Setting

Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 1 RESIDENTIAL SPECIAL SCHOOL

p.1

BL0 0RT

Lead Inspector Mr Graham Robinson Announced Inspection 7, 8, 9 th & 26 th June 2006 09:30 Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to:

p.1

BL0 0RT

• Put the people who use social care first • Improve services and stamp out bad practice • Be an expert voice on social care • Practise what we preach in our own organisation

p.2

BL0 0RT

Reader Information Document Purpose Inspection Report Author CSCI Audience General Public Further copies from 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) Copyright This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Internet address www.csci.org.uk Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Residential Special Schools. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop

p.2

BL0 0RT

Every Child Matters, outlined the government’s vision for children’s services and formed the basis of the Children Act 2004. It provides a framework for inspection so that children’s services should be judged on their contribution to the outcomes considered essential to wellbeing in childhood and later life. Those outcomes are: • Being healthy • Staying safe • Enjoying and achieving • Making a contribution; and • Achieving economic wellbeing.

p.3

BL0 0RT

In response, the Commission for Social Care Inspection has re-ordered the national minimum standards for children’s services under the five outcomes, for reporting purposes. A further section has been created under ‘Management’ to cover those issues that will potentially impact on all the outcomes above.

p.3

BL0 0RT

Copies of Every Child Matters and The Children Act 2004 are available from The Stationery Office as above. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4

p.3

Name of school

Address Moorside Farm Bamford Road Ramsbottom Lancashire BL0 0RT

p.4

Name of school

Email address rossendale@priorygroup.com

p.4

inspection

12 July 2005 Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5

p.4

Brief Description of the School:

Rossendale School is an independent special (residential) school, providing education for up to fifty-six pupils who display emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD). Pupils are subject to a statement of need under the 1996 Education Act.

p.5

Brief Description of the School:

The school generally admits pupils of mixed gender between the ages of 8 - 14 years. Boarding accommodation is provided for up to twenty-three pupils of mixed gender and is provided for a maximum of five days (four nights), term time only. All boarding pupils return to their home base for weekends and school holidays.

p.5

Brief Description of the School:

The residential accommodation was split between three sites. The on-site (main house) provision provided accommodation for up to nine pupils. Here bedrooms are usually shared and staffing levels would be high. Off site accommodation provided single occupancy bedrooms and was located a few miles from the school in residential areas. The first comprised of two adjoining properties both capable of housing up three pupils. The second, an eight bedded property was situated at a different location. Each unit was appropriately staffed, but offered a more independent lifestyle than the main house. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6

p.5

SUMMARY

This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection.

p.6

SUMMARY

The main remit of the inspection was to look at how those pupils who reside at the school, were being looked after. Therefore, the inspection concentrated on the welfare of boarding (resident) pupils only, with an attempt made to assess the outcomes for those children and young people who spend some of their time, living at the school.

p.6

SUMMARY

The school was visited on the afternoon of the 24 th May 2006 where all those pupils resident (on that day) were given the opportunity to complete a questionnaire. Twelve pupils did so.

p.6

SUMMARY

The main part of the inspection took place on the 7 th , 8 th and 9 th June 2006. A further visit took place on the 26 th June 2006 to conclude the inspection and provide verbal feedback.

p.6

SUMMARY

“They (staff) are all very caring, answer all questions and keep us informed on all aspects of the school.” (Parents Questionnaire)

p.6

SUMMARY

Letters from a range of external agencies as well as (nine) parental and (two) placing authority questionnaire’s were received prior to the main part of the inspection commencing. The response from these was unanimously positive. The quality of care and support pupils were receiving as well as ‘change for the good’ in behaviour and attitude were highlighted. One parent captured these views by stating, “ I think the staff are doing a good job and my son is happy there. They have a good understanding of him even though he is a very complex child and can be difficult at times.” (Parents Questionnaire)

p.6

SUMMARY

All (resident) pupils were given an opportunity to speak informally with the inspector. This was achieved by visiting out of school hours, each residential unit. The inspector also shared meals with pupils and accompanied five staff and nine pupils on an evening activity. He was given a warm and hospitable welcome from pupils and staff at all times.

p.6

SUMMARY

Three pupils were case tracked and one had an annual review during the inspection. The inspector was invited to attend as an observer. This allowed contact with the pupil’s parents who both spoke positively about the care their child was receiving.

p.6

SUMMARY

The feedback from most pupils was generally positive. Apart from a number stating they would prefer to be at home permanently, they recognised the benefits the school provided both socially and educationally. For example, one spoke enthusiastically about the progress he had made at a local athletics club and the improved independence he was experiencing. Another, whilst making tea for four, spoke about the ten or eleven GCSE’s he was going to take next year along with his plans for the future. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Two shared concerns that reflected the difficulties they were experiencing at that time settling into the routine of the school. The concerns were based on their inability and unwillingness to operate within the boundaries laid out for them. Whilst accepting their views, it was possible to check out their particular circumstances and make sure they were indeed being treated appropriately.

p.6

SUMMARY

For example, a positive questionnaire was received from the parents of one of the pupils who had expressed concern. They obviously recognised the difficulties their child was having settling at the school but felt the placement was proving to be beneficial by stating, “ The time (their child) has spent at Rossendale has been a rocky one, but the difference in him now to when he started is brilliant.”

p.7

SUMMARY

It was also possible for any minor negative comments received in pupil questionnaire’s to be followed up by checking records and speaking to staff and pupils. The inspector was left with the view that all pupils were indeed being properly looked after and that in his view, pupils were living in a safe yet stimulating environment with clearly laid out boundaries for both staff and pupils to operate within.

p.7

SUMMARY

The inspector spoke formally with six staff and a number of others in a variety of informal settings. All staff were highly motivated and well organised. They spoke positively about the pupils in their care and volunteered information about them that demonstrated a clear understanding of individual need. There was a healthy consistency in the way they responded to questions and in the way they were observed working with pupils.

p.7

SUMMARY

The general organisation and management of the school was efficient. The structure provided clear boundaries for pupils to operate within. Staff were highly motivated and operated with a clear sense of purpose and consistency. This contributed effectively to providing positive outcomes for pupils, a fact recognised by parents and placing authorities.

p.7

What the school does well:

It provided a high standard of residential provision.

p.7

What the school does well:

The range and organisation of the separate residential units, which encouraged and supported pupils towards greater levels of independence.

p.7

What the school does well:

The school worked positively in partnership with pupils, parents and placing authorities.

p.7

What the school does well:

Offered pupils a well-integrated educational and social curriculum. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Provided stability and consistency to pupils who had experienced little success in previous educational placements.

p.7

What the school does well:

Initiated, promoted and maintained positive relationships between (residential) pupils and care staff.

p.8

What the school does well:

Had a strong and focussed management structure that provided good levels of leadership, direction and support to a well-motivated workforce.

p.8

What has improved since the last inspection?

A new Head of Care had been appointed and had commenced his duties.

p.8

What has improved since the last inspection?

A new fully fitted medical room had been created.

p.8

What has improved since the last inspection?

New showers had been fitted in Sally Barn (2). One in the staff sleep-in room and the other in a pupil’s bedroom making the room en-suite.

p.8

What has improved since the last inspection?

A cattle grid and security barrier had been installed on the approach to the school.

p.8

What they could do better:

Ensure that all written references are received for newly appointed staff. Where difficulties are experienced in receiving them, alternative arrangements should be made.

p.8

What they could do better:

Please contact the Head for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9

p.8

CONTENTS

Recommended Actions identified during the inspection Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10

p.9

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children live in a healthy environment and the health and intimate care needs of each child are identified and promoted.(NMS 14) • Children are provided with healthy, nutritious meals that meet their dietary needs.(NMS 15)

p.10

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was good. All aspects of school life were arranged to monitor and promote a healthy lifestyle for pupils.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

A new medical room had been created in a different location to the room used previously for this purpose. Appropriate facilities to store medication had been made. This included security and when needed, a fridge to be used for storage. The facility was bright, modern and was located sensibly to provide facilities for both day and resident pupils.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

The systems in place to store, administer and transport medication to and from a pupil’s home base was satisfactory. The school had continued to follow pharmaceutical advice given during an inspection conducted in 2004.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

The system to record the administering of medication was felt to be outdated and in need of revising. This matter had been recognised and was being addressed by the school. The inspector was provided with a copy of a revised system to record the administering of medication. The revised system had yet to be implemented and the school is advised to introduce the new system quickly.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

All resident pupils were registered with a local health centre and records of visits to a range of health professionals were available. The school had a good, co-operative relationship with the health centre, schools medical services and with other health professionals such as dentists, psychologists, a consultant psychiatrist (who visited the school during the inspection) and a number of community based mental health teams.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Each pupil had a specific health plan and three were reviewed as part of the case tracking exercise. One had not been fully completed, but this had been Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 recognised by management. For example, a note from the Head of Care was on the appropriate file directing the key worker to complete the plan.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

The feedback from pupils regarding food both in school and at their place of residence was positive. At school, details of any allergies or special dietary needs were available in the kitchen. Staff also demonstrated a full awareness of any particular likes, dislikes and special dietary needs of young people. Young people reported the quality and quantity of food as good. The subject of food was not an issue of concern for them. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12

p.11

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children’s privacy is respected and information about them is confidentially handled.(NMS 3) • Children’s complaints are addressed without delay and children are kept informed of progress in their consideration.(NMS 4) • The welfare of children is promoted, children are protected from abuse, and an appropriate response is made to any allegation or suspicion of abuse.(NMS 5) • Children are protected from bullying by others.(NMS 6) • All significant events relating to the protection of children in the school are notified by the Head of the school or designated person to the appropriate authorities.(NMS 7) • Children who are absent without authority are protected in accordance with written guidance and responded to positively on return.(NMS 8) • Children are assisted to develop appropriate behaviour through the encouragement of acceptable behaviour and constructive staff responses to inappropriate behaviour.(NMS 10)

p.12

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children live in schools that provide physical safety and security.(NMS 26) • There is careful selection and vetting of all staff, volunteers, and monitoring of visitors to the school to prevent children being exposed to potential abusers.(NMS 27)

p.12

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was good. The school throughout its extensive campus provided a safe environment for pupils in all aspects of school life.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

Each pupil living away from the main school campus had their own bedroom and privacy was not an issue for them. The on-site accommodation comprised of two bedrooms accommodating three pupils and a bedroom with two pupils sharing. Privacy or lack of it was not raised as a concern. One pupil did have an issue regarding shared accommodation, but this matter was resolved as the inspection progressed. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 All pupils spoken with demonstrated an understanding and confidence in the complaints procedures. Information and complaints forms were on display and freely available in areas where pupils lived. There was a confidence that complaints would be dealt with and a range of staff names were nominated, as people pupils would be confident approaching with a problem.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

No incidents relating to child protection had occurred within the school since the previous inspection. However, there had been occasions where staff had shared their concerns with appropriate authorities regarding incidents or situations that had taken place away from the school environment. Those suspicions were recorded appropriately and had been sent to relevant authorities. They were made available for inspection purposes. All staff spoken with demonstrated a consistent understanding of the schools child protection policy and procedures.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Bullying was treated as live issue by all staff whose deployment around the school reflected this. They spoke sensibly about bullying and provided a consistent response regarding the steps taken to manage it. They demonstrated an awareness of the pupils likely to bully and those likely to be bullied, with a high proportion falling into both categories.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Three pupils shared some concerns about bullying describing incidents that to them, were irritating rather than threatening. Pupils confirmed that staff took bullying seriously and reacted quickly and appropriately when such incidents occurred. No serious issues of concern were raised with the inspector.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Physical intervention is something that does occur with pupils. The school had worked hard in previous years to reduce the number of incidents and look for alternative strategies. For example, the report from the previous inspection that took place at the end of the school year (July 2005) was able to confirm that the number of recorded incidents that year compared to the previous year (2003/04) had reduced by 48%.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

There had been a slight increase in the number of incidents recorded for this school year (95 up to 25/5/06). This was a matter of concern to all staff who continued to look for a reduction. Written documentation was provided to show that four pupils (1 resident, 3 day pupils) were involved in a large proportion of incidents. For example, for the autumn term (2005) the four pupils were collectively involved in over 50% of incidents.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

As well as completing a record of each incident, the school had looked at patterns and devised statistical breakdowns and analysis in an effort to reduce them. These assisted when devising the management behaviour plans that were in place. For one young person this had resulted in a ‘hands off’ policy unless he became a real threat to others. An incident occurred during the inspection where staff monitored the young person constantly as he left the Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 classroom and wandered around the school grounds looking for confrontation. The incident was managed without the use of physical intervention.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Two pupils suggested they were slightly hurt during physical intervention incidents. They did not suggest they had been mistreated and the records of the incidents suggested they had been handled appropriately. One pupil who indicated he had never been involved directly in any incident, but had witnessed such incidents felt that staff acted responsibly and “…discussed why they did restraints and tell you what you did wrong and how you can put them right.” The vast majority of pupils had not had any direct experience of physical intervention and there was a consensus of opinion amongst them that felt restraints were properly handled.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Two members of care staff were Team Teach tutors having completed the necessary training in September 2005. It allowed them to provide the basic two-day training along with regular ‘top up’ training. This was a continuous process with the last training having taken place on the 24 th and 28 th April 2006. All care staff had received appropriate training, even those still in their induction period.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

A range of risk assessments covering hazards and activity programmes were looked at. The systems to review and update were good. The service agreements for fire, gas and electrical equipment along with the oil-fired boilers were checked and dates of the previous service gathered. They were found to be satisfactory, although it was suggested to the site supervisor that it may be prudent to have a periodic inspection certificate for the electrical instillations (usually completed five yearly) for the off site accommodation known as Sally Barn. This would bring that site into line with the other accommodation sites.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The files of four staff recruited by the school since the previous inspection, were randomly selected to evidence that recruitment and clearance procedures were taking place appropriately. Two staff discussed the two-day recruitment process they had experienced recently, describing it as fair and thorough.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Some minor issues were picked up and they were relayed back to senior staff during the feedback session. For example, a member of staff had commenced employment with only one (previous employer) reference received. Evidence was available to show that the outstanding reference had been repeatedly chased up, although it had not been received. It was possible however to determine that verification of references was being undertaken as a matter of course. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15

p.14

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• The school’s residential provision actively supports children’s educational progress at the school.(NMS 12) • Children have ample opportunity to engage in purposeful and enjoyable activities both within the school and in the local community.(NMS 13) • Children receive individual support when they need it.(NMS 22)

p.15

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was excellent. Providing opportunities and allowing pupils to experience achievement coupled with enjoyment was an area of strength. Pupils individual needs were assessed recognised and acted upon with the intention to provide a positive outcome for each.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

Sorting out homework arrangements was one of the first things organised when pupils arrived at their ‘home base’ when school had finished for the day. Areas for study were available in each living area ranging from dining areas to bedrooms. Pupils also had the opportunity to be a part of the homework club, which operated after school and provided extra support and guidance.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

All staff demonstrated a good understanding of the individual educational needs and arrangements for the pupils in their care. Accommodating this into evening routines was organised efficiently. Care staff undertook a supportive role in school at certain times and this helped in the consistency pupils enjoyed in their relationship with staff.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

Providing individual support to pupils was an area of strength. All pupils had a key worker assigned to them who provided direct one to one work as well as monitoring and co-ordinating areas such as leave, health and general day-to- day life at school. Pupils recognised the support and the pivotal role of their key worker, which was demonstrated effectively during a pupils annual review observed by the inspector. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Activities and leisure pursuits were areas that pupils worked alongside key workers to identify and make choices as to how their leisure time was spent. Pupils were actively encouraged to try a range of both group and individual activities that provided purposeful, meaningful and enjoyable activities, with the majority being community based. They ranged from group activities such as a walking club, swimming and other sports to individual pursuits such as

p.15

EVIDENCE:

army cadets, horse riding, athletics etc.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

Pupils spoke positively about the opportunities and range of activities they experienced. They confirmed they discussed this with key workers where choices are made. Identified activities were then organised and arranged by their key worker. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17

p.16

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children are encouraged and supported to make decisions about their lives and to influence the way the school is run. No child should be assumed to be unable to communicate their views.(NMS 2) • Children have sound relationships with staff based on honesty and mutual respect.(NMS 9) • Children experience planned and sensitively handled admission and leaving processes.(NMS 11) • Children have their needs assessed and written plans outline how these needs will be met while at school.(NMS 17) • In accordance with their wishes children are able and encouraged to maintain contact with their parents and families while living away from home at school.(NMS 20)

p.17

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was excellent. Pupils were encouraged to make positive contributions towards certain aspects of the way the school operated and towards planning their own futures.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

Pupils confirmed they were given opportunities to make decisions about their lives and in some areas, influence certain aspects of the way the school ran. For example, each pupil had targets, which they and key workers had agreed. Pupils had also completed surveys provided by the school that invited them to comment and make suggestions about their life at school. Copies of the survey were retained on a pupils file. Two spoke excitedly about their recent election by fellow pupils to the School Council. Here they would represent their own and fellow pupils views about the school to senior staff.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The planning process was thorough with plans clearly laid out in writing. They were retained on pupils files and three were reviewed in detail as part of the case tracking exercise. They provided a clear insight into targets and plans, which covered a variety of areas that included, health, leisure, education, family/home, emotional/physical development and social skills. Problematic behaviour along with strategies to combat it, were in place. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The observation made at the annual review of one pupil provided a good example of how plans were formulated, reviewed and revised. The key worker, representative from the placing authority, the young person and parents all contributed effectively to this process.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The relationships between staff and pupils were observed as good. The banter and general good humour noted in each of the residential units provided a relaxed atmosphere without detracting from the structure or blurring of boundaries. Pupils and staff were at ease and enjoyed the company of each other. This was underlined with the positive interaction between staff and pupils noted during the evening activity observed by the inspector.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

All pupils who resided at the school did so for a maximum of four nights (Monday – Thursday). A number also went home for odd nights during the week as part of their plan of reintegration. All went home at weekends and for school holidays. Contact therefore was maintained and the response from both parents and placing authorities was unanimous in the view that the school and pupil’s maintained good levels of contact at all times. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19

p.18

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children can wear their own clothing outside school time, can secure personal requisites and stationery while at school, and are helped to look after their own money.(NMS 16) • Children about to leave care are prepared for the transition into independent living.(NMS 21) • Children live in well designed and pleasant premises, providing sufficient space and facilities to meet their needs.(NMS 23) • Children live in accommodation which is appropriately decorated, furnished and maintained to a high standard, providing adequate facilities for their use.(NMS 24) • Children are able to carry out their personal care in privacy and with dignity.(NMS 25)

p.19

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was excellent. Pupils were provided with accommodation that was of high quality reflected in the standard of fixtures, fittings, décor and maintenance.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

All pupils observed changed into their own clothes once the school day finished. Obtaining appropriate personal requisites such as toiletries was not a concern to any of the pupils spoken with.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

The organisation of the areas where pupils lived was designed to allow them to progress towards greater levels of independence. The pupils at the residential provision known as The Quarter had experienced the other residential areas before moving there. They were able to describe and recognise the move towards a more independent lifestyle as they progressed. They were happy and proud of the progress they had made from what one described as a chaotic to a more settled lifestyle. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 The review of pupil’s files showed clearly the progress that had (and was being) made. This was evidenced in revised targets, attainments and plans. A variety of staff acting as key workers described how the journey towards a more independent lifestyle did at times flounder, but was usually achieved by persistence and a consistent approach.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

A full tour of the premises was undertaken with all ‘living areas’ visited. All were of high standard, which was reflected in the state of repair, fixtures, fitting and décor. Pupils were observed being at ease and comfortable within their surroundings. On the approach to the school a cattle grid and security barrier had been installed.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

Two showers had been installed at Sally Barn (2) one in the staff sleep-in room and the other in a pupil’s bedroom, making it en-suite. All bathing and toilet facilities offered appropriate privacy and no issues of concern were regarding privacy were brought to the inspectors attention. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21

p.20

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Children, parents, staff and placing authorities have access to a clear statement of the school’s care principles and practice for boarding pupils.(NMS 1) • Children’s needs, development and progress is recorded to reflect their individuality and their group interactions.(NMS 18) • There are adequate records of both the staff and child groups of the school.(NMS 19) • Children are looked after by staff who understand their needs and are able to meet them consistently.(NMS 28) • Children are looked after by staff who are trained to meet their needs.(NMS 29) • Children are looked after by staff who are themselves supported and guided in safeguarding and promoting the children’s welfare.(NMS 30) • Children receive the care and services they need from competent staff.(NMS 31) • Children and staff enjoy the stability of efficiently run schools.(NMS 32) • The governing body, trustees, local authority, proprietor or other

p.21

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

responsible body monitors the welfare of the children in the school.(NMS 33)

p.21

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality of this outcome was excellent. The school was well organised and managed with regular and consistent monitoring processes in place.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

A Statement of Purpose last revised in June 2005 was provided on request. It provided an accurate view of how the school was organised and functioned. This included a description of the three separate areas where pupils lived. It would be advisable to update the section titled Management Arrangements (page 14 & 15) to take account of recent staffing changes.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The files of three pupils were reviewed in some detail as part of the case tracking exercise. The structure of pupil files had been revised since the previous inspection and this process was ongoing when the inspection took place. Two had been revised completely and were up to date. The third had Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 not been completed. There was evidence to show that the Head of Care was monitoring files. For example, the shortfall in the file in question had been identified and a note of instruction for the key worker placed on it. The general standard of recording was high.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

There were adequate numbers of staff to look after pupils when out of school. The staff group consisted of a Head of Care, a Senior Practitioner and thirteen Residential Child Care Officers (RCCO). In addition, a number of Special Support Assistants (SSA) provided extra support during the evenings. Most of the RCCO staff had been employed for some time and provided a highly motivated and experienced staff group that provided consistency to pupils.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

No Head of Care was in place when the previous inspection took place. All staff spoken with welcomed the appointment of the new Head of Care and recognised the pivotal role he undertook. As well as revising the structure of pupil’s files, personal development and appraisal of staff had been redefined. The programme of supervision, personal development and appraisal of staff was ongoing. The recent appraisal of one staff member was looked at.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

NVQ level 3 training (Caring for Children) had not been provided to the quality the Deputy Head required and had stalled. However, new arrangements had been made and the inspector was provided with details of the training programme. Three staff were due to undertake their A1 Assessor Award training on the 14/6/06 allowing them to become NVQ assessors. Plans were in place to get all care staff qualified to NVQ level 3 standard. Three staff had commenced the course, with others due to embark on a phased introduction as the year progressed.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

All staff spoken with felt that support, supervision and opportunities for training were good. No concerns were raised or complaint made.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The school was well organised and managed. All staff recognised and understood their own role as well as others they worked alongside. Care staff worked in two teams with overlap and handover times scheduled into each school day. A real team centred approach was noted which helped provide consistency for pupils and contributed to the positive way the school operated. Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23

p.22

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Residential Special Schools have been met and uses the following scale.

p.23

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

4 Standard Exceeded (Commendable) 3 Standard Met (No Shortfalls) 2 Standard Almost Met (Minor Shortfalls) 1 Standard Not Met (Major Shortfalls)

p.23

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

“X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable

p.23

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

BEING HEALTHY MAKING A POSITIVE Standard No Score CONTRIBUTION 14 3 Standard No Score 15 3 2 4 9 4 STAYING SAFE 11 X Standard No Score 17 4 3 3 20 4 4 3 5 3 ACHIEVING ECONOMIC 6 4 WELLBEING 7 X Standard No Score 8 3 16 3 10 3 21 4 26 3 23 4 27 2 24 3 25 4 ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Standard No Score MANAGEMENT 12 4 Standard No Score 13 4 1 3 22 4 18 4 19 3 28 3 29 4 30 3 31 3 32 4 33 3 Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding recommendations from the last inspection? No

p.23

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

This section sets out the actions that must be taken so that the proprietor meets the Children Act 1989, Inspection of Schools and Colleges Regulations 2002 and the National Minimum Standards.

p.24

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

No. Standard Recommendation Timescale for action (Serious welfare concerns only) 1 RS27 It would be advisable to devise a system to ensure that all references for newly appointed staff are received. When they are not, alternative arrangements should be made. 01/09/06 Rossendale Special Residential School DS0000009656.V295729.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25

p.24

Commission for Social Care Inspection

East Lancashire Area Office 1st Floor, Unit 4 Petre Road Clayton Business Park Accrington BB5 5JB

p.25

Commission for Social Care Inspection

National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI.

p.25