Hard-up Bradford Council is spending more than £4 million on places outside the district for children in care, a shock report reveals.

It pays out £25,000-a-year for social workers to visit them and in many cases the children have to leave the district simply because the council has too few places.

A hard-hitting review on children's residential services by the Council's best value review team showed 89 children were in residential care - with 43 living outside the district.

It said while children were sometimes housed in other areas by choice, because it was in their best interests, many were out of the district because of a lack of accommodation in it.

The team said the service had no commissioning policy and officers sometimes just rang up and secured places on the spot, wherever they could.

They said there was no negotiation on prices, terms or conditions and no tendering, and that the authority was spending more than others in the region on getting places for children in outside accommodation.

The "warts and all" report also found three of the six Council-owned children's homes in a poor state of repair and it was their view at the time of the report that they did not meet a number of regulations in the Children's Act, covering suitable space, furniture, decorations and maintenance.

The report said a programme of refurbishment had been completed but Tyson House and Woodroyd Terrace homes were in inappropriate locations.

The team also criticised the use of recycled furniture - sometimes from elderly people's homes - saying they were unsuitable for youngsters.

It reported rooms were small and sometimes had minimum facilities for the children.

The report, which went to last night's housing and health scrutiny board, recommended a 23-point action plan for the service, although it said it found good practice in many fields.

They included:

l Increasing the number of residential places in the district by two thirds;

l Adopting a commissioning model for buying places outside the authority, which could save thousands of pounds;

l Investigating the possibility of free access to education and leisure facilities for children and young people in care;

l Allowing extra funding for furniture; and

l Grouping appropriate children together in homes taking age into account.

But Councillor Peter Lancaster (Lab, Eccleshill) said although more homes and places were needed in Bradford, it was dangerous to consider private investment.

"If the profit margin isn't obtained, they will just withdraw."

But Richard Bates, head of the district's children provider service, said whatever arrangements were made the children would still be in local authority care.

He added that while substantial savings could be achieved there would always be a small number of "frighteningly expensive" places needed outside the authority, including secure places and places where children with serious problems would have to be shadowed.

e-mail: olwen.vasey

@bradford.newsquest.co.uk