The Care Experienced Fund (P.30/2026): comments
This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
THE CARE EXPERIENCED FUND (P.30/2026): COMMENTS
Presented to the States on 18th March 2026
by the Children, Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel
STATES GREFFE
2026 P.30 Com.
COMMENTS
The Children, Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel (the Panel') was briefed by the Minister for Children and Families and Government Officers about The Care Experienced Fund [P.30/2026] (the Proposition') on Tuesday 3rd March 2026.
Background
The Panel was reminded about the background to the proposed creation of a fund for care experienced Islanders over the age of 25 (the Fund') following recommendations from the Independent Care Inquiry.
The Panel understands that the Fund had been designed to be a ringfenced sum that would be invested as part of the States' Common Investment Fund. The administration of the fund would be facilitated by an independent, non-Government, administrator so that potential beneficiaries would not have to approach a Government entity for support.
The Fund will provide support for Islanders with care experience with a focus on the following three areas:
• Mental health and wellbeing, for example, accessing psychological support
• Progressing lifelong learning opportunities, or help with the desire to return to education to advance their attainment
• Financial stability and emergency funding, for example, in situations where other people may turn to the Bank of Mum and Dad' or have support from familial networks
Panel queries
Definition of "care experienced"
The Panel had corresponded with the Minister for Children and Families in advance of the meeting with some queries about the definition of "care experienced". The report accompanying the proposition referenced that applicants need to meet the definition of having previously been "a child in the care of the Minister" under the Children (Jersey) Law 2002, however, the Panel had noted that this was not a specific definition used in the draft terms of reference, where "care experience" is used as a more general term. The Panel asked for clarification of whether the definition used in the Children (Jersey) Law 2002, specifically the circumstances referenced in Article 1A of that law, which includes "a child who is looked after by the Minister" would all be eligible for application to the Fund.
It was confirmed that the definition was intentionally broad to allow a degree of flexibility, but that the purpose was for the Fund to benefit adults who were previously children in the care of the Minister, by virtue of a care order. It was explained that Article 1A of the Law (children looked after by the Minister) includes a wider group of children, including those in the Minister's care for a very short period of time or because they were held in custody on remand and, therefore in different circumstances to those who were subject to a care order.
During the briefing, the Minister emphasised the need for flexibility of the definition, recognising that some eligible individuals experienced circumstances governed by
legislation in place before the Children (Jersey) Law 2002. It was confirmed that efforts would be made to ensure that the relevant records were checked in order to ascertain eligibility and ensure that individuals with previous care experience in Jersey would have access to the support funding where possible. It was further confirmed that detail about beneficiary criteria would be included in Service Level Agreements to be entered into by the independent administrators, who would determine the eligibility of applicants.
The Panel learned that care experienced Islanders who had subsequently left the Island would not be eligible for support from the Fund. And that the Fund was intended to support those who lived in Jersey only.
Administration fees
The Panel also noted that the report accompanying the proposition included estimates for annual investment income of approximately 2% and annual benefits uprate of 2.5% and requested that further information be provided about the percentage figures and why they were considered appropriate estimates. The Panel was advised that the return percentages had been discussed with officers from the Government's Treasury team as part of the Fund's development and had deliberately been set at a conservative estimate, below the Fiscal Policy Panel's projections.
The Panel received information regarding the proposed administrator of the Fund and requested further detail on the basis of their fee structure. Reference was made in the proposition's accompanying report to an administration fee of 10%, and the Panel sought clarification as to whether this applied to 10% of the distributions made. In followup correspondence, Government officers confirmed that the 10% fee would be charged on the amounts distributed from the Fund. They also advised that an annual uprating was built into the distribution allocations, and as such, the 10% figure should remain applicable for the duration of the Fund. The only exception noted was that initial setup costs incurred by the administrator could result in the first year's administration costs exceeding 10%.
The Panel seeks assurance that this structure is the most appropriate, sustainable, and cost-effective model for the effective administration of the Fund across its full lifespan. Due to the timing of lodging at the end of this electoral period and the time available to scrutinize this proposition the Panel requests that the Minister address this point when he presents this proposition to the States Assembly.
Other points
The Panel asked how potentially eligible Islanders would be alerted to the existence of the Fund and potential support. It was confirmed that the independent administrator would be required to undertake some promotion of the Fund as part of their fee, but also, that organisations such as Jersey Cares would likely be helpful in sharing information with potentially eligible individuals with whom they came into contact.
Regarding the establishment of the Fund, it was confirmed that the sale of Aviemore was expected to complete in summer 2026. The Panel was advised that there would be two tranches of income into the Fund, pending stages of the sale and development.
Page - 3
P.30/2026 Com.
Regarding the proposed 10-year lifespan of the Fund, the Panel was advised that the timeframe could be reviewed in due course and would depend, in part, on the Fund's performance. It was noted that the intention was for the Fund to support those affected by poorer care experiences in the past, while future generations of care leavers should benefit from improved care and enhanced support systems.
Conclusion
In summary, the Panel supports the creation of the Fund in Jersey following the sale of Aviemore', recognising its role in supporting Islanders aged 25 and over who have care experience. The Panel's primary point of concern is the level of fees proposed for the independent administrator, and it therefore requests that the Minister for Children and Families address the suitability of this structure and the fees when presenting the proposition to the States Assembly.