such as
restricting access to further education post 18 years, the deficit in
adequate support provisions in schools as well as the challenge
of identifying suitable placements all add to the burden they carry.
Current proposals in the consultation process in the Home Office
suggest the removal of children seeking asylum from foster care
at the age of 16 to enter shared housing or other forms of
supported accommodation. This is seen by some as contradictory to the ‘Looked After
Children’ green paper, which states that this should be provided until the age of 18yrs. The
New Asylum Model which is due to be rolled out in April 2007 still does not outline the level of
provision local authority supported children who are seeking asylum. This represents yet
another challenge to professionals seeking to get to grips with planning and advising on rights
and responsibilities of the children they look after and may add to their anxiety.
Projects such as BUMP (Befriending Unaccompanied
Minors Project- Birmingham) seek to mitigate this negative
impact by offering mentoring and activities that focus on
building personal confidence. Whilst offering an excellent
example of practice, they are restricted in their capacity
and so limited in their reach. The Refugee Council has
recently established a Children Panel of Advisors helping
separated children who may have newly arrived or are in
crisis. Other examples of service are provided in RCHiP
Phase One report. However, aaccess to these provisions
depend on children having awareness of them as well as
resources to access them. Even though some financial
assistance may be offered, nonetheless additional barriers can affect access such as
personal safety (travelling after dark), having adequate clothing in the winter, daytime
appointments may be at the expense of classes or other activities.
A unaccompanied young
man seeking asylum was
troubled by the fact that a
specialist health centre
had been set up for
refugees – “why do they
think we have special
illnesses, what do they
think we are?”
I love this country, it has saved
my life, but I really miss my
family. My social worker is like
my mum! I am so worried about
the future but all I can do is be
good, pray to god that the Home
Office will let me stay. 16 yr old
young woman
I am grateful to Britain for giving
me a home, but they have really
made me suffer here. My
solicitor is rubbish and the
Home Office are just cruel. They
think I am lying! 17 yr old young
man

36
Home Office “UASC Reform Programme”.
The Home Office “UASC Reform Programme” is still in the developmental stage. The
objectives are:
Scope:
• Intake and assessment of UASC.
• Induction of UASC (as different from the induction of adults within the asylum
process) and age assessment.
• Dispersal and case transfer between Local Authorities.
• Commissioning and contracting services for assessment, accommodation and
support.
• Content and delivery of services.
• Early returns and removals.
• Post - 18 removals.
• Policy and practice once a child reaches the age of 18 years.
Proposals:
• Development of clear profile of current UASC population and identify current and
future trends in partnership with NRUC.
• Review of current working practices and processes including evaluation of SCT (Safe
Case Transfer).
• Agreement of principles to guide reform and ways forward with DfES, ADSS and
others.
• Development of proposals with regard to changes in each strand.
• Consultation with key external and internal stakeholders.
• Development, implementation and evaluation of ‘trailblazing’ schemes for
assessment, accommodation and support to test out aspects of emerging proposals.
Safe Case Transfer
In keeping with Home Office objectives, the North West Region (Several Greater Manchester
local authorities) have formed a consortium that work in partnership with Kent County Council
to provide a ‘safe case transfer’ model. The agreement ensures the planned transfer and
placement of young people from the South East to the North West. The West Midlands region
may wish to look at this model as an example of good practice that could be applied within
the local context e.g. between West Midland Authorities.

37
WMSPARS hosts an Unaccompanied Asylum Seeker Children regional sub group. At a cross sector
consultation event on March 2
nd
, in response to the proposed Home Office reforms to services for
unaccompanied children and young people.
Reception, screening and assessment:
Benefits as pull factors?
Little evidence on whether benefits of the system act as pull factors for children. Regarded as to simplistic an
argument, a range of factors such as education, English language, the perception of U.K. as more
multicultural/tolerant, and the presence of specific settled refugee communities were more likely factors
affecting decisions to come to the UK.
Reception arrangements:
Such arrangements at present are missing, issues such as accessing healthcare on arrival and for longer
term requirements need to be considered. Education provision is variable in region, those who can get into
school benefit more than older young people who only have the chance to access ESOL provision.
One view is that UASCs should not be housed with English children with offending/challenging behaviour,
and that under 16’s should be in appropriate accommodation, and provided with clear explanation of what is
going to happen in immigration and care process.
Specialist arrangements:
With respect to joint commissioning arrangements, need to develop strategy further (post 2005 experience),
concerns about the legal responsibility for the UASC for the Local Authority “transferring” the UASC to
another area. Problems are not insurmountable.
What are the current incentives for a Local Authority to become a specialist provider?
Need for a planned process of reception centre services, and the management of future service provision. Is
it possible to cluster by language groups?
Age Assessments:
Need for joint age assessment between Immigration Service and Social Service Departments. Age needs to
be clarified at the earliest point, this helps agencies and the young person.
Discussion as to the possibility of Immigration Service leaving date of birth field open for adjustment at later
date. Agreed that age assessment is not an exact science, some UASC don’t know their age, potentially the
use of a reception centre given time for a 3-4 week assessment for age to be determined could work.
Example of work in Kent was noted.
Agencies are still dealing with a Pool of inaccurate age assessed cases. It was suggested that there is a
need to understand that UASC’s may change their account, but this does not mean they are lying.
Would it be possible to defer screening for UASCs for a period of time to allow them to settle,
overcome fears etc? Could screening be done nearer to where UASCs where accommodated?
If the SEF is being phased out as part of the NAM process, is the same planned for UASC’s , and what
timescales are being looked at ?
Current Home Office view is that they need to make an initial assessment of age. MEU have a screening
team which does include a number of officers who have been training to screen minors. Links are developing
with Social Services. NAM will also have an impact on this issue, with allocated caseworkers further
discussions re age can occur. Can age disputed cases be given specific indicators? How can these
cases be picked up / referred on if appropriate ? Can Immigration not put 01-01-00 when date of birth
can’t be established ?, This causes major problems with the Job Centre when UASCs move onto claim
benefits.

38
Improvements to decision making process :
There is a need for better translation of paperwork into “non- legalistic” language and to ensure that this
information is conveyed through an appropriate adult. Utilising the voluntary sector where available to help
with this issue, often they are providing advice/ advocacy and some may have immigration specialism.
Case Transfer arrangements between authorities
Extent that ties UASC have made in one area should be considered before transfer:
The potential disruption to the child should be considered, what existing links they have with area, School,
community support, faith were noted. The links with professional were also noted, such as disclosure and
trust, could this be disrupted by move ? Dependant on the length of time individual has been in a community.
Do we make distinction between new arrivals and those UASC who have been in area for a period of time ?
The wishes of the Child need to be given appropriate recognition. Time for explanation and information for
UASC to make an informed choice should be considered.
Issues around age assessment and initial screening were raised. Concerns exist about the child having to
retell their story on multiple occasions and to different professionals.
Questions also as to how Children’s Trusts and LEA’s might also identify young people in their community
who might be UASC.
Movement needs better management, sharing of information. There is a view that some LA’s would accept
responsibility for a child who had been living in an area for some time as a child in need in their area.
Consideration might be given to moving UASCs to areas where existing services are well developed and
could potentially be expanded, some form of follow up between transferring authority was also suggested.
Issues re trafficking , management and protection of children were also raised.
Commissioning of services
Fostering :
Financing foster placements and the initial burden on the local authority was noted. Costs of specialist foster
care and possible recruitment and training of foster carers from the Refugee Community is an option.
Transfer of 16-18 year olds from foster placements, what should happen for these UASC ? Role of UASC
choice in their options also noted. A broader range of options need to be developed for UASC .
What role could the voluntary sector or RSLs play in provision for UASC ? Potential for further joint
working in provision for UASC should be considered. Good planning for small numbers of UASC can be
done if local agencies work well together. If services are already well developed there needs to be serious
questions asked if decisions are taken to move UASCs away.
Returns and removals :
The need also to consider the effect of removal of UASC from foster placement ( Relating to cases where
negative decision on asylum claims is made.)
Some groups felt that levels of uncertainty about the process make it hard for UASCs to consider return as a
possible outcome. The use of voluntary planned returns might be the best route. Further work needs to be
done to ensure that initial decision making is improved, this links also with the need to ensure there is
adequate legal representation in areas where UASCs are supported. Material could be developed to show
UASCs young people who have successfully returned, people should be encouraged, not forced to return.
The question about protecting scare resources from the necessity to support people in the UK illegally was
seen as a political question which should have no bearing on the rights of children and how they should be
cared for.
The length of time an individual has been in the UK is seen as important. Disruption after a long period in the
UK is seen as undesirable and not accounting for the positive contribution that young people could make if
they are already settled. In terms of deciding who might stay in these circumstances, decisions should be
taken on an individual basis , taking into account education, voluntary work, local ties, language etc.

39
Chapter Seven –Education
Common Assessment Framework
“The Common Assessment Framework (CAF) is a key part of delivering frontline services that
are integrated and focused around the needs of children and young people. The CAF is a
standardised approach to conducting an assessment of a child's additional needs and
deciding how those needs should be met. It can be used by practitioners across children's
services in England”. (Every Child Matters 2006). This includes asylum-seeking children and
holds significance relevance at the point of transition when gaining refugee status (or similar).
The point of transition is significant for the whole family and requires a specific response.
WMSPARS holds a unique position in terms of being able to enable an effective multi agency
response at this crucial stage of a family’s integration in to the community. As the key contact
with the Home Office and local strategic bodies as well as accommodation providers within
the region, it can offer information and advice about specific family circumstances (with due
consideration to relevant data protection requirements) and therefore assist the facilitation of
a cohesive response at the point of transition.
Starting Point (Bolton)
An example of good practice that would benefit refugee
children in the West Midlands, is a specialist school called
Starting Point. All new arrivals from abroad (not only refugees)
are provided an initial placement of a year prior to attending
mainstream schools. During this time the education
programme is focused on ensuring children are able to
achieve the five outcomes of Every Child Matters in
accordance with their specific learning needs resulting from
being new to the UK.
(http://www.nrif.org.uk/Education/PrimaryEducation/docs/0311
3StartingPoint.pdf)
Education and Inspections Act 2006
The new Education and Inspection Act offers potential for encouraging parental participation
in influencing the way schools respond to the needs of refugee children and young people.
However, this opportunity may be lost if not strategically guided and informed by wider policy
guidance and directives.
The new Act places a strong emphasis on empowering parents and devolving autonomy to
governing bodies. This raises the issue of ‘who is heard’. There is a risk that those least able
to engage will be left behind without due attention to the issues that effect them. Whilst this is
Daring to Dream
Children and young people
are integral to the success of
UK government’s refugee
integration strategy, to
breaking down barriers
between refugee and settled
communities and the creation
of cohesive communities.
Furthermore, for young
refugee and asylum-seeking
people, school provides
stability and normality that
mitigate the negative effects
of traumatic experiences.
(Daring to dream: Raising the
achievement of 14 to 16 year
old asylum-seeking and
refugee children and young
people, Refugee Council
2005)

RCHiP_Report_1-3-07

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to RCHiP_Report_1-3-07

Similar to RCHiP_Report_1-3-07 (20)

RCHiP_Report_1-3-07