Setting

Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 1 RESIDENTIAL SPECIAL SCHOOL

p.1

B30 3QA

Lead Inspector Andrew Hewston Announced Inspection 21st February 2006 09:30 Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 2 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to:

p.1

B30 3QA

• 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

B30 3QA

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 Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

B30 3QA

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

B30 3QA

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

B30 3QA

Copies of Every Child Matters and The Children Act 2004 are available from The Stationery Office as above. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4

p.3

Name of school

Address Monyhull Hall Road Kings Norton Birmingham West Midlands B30 3QA

p.4

inspection

Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5

p.5

Brief Description of the School:

Lindsworth is a special school providing day, extended day and residential places. It provides up to 14 residential places if two bedrooms are shared, or twelve places if all bedrooms are single. Residential pupils board at the school for only four nights a week, Monday to Thursday inclusive. At the time of the inspection all the residential pupils were boys, and there were seven being accommodated. All the pupils have a Statement of Special Educational Needs and their predominant difficulties are social, emotional and behavioural [SEBD]. The school operates on two sites, but the residential provision is wholly on only one of these, the Lindsworth ‘South’ site, in Kings Norton, Birmingham. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6

p.5

SUMMARY

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

p.6

SUMMARY

This inspection was completed over a three day period by Andrew Hewston and Claudette Morgan. During the inspection the inspectors met with a variety of staff involved with the school including care and teaching staff, as well as the school nurse. Children were also spoken to throughout. Paperwork relating to the residential units recording systems was examined and three children’s complete set of school files were looked at.

p.6

What the school does well:

The school has a nurse who is based in the site to enable health promotion and swift access regarding medical concerns for the young people. The school had developed good links with other health professionals. The school offered a range of choices of menus for the young people, with meals being served within a sociable environment.

p.6

What the school does well:

Arrangements to combat bullying behaviours were positive, with the school also having a proactive complaints procedure. Child protection concerns were assessed as being dealt with in a professional manner with some good records available. Staff had received training in additional measures of control including breakaway and de-escalation techniques. Some good records were available relating to these additional measures. Recruitment procedures for staff were very good.

p.6

What the school does well:

Effective links were developed between the teaching and care staff in ensuring consistent links between school and residence. A range of activities were available for the young people both within the school and externally. A range of resources could be drawn from to ensure sufficient support for the young people in residence.

p.6

What the school does well:

Consultation with the young people took place on a regular basis with young people being able to use differing forums to state difficulties and to celebrate successes. Overall relationships observed within the residential unit between staff and young people were positive, with respect being afforded to the young people. Staff showed a good knowledge of the lives of the young people and had developed some effective relationships with the families and carers of the residents. Staff were able to also discuss differing young peoples preferences and developments while being in residence. Admissions procedures into residence were appropriate.

p.6

What the school does well:

The accommodation offered to the young people was of an acceptable standard, with good facilities for bathing. Communal areas were spacious and well resourced. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 7 Recordings required by the Standards were available relating to the young people in the majority of instances. Staff were offered a range of support structures during the school day, with senior staff being available for consultation. The percentage of care staff across the school site that were qualified to NVQ3 was in excess of the expectations of the Standard.

p.6

What has improved since the last inspection?

A number of the recommended actions stated at the last inspection had been acted upon by the school and ensured that some Standards were met sufficiently.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

A new system for recording absconding behaviour was seen to aid information collection. Medication records seen were completed appropriately. Increased records were seen within the individual children’s files of key worker meetings occurring.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

Monitoring of the bedroom doors continues, but this was now completed with the knowledge and permission of the parents / carers of the young people. The arrangements for the recruitment of staff had improved since the last inspection.

p.7

What they could do better:

Although medication recordings had improved the recordings of accidents was in need of development, with staff often being unaware of expected procedures.

p.7

What they could do better:

The young people continue to need to have a telephone that is accessible without staff permission. The staffs responses to child protection allegations was assessed as being appropriate, recordings were still required of the Head of Care following such concerns to show the full outcomes of any reported anxieties. Recordings were also necessary regarding the outcomes of reportable significant events. Although the inspectors did not assess absconding behaviour as being overly problematic within the residential unit, there remained a need for staff to respond to such behaviour with appropriate planning.

p.7

What they could do better:

Recordings of additional measures of control, with relation to both sanctions and restraints were found lacking in a number of instances. Staff were also observed using restraint in a manner that was assessed buy the inspectors as being inappropriate. Some health and safety records were not available for inspection, and the overarching difficulty of the sites security continues to be challenged following the removal of a large section of border fencing. The school continues to require an independent visitor for the school, with this issue being raised at the last 3 inspections. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 8 Placement planning for the young people was assessed as being basic and requiring additional information to ensure evidence of their development at Lindsworth.

p.7

What they could do better:

The fabric of the building was acceptable in the majority of areas although the windows continue to show deterioration and require considerable investment from the LEA.

p.8

What they could do better:

Management of the staff was lacking in a range of areas that could not be sufficiently evidenced, including supervision, annual appraisals and personal development plans. Increased and effective monitoring was in need of development by the senior staff and by the visiting governor.

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. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9

p.8

CONTENTS

Recommended Actions identified during the inspection Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

14, 15

Although some positive work was being completed with the young people to promote their health, some recording systems did not adequately ensure that incidents were responded to appropriately.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Medication administration records were not fully assessed due to the school nurse being in the process of moving rooms, those records that were examined appeared appropriate. Insufficient records were available either within the schools accident log or individual children’s files when medical attention had been required following an incident. Staff were also unaware of appropriate full recording procedures following a medical incident. The schools accident log / 1 st aid book was not in line with the data protection act. Training had been completed across the school site with relation to first aid and there were sufficient trained staff available at all times. The school had good links with specialist medical services including those areas as specified within the Standard, these included a qualified psychologist being available on the school site for referrals.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

The inspectors took part in a number of mealtimes and found them to be pleasant social occasions. Meals were of an adequate quantity and quality with 3 choices of menu at lunchtimes. Domestic staff showed knowledge of differing young peoples dietary needs, and discussed how these could be met. Young people had an input into the menus served due to regular food committee meetings, including representatives from each of the schools units including the residential unit.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Mealtimes were well organised and in the evenings were cooked by either care staff or earlier by the catering staff. Young people stated that they had been involved in the preparation of foods in the evening with appropriate guidance. The dining room was furnished for staff and children, including plates and cutlery etc. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11

p.10

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.11

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.11

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 26, 27

Although some standards relating to young people staying safe were assessed as being met, such as complaints, bullying and recruitment practices, the problems with behaviour management and school security suggested that young peoples safety is not sufficiently secure at all times. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12

p.11

EVIDENCE:

Each young person had their own room and bathing facilities. Difficulties stated by the young people at the last inspection with ‘day pupils’ sharing the communal areas and staff with the residential children had been overcome, with the unit, following the unit being made solely for the use of residents. Young people were able to use the unit’s telephone in private through the use of a portable handset. This was however unable to be accessed without the young person asking for staff permission to use it. Staff did state that young people were allowed to use their mobile phones in the evenings Staff showed sufficient awareness of the young people's privacy within their own rooms, and an awareness of the policies and procedures relating to privacy and confidentiality. Children’s records were stored within a locked office.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

The system developed prior to the last inspection was assessed as being appropriate with some records of complaints being received and responded to. Young people were aware of their ability to complain to the school and the majority of young people were aware of the role of the Commission with relation to complain. The inspectors were made aware of some informal complaints being made by both children and parents. There was no specific system in place to record or deal with these.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

The schools’ Head of Care was the designated teacher for child protection and a qualified social worker. He had a very good working knowledge of child protection, and was able to discuss positive and consultative relationships with both the Local Education Authority child protection team and some members of the Social Care and Health child protection teams. The head of Care was responsible for the recording of child protection issues within the school through consultation with the Head teacher. Recordings were seen to be computer based with only the Head of Care and the Head teacher being able to access these records. The inspectors were able to view these records although there was seen to be a lack of recorded clarity showing if or how concerns had been fully responded to. The schools’ policy relating to child protection was appropriate. All staff that were interviewed showed a basic knowledge of the non-

p.12

EVIDENCE:

questioning ethos of child protection, and were all aware of the need to report instances of concern or abuse to the Head of Care. The school had a school time nurse who was able, and had in the past, had an involvement with child protection referrals if required. There was a positive professional relationship noted between the nurse and the school in such matters.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

The school has a good policy in relation to anti-bullying. Staff and pupils were aware of the system within school and residential unit to report any concerns regarding bullying behaviour. The system also allows for young people to Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 report incidents of bullying behaviour on an anonymous basis within designated boxes around the school or to staff. This system is reported in a simplistic form within the children's guide for the residential unit. Records relating to bullying reporting were kept and consultation with both the bully and the victim were reported to take place. There were specific systems in place within the school contract system to allow for bullying behaviour to be closely monitored. Response to the questionnaires showed that a small number of young people felt that they had been bullied at some point. This was assessed as being low

p.12

EVIDENCE:

given the recorded difficulties of the young people in residence.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The Head of Care was aware of the need to notify the appropriate authorities with regard to those areas as specified within the Standard, and was also aware of the need to notify CSCI of issues regarding child protection. There appeared to be no structured recording system for these notifications and no recordings of responses to these. At least one incident that required notification to the Commission had not been forwarded, other incidents had been that were not fully required.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Staff members were able to discuss appropriate responses to when young people absconded from the school site. Records were available of absconding behaviour that was displayed by the young people. Those young people for whom absence without permission was an ongoing problem did not have specific planning or risk assessments within their files to show how staff were working to decrease such behaviour.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The schools behaviour management system was assessed as having some miss-recording issues and required substantial reappraisal within some areas. Records of additional measures of control were recorded within an Antecedence Behaviour and Consequence (ABC) log within each home, a main school Physical interventions log with additional sheets for individual pupils and the school ‘homes’, and the individual homes log books. Evidence was available to show that there was some confusion regarding when these differing systems were used. These included - Records of restraints were seen within the ABC book and daily log but not within the PI log or sheets. - Some sheets stating that information was recorded within the ABC log yet was not. - The PI log within the home having undated entries. - Sheets within the homes file not being in consequential order or in the individual sections of this file, with staff being unsure of how these should be

p.13

EVIDENCE:

appropriately filed. Staff were trained on a regular basis in physical holds, breakaway techniques and de-escalation techniques. The school was in the process of developing its own system of restraint, this is not in line with the expectations of the education department. The person leading the restraint training had previously trained staff in the PAMOVA system; this was not registered with British Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 Institute for Learning Disabilities (BILD). The inspectors were concerned during the inspection when they witnessed pain being used as a compliance technique during a restraint with a young person, suggesting that despite training updates the underlying ethos of this training was being misunderstood. Such actions are not in line with s550A of the Education Act. Recordings of at least one other restraint suggested that this was carried out despite a young person

p.13

EVIDENCE:

attempting to comply with instructions; the young person was then given additional sanctions due to a restraint being used. Confusion was stated by staff relating to the recording of sanctions, some sanctions were recorded within the ABC log, and some recorded within the homes log, some sanctions stated as being given during the inspection were not recorded at all. Neither of these systems contained all of the information as required by the Standard, with recordings missing basic information such as full names of children, staff or dates when these occurred.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The school had records of health and safety checks relating to fire drills and alarm checks, although the alarm checks were all completed from the alarm box rather than differing activation points. Portable Appliance Testing had been appropriately completed, as had the residential units electrical survey. Clarification was required relating to issues highlighted at the gas inspection in January 2005 and the most recent certificate was not available at the time of the inspection. Records were not available of legionella testing having been completed within the home area. No records were available of temperature checks being completed on the fridges within the homes kitchens, although these were done within the main school kitchens. The development of a large housing estate to the side of the school over the past two years has created major difficulties with the security of the school site. A fence that was previously in place had been removed during the

p.14

EVIDENCE:

building process and no replacement was put into place. The schools head teacher stated that some confusion relating to contracting expectations had led to the school now having open access to the people on the new estate and to the rear of the residential unit. During the inspection at least 5 people were observed accessing the site via the rear of the residential unit, including individuals using the computer facilities within another of the school buildings. A recent court case relating directly to the difficulties to the Lindsworth site being insufficiently secure raised increased concerns about the need for the removed side fencing to be replaced. Some increased security measures such as name badges and new signage around the site were assessed as having a limited effect on the security of the site.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Recruitment procedures for the school were assessed as being very good, with all required aspects of the Standards being complied with. Additional CRB checks were completed on all residents of the site and regular visitors. Information with relation to recruitment checks were clear and fully accessible. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

12, 13, 22

Young people were assessed as being offered a good range of support services while at the school, either by care staff, internal professionals of external agencies. Activities within the residential provision were appropriate.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The home had very good links with the school, with care and teaching staff observed working together to identify personal, social, and educational development. Care staff were observed supporting young people in school following difficulties, and teaching staff also had an input into the residential part of the young peoples lives. Evidence from reviews and individual education plans showed an input from the residential staff. Staff from the care and teaching side discussed with the inspector how care staff often took a role within the classroom if specific difficulties had occurred relating to the young people. Care staff were observed going through young peoples educational contract, a form of daily report, at lunchtime and at the end of the day, and were the key personnel for sanctions relating to poor behaviour within the school environment.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

A good range of activities was seen to be offered to the young people within the school environment and off the school site. This was done by both care staff and teachers working additional hours in the evening. The unit linked up with other homes from the school in the evenings for activities, due to the school offering an extended day provision to some pupils. Funding for activities was assessed as being at an acceptable level, with staff occasionally negotiating with operators to ensure enhanced leisure activities. An appropriate balance was observed between young people’s free time and organised activities, with staff allowing an appropriate choice for the young Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 people. Staff were aware of attempting to ensure that videos, games, and television programmes were age appropriate.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

Support for young people within the residential unit was available in a variety of systems, most of which being linked directly to the school. Resources regarding differing counselling techniques could be evidenced, alongside the school nurse. The staff within the unit were observed actively promoting the involvement of young people into social groups, in an attempt to counter difficulties related to feeling isolated or to overcome difficulties that they were aware of between young people. The schools Head of Care discussed a number of people that were suggested to fulfil the role of an independent visitor, who can be contacted by pupils directly if they had personal problems or concerns at the school. This position had yet to be decided on at the time of the inspection, this is the same situation as at the last 3 inspections, although some moves forwards appear to have occurred. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

2, 9, 11, 17, 20

Observations and discussions with the care staff team showed that they there existed good communication systems within the school to support the young people. Such proactive work was often lacking in recordings and evidence of children’s development while in residence.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The school used a range of consultative forums, from more formal pupil consultations with senior staff on a six monthly basis, daily group meetings within the residential unit to discuss behavioural contracts, to more generalised discussions regarding activities. The school had a school council; this included elected young people to discuss matter affecting the school. The school has a number of young people who are involved with a food committee that looks at differing menus, alongside the likes and dislikes of the young people. Information relating to of parental contact and consultation was available within the young people's files, although the majority of information was recorded within the homes log book. Inspectors were made aware during the inspection that some very good links were made between staff and the young peoples families, this was often difficult to evidence through any of the homes

p.17

EVIDENCE:

recording systems. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 Relationships observed throughout the inspection between the young people and the range of staff that worked within the home continues to be very good. Young people and staff had clear awareness of expectations of behaviour, and staff had received training / been involved in developing, the schools behaviour management programme. Staff were observed attempting to incorporate individual young peoples wishes and preferences alongside those of the group. Staff also discussed the different ways that they did this during meetings with the young people as a group within the contract meetings and individually. Staff showed a good knowledge of the lives of the young people that they were working with. Young people's comments relating to the care staff team were positive in the vast majority of cases.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The school had a clear admissions procedure for admissions, which included an interview and tour of the school and premises. This system was supported by the schools designated home school liaison contact, who is a qualified social worker. Improvements to the system had been made since the last inspection to ensure all areas of information were received from parents prior to admission. Information required from the Standard was recorded as appropriate.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

There were no specific plans for leaving care due to the age range of the young people who were in residence at the time of the inspection. Staff discussed the development of the young people away from residence as their time at Lindsworth developed.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Placement / care plans were available within all of the young peoples files examined. These were almost all too basic and large areas were of a standard format for all young people within the school. The plans cover all of the areas as required by the Standard although does not show any particular development of the young person while at the school. As stated at the last inspection the level of individuality of the plans was surprisingly poor given the high level of knowledge that the staff had relating to the lives of the young people. Young people stated who their key workers were and explained that they met with them occasionally “especially because of the inspection”. Records of meetings appeared to have taken place for the vast majority of cases in the 6 weeks prior to the inspection.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The young people in residence all returned home or to residential accommodation at weekends and during the school holidays. Young people stated that they were allowed access to parents when required and also to other family members. The home requires a private area for contact visits to take place, although bedrooms were assessed as being sufficiently private if these did not require supervision. The inspector did not find any restrictions with regard to contact taking place. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

16, 23, 24, 25

The accommodation provided for the young people was of an acceptable standard with good washing facilities. Refurbishment of the windows is still required.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

Young people were able to bring both pocket money and their own clothes into the unit, and have these stored appropriately.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

The accommodation for the young people is of an acceptable standard with good-sized communal areas that are used as a lounge / dining room and games room. The home also has office space and a kitchen area downstairs. On the first floor is the residential accommodation. Auditory monitoring is used on the bedroom doors and letters were within the young peoples files to show that their parents had accepted this. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 Exterior paintwork, especially to window frames, is unsatisfactory. Some window frames are rotting and will soon be dangerous. The Inspector understands that upkeep of the exterior of buildings on the school site, including Home 2, is the responsibility of the Local Education Authority and not the local school management. Bedrooms were assessed as being of a good standard including ensuite facilities in all bedrooms. There was some evidence of personalisation of

p.19

EVIDENCE:

bedrooms, although this was limited, due in part to the young people only being in residence a maximum of 4 nights a week in the school term. All young people had their own rooms.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

The en-suite facilities within each of the bedrooms afforded the young people good washing and toilet facilities, one of the young peoples bedrooms also had a bath in their bedroom area although this room was not in use at the time of the inspection. The inspector noted that there was some variation in water temperatures between these areas although this was not of concern. Additional toilet facilities were also available downstairs including a staff toilet that had been recently fitted with a washbasin. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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

1, 18, 19, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33

Although the management completed some regular monitoring this appeared to miss some of the insufficient practice issues such as supervision, appraisals and personal development planning. Staff within the residential unit were assessed as requiring more dynamic and proactive leadership in ensuring the development of appropriate recording systems.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The schools statement of purpose had not changed since the last inspection and was assessed previously as acceptable including all of the required areas.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

All information as required by the Standards were accessible within either the young peoples main file, or that within the home unit, other than that information as stated within Standards 14 and 8. The inspectors assessed the recording of information as needing to move being primarily within the homes Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 logbook and more towards the use of the individual files to enable young people to access information recorded about them. The logbook was seen to include in depth recordings of incidents and conversations, which would be better recorded within accessible files, this would also aid report writing.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The school had records relating to all of the areas within the Standard. Some of these required additional details, such as the school register, although the information required was available within other records. Poor record keeping with relation to the accident book is reported within Standard 14.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Staffing within the home was good with additional support being offered by the senior staff on a ‘bleep’ system. Two staff slept in the home each night within suitable accommodation. The range of experience and trained staff within the home was good. Teaching staff played a part in offering additional activities in the evenings, and were assessed as having a positive and consistent role within the lives of the resident young people. During one evening of the inspection one staff member was witness spending at least an hour on their own in the lounge area watching the television rather than interacting with the young people who were involved in activities in other areas of the school.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The school had records that showed that there was a range of training that had been completed for all school care staff. The inspector was pleased to note that NVQ 3 training had been provided and completed by the majority of care staff. Staff meetings also offered a level of training within some areas of practice being reviewed on a weekly basis. The school also supported some non- residential staff members through professional social work studies. Each member of staff was aware of their personal development plans, although these had not been updated since a number of months prior to the last inspection and were therefore assessed as not being in use. New staff stated feeling supported within their induction at the school.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Most staff members of the residential care staff stated that they felt supported by senior staff. All stated that they would access the Head of Care if they had particular difficulties. The schools email and intranet with regular staff meetings, formed parts of a good staff support system, although some staff stated difficulties sometimes occurred accessing staff through the bleep system. Minutes of staff meetings were not available. The school also offered access to external counselling services to staff Formal supervision of care staff continued to be poor with the Standard not being met and staff describing insufficient timescales between supervision meetings. This was concerning as this area was highlighted at the last two inspections, with very limited records of supervision being available. The staff did not have an annual appraisal system, although this was reported to the inspector at the last two inspections as about to be being rolled out.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 All of the key residential staff, including the Head of Care, Deputy Head of Care, and team leader of the residential unit were qualified social workers. All residential staff within the home had also completed NVQ 3. Rotas were in place to meet the needs of both the young people and staff. There was awareness within the staff team of the working time directive. Concerns were raised by staff regarding the decreasing number of resident young people and the possible effect that this would have on the continuity of the residential provision. The schools management needs to assess the future arrangements for residence at the school in conjunction with the Local Education Authority.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

Monitoring of the majority of the areas as requested by the Standard were evidenced as being completed, in excess of the required monitoring in some cases. Monitoring was completed by a range of people as designated by the Head, although staff must ensure that these records are signed once records have been checked. Notably some key areas were continue to not checked sufficiently, as have been stated within this report, including staff supervision appraisal, accidents, and the recording of additional measures of control. The school had a good development plan, which was known by all senior staff, and the school created a good response in terms of planning following from the last inspection.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

Reports were available to show that a designated person visiting the school had completed monitoring; these reports were brief without giving a feel of the residential provision. Visits were completed on a termly basis rather than half termly. Inspection reports were available within the residential unit and the school. Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24

p.23

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.24

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.24

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.24

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

BEING HEALTHY MAKING A POSITIVE Standard No Score CONTRIBUTION 14 2 Standard No Score 15 3 2 3 9 4 STAYING SAFE 11 3 Standard No Score 17 3 3 2 20 3 4 3 5 2 ACHIEVING ECONOMIC 6 3 WELLBEING 7 2 Standard No Score 8 2 16 3 10 1 21 X 26 2 23 3 27 4 24 2 25 4 ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING Standard No Score MANAGEMENT 12 4 Standard No Score 13 3 1 3 22 3 18 3 19 3 28 3 29 2 30 2 31 3 32 2 33 2 Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 Are there any outstanding recommendations from the last inspection? Yes

p.24

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.25

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

No. Standard Recommendation Timescale for action (Serious welfare concerns only) 1 Staff to record all accident within the appropriate school records. The schools accident log to be complaint with the data protection act. 20/03/06

p.25

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

2 RS3 A telephone will be provided for young people to use to make and receive telephone calls without asking staff for permission.

p.25

inspections. Timescale of 01/09/05 not

3 Recordings to be available to show the outcomes of child protection concerns 20/03/05

p.25

inspections. Timescale of 01/09/05 not

4 RS7 A system for the recording of notifications and their outcomes to be developed. All significant events as stated within the Standard to be forwarded to the Commission in a timely fashion. 25/03/06

p.25

inspections. Timescale of 01/09/05 not

5 RS8 Where high levels of absconding behaviour occur then appropriate risk assessments to be completed in order to address such behaviours.

p.25

This was a requirement at the last

31/03/06 Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 26 inspection. Timescale of 30/04/05 not met.

p.25

This was a requirement at the last

6 RS10 Additional training to be completed relating to the recording of behaviour management actions.

p.26

since the last inspection additional work is

still required. All behaviour management records to include information as stated within the Standard. All staff to be aware of the guidance within s550A of the Education Act relating to the non- permissible use of physical intervention to enforce compliance with instructions. The schools use of physical interventions to be in line with the expectations of the Local Education Authority. 25/03/06

p.26

since the last inspection additional work is

7 The removed fencing to the side of the school to be replaced, or the school to increase its security arrangements for this area. 01/09/06

p.26

since the last inspection additional work is

8 Records to be available for legionella testing within the homes water system. Daily checks to be completed on fridge / freezer temperatures within the home. 30/04/06

p.26

since the last inspection additional work is

9 RS22 A person(s) who is independent of the school and the LEA, be identified whom pupils can contact directly about personal problems or concerns at the school.

p.26

inspections. Timescale of the 31/07/05 not

10 RS24 Rotting window frames to be repaired or replaced.

p.26

This was a requirement at the last

inspection. Timescale of 31/01/06 not met. 31/01/07

p.26

This was a requirement at the last

11 RS29 All staff to have active personal development plans. 30/06/06

p.26

This was a requirement at the last

12 RS30 Supervision of staff to be completed on a half termly basis and recorded appropriately.

p.26

This was a requirement at the last

Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 27 inspection. Timescale of 31/04/05 not met. Staff to receive annual appraisal

p.27

inspection. Timescale of 31/07/05 not met

13 RS32 All areas to be monitored and signed in line with the Standard. 30/06/06

p.27

inspection. Timescale of 31/07/05 not met

14 RS33 Governors’ visits to be completed on a half termly basis. 30/06/06 Lindsworth School DS0000017171.V276076.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 28

p.27

Commission for Social Care Inspection

Birmingham Office 1st Floor Ladywood House 45-46 Stephenson Street Birmingham B2 4UZ

p.28

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.28