sruption. Conduct of reviews 5.36. The agency should provide written information about how it intends to review a child’s case to the prospective adopter, the child where the agency considers the child is of sufficient age and understanding, and to any other person the agency considers relevant, such as the child’s birth parents or guardian and anyone else who has contact with the child. The Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) appointed by the agency must ensure that the review is conducted in accordance with AAR 36 and, as far as is reasonably practicable, attend and chair any meeting to review the child’s case. See AAR 37. 5.37. The matters to be considered at each review are set out in AAR 36.6. The guidance on reviews of looked after children contained in the 1989 Act guidance 104 Volume 2: Care Planning, Placement and Case Review should also be followed in respect of reviews conducted under the AAR in so far as it is appropriate. The major difference will be that once the child has been placed for adoption, the prospective adopter, who has parental responsibility for the child, will always have a major role and must be consulted, whereas the extent to which birth parents are consulted and involved will be a matter for the agency’s discretion depending on the circumstances of the case. It will rarely be appropriate, for example, for birth parents to attend a review meeting once a child has been placed with prospective adopters. In this context the provisions of AAR 45, which modify the application of parts of the 1989 Act, are relevant. 5.38. It is of the greatest importance that, if the plan is for the child to be placed for adoption and the agency is authorised to place the child but has not succeeded in placing him, it continues to make strenuous efforts to find 