The government is facing criticism for quietly implementing cuts to the Adoption and Special Guardianship Fund (ASGF), reducing the Fair Access Limit (FAL) for therapy for adopted children from £5,000 to £3,000. This decision, revealed during parliament’s Easter recess in an email to the sector, has sparked concerns about the impact it will have on vulnerable children and families.
The ASGF, which supported nearly 20,000 children last year, will continue with a budget of £50m from April 2025, but with significant changes in how the funds are allocated. The cuts include a 40% reduction in the therapy grant limit and the removal of a £2,500 allowance for specialist assessments. This means that families will now have to navigate within the £3,000 limit for both therapy and assessments, without government matching funds for expenses exceeding this amount.
Liberal Democrat MP Munira Wilson criticized the government for the lack of transparency in announcing these changes, especially after raising the issue in the Commons earlier in April. She expressed deep concerns about the impact of the cuts on children’s quality of life, urging ministers to reconsider their decision.
Charities, including Adoption UK and Kinship, have also denounced the cuts, highlighting the essential role of therapy for adopted children who have experienced trauma, neglect, or abuse. These organizations stress that the cuts could lead to family breakdowns and increase pressure on an already strained care system, potentially jeopardizing the well-being of children in need.
As the government faces backlash over these cuts, attention turns to the upcoming June Spending Review, where Chancellor Rachel Reeves will outline her plans for future spending and reforms. With economic challenges and global uncertainties putting pressure on fiscal policies, there are concerns about further austerity measures or tax increases to address budget constraints.
The decision to reduce support for adopted children’s therapy underscores the complex challenges faced by vulnerable families and the need for thoughtful and sustainable funding solutions to ensure the well-being of those in need. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how policymakers will address these critical issues in the broader context of public sector reforms and financial stability.
