Point 76: Are You Preparing Them for Panel — Or Building It Into an Ordeal?
Point 76: Are You Preparing Them for Panel — Or Building It Into an Ordeal?
By the time a prospective Foster Carer reaches panel, they may have spent months hearing about it.
Before panel...
At panel...
Panel will consider...
Panel might ask...
This needs to be completed for panel...
We're hoping to take you to panel...
Panel gradually becomes the destination for almost everything.
So what picture has the applicant created in their head by the time the day finally arrives?
An interview?
An examination?
A boardroom?
A tribunal?
A group of strangers waiting to find fault?
Or an important but understandable part of a professional approval process?
That difference matters.
DON'T SPEND MONTHS BUILDING PANEL UP — AND THEN WONDER WHY THE APPLICANT IS TERRIFIED OF IT.
Panel is important — and it should remain important
This Point is not arguing that panel should become casual.
Foster Carer approval is a significant decision.
Children need safe, capable Foster Carers.
Assessments need professional scrutiny.
Panel has an important quality-assurance and recommendation function within the current system.
Indeed, in the Government's 2026 consultation on reforming panel arrangements, 67% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that panels provide value proportionate to the resources involved. Respondents particularly identified independent oversight, safeguarding, quality assurance and diverse perspectives as benefits.
The Government subsequently decided not to proceed with removing panels from initial Foster Carer assessment and review, instead committing to improve panel operation, including timeliness, quality and practice.
So the issue is not:
“Do away with rigorous panel scrutiny.”
It is:
HOW DO WE MAKE A RIGOROUS PROCESS UNDERSTANDABLE TO THE PERSON EXPERIENCING IT?
THE CONSULTATION TELLS US SOMETHING IMPORTANT
The same Government consultation also recorded criticism of panels.
Current and former Foster Carers were more likely to question their value, and concerns included that panels could feel:
intimidating;
duplicative;
and:
unclear in purpose.
Some respondents also argued that panels could contribute to delay and administrative burden.
That is directly relevant to Foster Carer Recruitment.
It tells us that professional intention and applicant experience are not automatically the same thing.
A panel may believe it is conducting a respectful, proportionate conversation.
The applicant may experience:
“Seven strangers are questioning whether I'm good enough to Foster.”
Both realities can exist at the same time.
WHAT DOES THE APPLICANT THINK PANEL IS FOR?
This is probably the first question services should ask.
If you stopped an applicant one week before panel and asked:
“What does fostering panel actually do?”
what would they say?
Would they understand that panel considers the assessment information and makes a recommendation?
Would they understand the relationship between panel and the Agency Decision Maker?
Or would they say:
“It's where they decide whether I pass.”
That language — pass or fail — is exactly what we need to avoid.
Panel is not a Foster Carer driving test.
PANEL RECOMMENDS. THE ADM DECIDES.
This should be explained clearly.
Under the current framework, panel considers the relevant assessment information and makes a recommendation regarding suitability and proposed terms of approval. The decision then sits with the Agency Decision Maker under the approval process.
That distinction becomes particularly important for Points 77 and 78.
At Point 76, the applicant simply needs to understand:
what panel does;
what it does not do;
and:
what happens next.
DEMYSTIFY THE ROOM
Before panel, the applicant should have a reasonable understanding of:
WHO WILL BE THERE?
Not necessarily the biography of every individual, but what the panel is and why different perspectives are represented.
WHY ARE THEY THERE?
To consider the assessment and make an appropriate recommendation — not to repeat the entire Form F from the beginning.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN?
How they join or enter.
Who introduces people.
Approximately how the meeting proceeds.
When they will be invited to speak.
How questions are managed.
When they leave.
WHAT MIGHT THEY BE ASKED?
Not the exact questions.
But the nature of the discussion.
WHAT HAPPENS AFTERWARDS?
How the panel recommendation is communicated and what happens before the Agency Decision Maker's formal decision.
The objective is not rehearsal.
It is orientation.
PREPARATION ≠ COACHING
This distinction is critical.
A service should prepare applicants for the experience of panel.
It should not coach them to produce particular answers.
There is a big difference between saying:
“Panel may want to explore your understanding of support and your family network, because those were important themes in the assessment.”
and:
“If they ask you about support, make sure you say X, Y and Z.”
The first reduces uncertainty.
The second risks creating a performance.
Panel needs to meet the applicant, not a rehearsed version designed to produce approval.
So:
PREPARE THE PERSON. DON'T SCRIPT THE PERFORMANCE.
THE ASW SHOULD NOT USE PANEL AS A THREAT
Language throughout assessment matters enormously.
Comments such as:
“Panel won't like that.”
“You'll need a better answer than that at panel.”
“Wait until panel asks you about this.”
may sometimes be said lightly.
But repeated over several months, they can turn panel into something menacing.
The applicant begins imagining an unseen authority constantly waiting in judgement.
The more useful language is professional and explanatory:
“That is an area the assessment needs to explore clearly, because it will form part of the information considered through the approval process.”
The concern remains.
The drama disappears.
WATCH OUT FOR THE MOCK INTERVIEW
Some preparation can accidentally make things worse.
If a pre-panel session becomes:
Question 1. Give me your answer.
No, try again.
Say it this way.
the applicant receives a powerful message:
There are correct answers.
They then arrive at panel trying to remember what they were supposed to say.
That can make somebody who has spoken openly for months suddenly appear tense, guarded or unnatural.
Panel preparation should increase confidence in the process, not confidence in memorised responses.
THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE HEARD
Current National Minimum Standards say Foster Carers and prospective Foster Carers should be given the opportunity to attend and be heard at panel meetings concerning their approval, and to bring a supporter if they wish.
That wording matters.
The applicant is not simply a person being summoned to answer questions.
They have a voice in the process.
That means preparation should include:
You can speak.
You can clarify.
You can ask questions.
You are not merely being examined.
That can significantly alter the psychological framing.
PANEL ITSELF SHOULD THINK ABOUT INTIMIDATION
This is not solely an applicant-preparation problem.
The statutory fostering guidance makes an interesting point about panel composition: while services may appoint a central list of suitable members, individual meetings should not become so large that they become difficult to chair or intimidating to prospective Foster Carers or others attending.
That is important.
It means:
“The applicant was very nervous”
should not automatically be treated simply as an applicant issue.
Panel should also ask:
What does our panel feel like to somebody walking into it for the first time?
THE FIRST FIVE MINUTES MATTER
Imagine entering a room or joining an online meeting.
There are several unfamiliar faces.
Everybody already knows intimate details about your life.
You know almost nothing about them.
They have read your assessment.
You are waiting for their questions.
That is an inherently unusual power dynamic.
The chair and panel therefore have considerable influence over how the experience begins.
A clear welcome.
Introductions.
Explanation.
Normal human warmth.
An acknowledgement that applicants are often nervous.
None of those things weaken scrutiny.
They simply create conditions in which applicants can participate properly.
VIRTUAL PANEL DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN EASIER PANEL
Many services use virtual arrangements.
For some applicants this may reduce travel and make attendance easier.
For others it introduces new anxiety:
Will the link work?
Where do I wait?
Can everyone hear me?
Should my partner and I use one screen?
Who appears first?
Am I muted?
What if the connection drops?
If the service uses virtual panel, then technical preparation becomes part of applicant preparation.
Do not allow the applicant's first experience of the platform to be:
five minutes before panel.
ACCESSIBILITY IS PANEL PREPARATION TOO
Services should also think beyond generic nervousness.
Does the applicant have:
communication needs?
hearing or visual needs?
language needs?
neurodivergence?
difficulty processing multiple questions quickly?
anxiety around formal groups?
technology barriers?
If reasonable adjustments or different arrangements are appropriate, those should be considered before the applicant is sitting in front of panel.
Again, that does not change the professional question.
It changes the conditions under which the person is able to participate.
WHAT ABOUT THE FOSTER CARER BUDDY?
Point 67 established the boundary:
THE ASW ASSESSES. THE BUDDY SUPPORTS.
Panel is one of the strongest places for that role.
An experienced Foster Carer can say:
“I remember being really nervous.”
“This is what surprised me.”
“It felt less frightening once I was actually there.”
“Remember that the panel has already read your assessment.”
That is lived-experience reassurance.
What the buddy should not say is:
“They always ask this question.”
“Make sure you answer like this.”
“Don't mention that.”
“If they ask X, say Y.”
That crosses the boundary into coaching.
LIVED EXPERIENCE CAN DEMYSTIFY PANEL. IT SHOULD NOT GAME PANEL.
WHAT IF PANEL ASKS A DIFFICULT QUESTION?
The answer should not be:
“Hopefully they won't.”
Applicants should know that panel may seek clarification or explore something significant within the assessment.
A difficult question does not automatically mean:
panel is against you;
something has gone wrong;
or:
you are about to be rejected.
Questions are part of scrutiny.
And because Point 73 established no unexplained surprises, genuinely significant areas should not normally feel as though they have suddenly materialised from nowhere at panel.
That continuity is important.
WHAT IF PANEL NEEDS MORE INFORMATION?
Applicants should understand this possibility too.
A panel seeking clarification or further information should not be translated in advance as:
failure.
What exactly happens will depend upon the circumstances and the formal process.
But applicants should know that the world is not necessarily divided into:
YES
and:
NO
within the first few minutes of panel.
Again, the principle is:
explain possibilities without trying to predict outcomes.
ASK THE APPLICANT HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT PANEL
This sounds almost embarrassingly simple.
Ask them.
Not:
“You know what happens at panel, don't you?”
That question invites:
“Yes.”
Instead:
“When you think about panel, what are you expecting it to be like?”
That can uncover:
“I'm worried they're going to interrogate my partner.”
“I thought there would be twenty people.”
“I think I have to give a presentation.”
“I'm worried one wrong answer means we won't be approved.”
Those misunderstandings can be addressed.
PANEL FEEDBACK SHOULD GO BOTH WAYS
Current National Minimum Standards describe panel's quality-assurance role in relation to the service and assessment reports.
But fostering services can also learn from applicant experiences of panel.
If applicants repeatedly say:
“Nobody explained who all the people were.”
change it.
If they say:
“The waiting room was the worst part.”
look at it.
If they say:
“It felt as though the same things were being asked again.”
understand why.
If they say:
“It was actually much warmer than I expected.”
ask why their expectation had become so frightening in the first place.
That last question may reveal as much about the assessment journey as about panel itself.
DON'T MEASURE SUCCESS AS “THEY SURVIVED PANEL”
That phrase is sometimes used humorously:
“You survived panel!”
I understand why.
But think about the message.
Why should a prospective Foster Carer have to survive the organisation's approval meeting?
Perhaps a better ambition is:
“They understood it, participated in it and felt professionally respected throughout it.”
Much stronger.
POINT 76 TEST
Before a prospective Foster Carer reaches panel, could they answer:
PURPOSE
Why am I going?
PEOPLE
Who am I likely to meet?
PROCESS
What will happen?
QUESTIONS
Why might panel ask me things?
PARTICIPATION
Can I speak and ask questions?
SUPPORT
Who is supporting me?
OUTCOME
What does panel recommend and what happens afterwards?
If they cannot answer those questions, their anxiety may have been created partly by the organisation itself.
PANEL DOES NOT NEED TO BE LESS RIGOROUS TO BE LESS FRIGHTENING
This is ultimately the central argument.
Professional scrutiny matters.
Independent perspectives matter.
Safeguarding matters.
Quality assurance matters.
And the 2026 Government consultation demonstrated substantial support for continuing the role of panels while also exposing concerns about intimidation, duplication, delay and inconsistent practice. The Government has chosen to retain initial assessment panels and focus instead on making them work better.
That creates a straightforward challenge for fostering services.
Keep the scrutiny.
Lose the unnecessary mystery.
Keep the questions.
Lose the theatre.
Keep professional independence.
Lose avoidable intimidation.
PREPARE THE PERSON. DON'T SCRIPT THE PERFORMANCE.
LIVED EXPERIENCE CAN DEMYSTIFY PANEL. IT SHOULD NOT GAME PANEL.
And above all: