Setting

X10029.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 FOSTERING SERVICE

p.1

M33 5ND

Lead Inspector Jeff Banham Announced Inspection 18th April 2006 10:00 Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 2 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to:

p.1

M33 5ND

• 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

M33 5ND

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 Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.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 Fostering Services. 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

M33 5ND

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

M33 5ND

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

M33 5ND

Copies of Every Child Matters and The Children Act 2004 are available from The Stationery Office as above This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4

p.3

Name of service

Address Lorimer House Brooks Institute Carrington Lane Sale M33 5ND

p.4

of places

Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5

p.5

Conditions of registration:

1. As detailed in the Statement of Purpose dated 8th April 2004, Lorimer Foster Services Limited operates a range of fostering services in the North West of England including short -term, long term, emergency and bridging placements, for children/young people “looked after”. 2. The Statement of Purpose is maintained in line with the requirements of Regulation 3 (1) of the Fostering Services Regulations 2002. The Statement must be kept under review and updated. Any changes to the agency’s purpose must be agreed with the Commission for Social Care Inspection prior to implementation. 3. The organisation must, at all times, employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. 4. The staff and manager must receive relevant and updated training to assist them in their work with children/young people and foster carers, in particular the management of child protection allegations.

p.5

Conditions of registration:

5. The Fostering Service is managed at all times in accordance with the guidance and regulations issued in respect of independent fostering agencies by the Secretary of State for Health under Sections 22 & 23 (1) of the Care Standards Act 2000.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

Lorimer Foster Services forms part of the Lorimer Group. This is a privately owned agency established in 1992 as a provider of both residential and foster care services for “looked after” children.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

Lorimer Fostering Services was registered in July 2004 to provide placements with approved foster carers for children and young people aged between 0 to 18 years. The range of provision includes short term, long term, bridging and emergency placements.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

The Lorimer group is based in Sale in Greater Manchester and covers the North West of England. Lorimer Foster Services had employed a Regional Director and Team Manager to develop services in Yorkshire and Humberside, although there were no approved foster carers in that region at the time of the site visit.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

At the time of the site visit the agency had 25 approved fostering households, offering 51 approved places. 12 of these were filled, 20 were vacant and 14 not available. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.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 announced and took place over a period of 4 days starting on 18 April 2006.

p.6

SUMMARY

Two inspectors conducted the site visit for this inspection. The Regional Manager, acting Panel Manager, and four supervising social workers were interviewed. The Regional Manager had applied to become the registered manager for the service, and is referred to in this report as “the Manager”.

p.6

SUMMARY

The premises were inspected. Policies, procedures and records were examined. A selection of foster carer files was read, together with the files of the children placed with them. Foster carers were visited in their own homes and children and young people were spoken with.

p.6

SUMMARY

An inspector attended a meeting of the foster care panel and spoke with the Chairperson and other members.

p.6

SUMMARY

As part of the inspection survey questionnaires were sent out to foster carers and children and young people.

p.6

SUMMARY

Lorimer Foster Service has responded positively to the requirements made as a result of the significant concerns about practice and management that were identified at the last inspection.

p.6

SUMMARY

The Manager had provided information before the site visit to the agency. This included that which was required as a standard part of the inspection process and in addition the responses to the statutory notices that had been issued after the last inspection.

p.6

SUMMARY

A comprehensive written review of every Form F assessment completed by the agency had been undertaken as required. The Manager also provided a summary of the findings that were relevant to the practice and management of Lorimer Foster Service. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 7

p.6

What the service does well:

A new Manager has recently been appointed and she has started to assess shortfalls in practice and systems, and take action to make necessary improvements in a targeted and prioritised way.

p.7

What the service does well:

The newly formed team of social workers provides effective support to carers.

p.7

What the service does well:

The staff was committed to develop the service and to provide child-centred practices in order to ensure children were well cared for.

p.7

What the service does well:

The newly-appointed Manager and Panel Chair were clear about the need to develop policies, systems and practices that were child centred, and to maintain an independence from the business-led elements of Lorimer Foster Care.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

New standards for Form F assessments have been introduced. All previous assessments have been reviewed and action identified to provide information not previously obtained. Some carers are undergoing a complete re- assessment. A new chair and members have been appointed for the foster panel. New procedures have been developed, new panel members have been recruited, and the panel is beginning to operate more effectively than in the past.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

New social work staff have been employed, and new policies and procedures introduced. Contact with local authorities has improved, and there are more improved standards of recording.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

There is a more consistent system of accepting referrals, identifying needs and matching children with carers.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

These developments will enable the agency to develop a more effective, child- centred service.

p.7

What they could do better:

In its current financial state the agency is under pressure to increase its income. The owner has said he intends to continue to provide financial support whilst improvements are made to the service. The situation inevitably concerns staff and creates uncertainty within the agency. Staff would benefit from more Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 8 explicit statements about the support that is to be provided to enable the continuation of the service.

p.7

What they could do better:

The role of the Manager and the acting Panel Manager are unclear. The four social workers are in effect supervised by two people. The Team Manager said he did not feel qualified to be effective in supervising Form F assessments; the acting Panel Manager has been at the agency for some time, and involved in the practice of assessment that had previously been identified as being in need of improvement. The situation means that the overall management of the social work team is not as effective as it might be so as to ensure that children/young people place receive an appropriate service. This will be more significant if and when the work of the agency increases.

p.8

What they could do better:

The agency needs to continue to improve the quality and timing of information about children it receives from placing authorities to ensure that appropriate planning takes place so as to promote and safeguard children/young peoples’ welfare.

p.8

What they could do better:

A clearer protocol for the responsibilities of supervising social workers, particularly in relation to the supervision of carers, would assist practice and improve services to children and young people.

p.8

What they could do better:

Please contact the provider 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. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9

p.8

CONTENTS

Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10

p.9

The intended outcome for this Standard is:

• The fostering service promotes the health and development of children.(NMS 12)

p.10

The Commission considers Standard 12 the key standard to be

inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.10

JUDGEMENT – we looked at the outcome for Standard:

Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.10

JUDGEMENT – we looked at the outcome for Standard:

A number of changes had taken place to the previous systems and as a result the service offered better health care support to carers and children/young people. The continued examples of incomplete information about children/young people potentially compromised the ability of carers to meet their healthcare needs.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Children’s records demonstrated that they were registered with GPs, dentists and other health professionals as were needed to meet health care needs. The Manager said that more information was obtained at the point of referral than had been previously, and issues such as mental health and other specialist care needs were established as soon as possible.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Supervising social workers confirmed that children/young peoples’ health needs were discussed with carers and relevant information was recorded on supervision records.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

All children placed had an annual health care assessment. The annual review process considered health care needs and the tasks associated with meeting them. Foster carers said they were clear about the importance of meeting health care needs and ensuring children were cared for properly. This included recognition of the importance of other aspects of healthy living such as exercise, healthy eating and information and advice about drugs, alcohol and sexual health.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

Medical consents were obtained within the Placement Agreement Part 1 (PP1). This document was also used as the Foster Placement Agreement. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 There were documents that had not been signed by all parties, or documents where the medical consent had not been specifically established for some children.

p.10

EVIDENCE:

The Manager said that before Christmas 2005 there had been examples of sufficient information not being made available to carers, but this had now improved. This was demonstrated on some children’s files where written health care records were not available. Carers said they had requested additional information on children placed with them, and supervising social workers had asked placing authorities to supply the information. When it had not been received there was no evidence that it had been systematically and formally followed up by senior managers from Lorimer.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

The other issue facing Lorimer Foster Service was the large geographical area covered by the agency. This meant that knowledge of services in some areas was limited, and needed to be improved. The Manager said that where possible the agency tried to place children within their home authorities.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

Training records showed that foster carers had received basic training in health and well being. First aid training was basic and provided during preparation training. Foster carers should have access to additional training to care for children with complex needs and babies.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

The Manager confirmed that plans for development included training on communicable diseases and the development of the health outcomes in the “Every Child Matters” framework to identify health needs and improve health care for all children. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12

p.11

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• Any persons carrying on or managing the service are suitable. (NMS 3) • The fostering service provides suitable foster carers.(NMS 6) • The service matches children to carers appropriately.(NMS 8) • The fostering service protects each child or young person from abuse and neglect.(NMS 9) • The people who work in or for the fostering service are suitable to work with children and young people.(NMS 15) • Fostering panels are organised efficiently and effectively.(NMS 30)

p.12

The Commission considers Standards 3, 6, 8, 9, 15 and 30 the key

standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.12

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

3,6,8,9,15 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service.

p.12

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

There was evidence that improvements to the systems for approving carers and matching children were being put into place. The Manager, and Chair of the panel, were both clear about the areas that needed to change in order to make the system safe and effective.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

Lorimer Foster Services had undergone significant changes in personnel since the last inspection. Included in these changes was the appointment of a new Regional Director who had started in post in January of this year. She had applied to become the registered manager, the previous registered manager having left the agency. A new Panel Chair had also been appointed since the last inspection. A series of changes to improve the ability of the agency to recruit effective carers, and match children with carers who could meet their needs had been implemented.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

Approvals, supervision and reviews of foster carers included assessments of premises and all aspects of the potential accommodation. A written checklist was included on foster carer files as part of the approval and review documentation. All of the foster carers’ homes that were seen during the Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 inspection were safe and comfortable. The bedrooms of children and young people were appropriately furnished and decorated. Supervising social workers said they were aware of the significance of ensuring that the health and safety aspects of accommodation were rigorously assessed and reviewed as part of the approval process. A comprehensive review of the assessments and approvals of all foster carers had been started by the new Manager. (See Standard 17 below) Included in this was a reconsideration of the health and safety check for all homes.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

The agency collected information about pet ownership. One questionnaire said that the foster carers owned one dog although two dogs were in the house at the time of the inspector’s visit.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

In the past foster carers approved by Lorimer Foster Service had been approved for a wide range of needs. For example, a new carer may have been approved for “…… a child aged 0 to 18, of either sex .” Such a range meant that it had been difficult to match the strengths of a carer to the needs of a child. This shortfall in practice had been identified by the Manager as part of the review of all Form F assessments that had been conducted by the agency. In her submission of evidence to the Commission the Manager had written

p.13

EVIDENCE:

“In general, there was often little thought given to the recommendation for approval in terms of age ranges of children, or whether a carer was able to provide care on a short/long term basis, or in relation to respite/emergency/ bridging. Frequently carers were approved with very broad ranging terms such as 0-16 or 0-18, where it had not been evidenced on the Form F that they had the skills and experience to do this, or indeed, where the information in the Form F indicated that they only had experience in early years.”

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The Manager and Panel Chair confirmed that once the initial review of Form F assessments had been completed re-assessments of carers, where this was thought to be necessary, would be conducted, and a refinement of terms of approval would be undertaken for all carers.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The Panel considered one approval application as part of its business. The carers were recommended for specific and defined needs. This change in practice was intended to enable the agency to match more effectively carers with children. The panel felt that the assessment presented to them: • did not provide sufficient evidence of the applicants’ ability to manage potential challenging behaviour; • did not present information about the possibility of the applicants having another child of their own; • did not present information about the potential impact of a placement on the applicants’ two-year old child; • did not provide sufficient information on the male applicant’s previous relationships; • did not contain an understandable chronology. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 The panel was able to obtain further information from the social worker who had written the report as she attended the panel meeting in person. A decision

p.13

EVIDENCE:

was made on the applicants’ subsequent approval, and appropriate conditions of approval.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The issue of responsibility for supervising the quality of assessments and ensuring the “gate keeping” process for items presented to panel was complicated by the involvement of the Manager, the team manager and the acting panel manager in the work of the assessing social workers.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The Manager said she was involved in matching at the earliest possible stage and was the person who would agree a match between child and carers. She felt that the number of disruptions to placements was indicative of the previous poor practice in matching children with carers.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The training programme showed that training in child protection and behaviour management was organised for carers. Carers confirmed that they had attended training, and records of supervision meetings and reviews listed the training that carers had received. The Foster Care Handbook had a clear statement that corporal punishment was unacceptable.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Each foster home had a safe caring policy, although some were more comprehensive than others. The Manager had recognised the need to update the agreement with each placement, and make it specific to the placement of every individual child with its carer.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The service had updated and revised a range of policies and had produced a new policy and procedure for use if a child was missing from the carer’s home.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The Manager confirmed the issue about the availability of information on children for foster carers that had been identified at the last inspection. She said “pre-Christmas 2005 there will have been instances of relevant information not being made available to carers. This has now changed.” Foster carers confirmed that they had taken children without the proper information being available, and there was evidence that some placements had ended because children had exhibited behaviours of which carers were not aware before the placement had been made. Children’s files showed that some ‘Looked After Children’ (LAC) and other documentation was not available. The Manager could ensure that placing authorities were made aware in writing, as part of the placement contract, of what information is required at the point of referral, or when an emergency placement is made. Foster carer agreements should contain a statement that they will not take a child without

p.14

EVIDENCE:

relevant and specified information. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 A new team manager had been appointed. His role was to manage the four supervising social workers, three of whom had also been appointed since the last inspection. Two new panel members had been recruited. The personnel files of all new staff were seen. They contained all the information, checks and references required by Schedule 1 of the Fostering Services Regulations. Staff confirmed that they were subject to formal probationary period following appointment. All staff had CRB checks that were less than two years old.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The four supervising social workers were all experienced and qualified in undertaking both assessments and approvals, and supervision of foster carers. The team manager did not supervise the assessment work of his team. He said that when he was appointed he took the job on the understanding that he would not be responsible for the work of the social workers in the assessment of applicants’ to foster.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The four social workers were therefore supervised by the team manager for the supervision of carers, and by the acting panel manager for the assessment and approval of foster carers. The team manager and the social workers said they felt this arrangement to be confusing, and that it led to tensions about priorities and the management of workload. The opinion that there were “too many managers” was expressed by all staff to whom the inspectors’ spoke.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

In addition social workers said they were required to complete assessments in a shorter timescale than the guideline period of six months provided by BAAF. One social worker said she had been allocated an assessment in April that was to go to the June panel. Papers needed to be submitted four weeks before the Panel meeting. These timescales meant that social workers felt they did not have enough time to complete assessments properly. The Manager checked the dates involved in this case and said that it had in fact been allocated in January. She said it was recognised that there was pressure to get it to Panel before the six-month timescale. The Manager said that a formal agreement has been reached within the agency that the six-month timescale is both realistic and appropriate.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The team manager said he did not feel he had the knowledge or experience to supervise work on Form F assessments, and that he would need training in order to do the work effectively. The panel manager had had the responsibility of supervising all Form F assessors, to ensure that assessments met the agency’s minimum standards and to plan future panels. She had been previously been involved with the earlier assessment process that was now subject to comprehensive review, had for a short period been the acting manager of the agency, and had been a member of the panel prior to the appointment of the new chair. It was not therefore clear that she had the experience or expertise to supervise and manage the work of assessing social workers, irrespective of the confusion for the team of having, in effect, two managers for four workers. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The agency employed two unqualified support workers, one full time and one part time. The full time worker supervised the part time worker

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The last inspection had identified a number of concerns about the functioning of the Foster Panel. Lorimer Foster Care had been required to review the functioning of the Panel, to review the procedures under which the Panel operated, and to review the role and responsibility of the Panel chairperson.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The review of the Form F approvals conducted by the Manager confirmed that the Panel had not previously always fulfilled its functions as far as the scrutiny of assessments and reviews of carers, and matching of placements had been concerned. The Manager said she realised that the effective functioning of the Panel was central to the practice of the agency, and therefore significant changes had taken place to the Panel membership and the way it operated.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

A new Chair had been appointed. She had produced a written Lorimer Panel initial development plan that set out actions and timescales in relation to Panel membership, training, administrative arrangements, personal development and quality assurance. Written Panel Procedures had been produced; there was a written description of the role and function of the Panel and guidance given to each member in relation to their preparation for Panel, and their responsibilities within the panel meeting. Panel members said they welcomed the guidance provided, felt positive about the role of the chair, and appreciated the briefing that had already been given to them. A Panel training day had been organised at which the operation of the Panel as a team could be developed.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

Social workers who attended the Panel said they felt it operated in a way that encouraged and supported the development of good practice, and they welcomed the changes.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

A meeting of the Panel was observed during the site visit. The Panel was quorate, although two additional members needed to be recruited. These included someone who was a foster carer, and a person with a health background. The chair confirmed that the process for recruiting members to fulfil these functions was well underway.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The Panel was effectively chaired, and the discussions and decisions were based on good practice. The Panel chair and the Manager both recognised that further work needed to be done. In particular the role of “panel gatekeeper” needed to be clarified. The Manager, the acting panel manager and the team manager all had a role in the supervision of assessments and reviews and it was not clear who was responsible for the monitoring of the items that were to go to panel, and the quality of the work that was presented. The Panel Chair said she was not clear about the relationship between the respective roles and Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 responsibilities of the team manager and the acting Panel manager, and was not clear about the role of the “Panel manager.”

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The Panel Chair said that in future she would expect the Panel to have a more active role in the receiving and monitoring of complaints. She also said that reports to Panel should have more detailed chronologies, be more effectively “proof read” and to contain more analysis of information. She said that the agency also needed to review its training programme for staff and carers. The Panel Chair said, “We are at the cusp of a lot of change. We will need to be clear to the agency about what we expect from it.” Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18

p.17

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service values diversity.(NMS 7) • The fostering service promotes educational achievement.(NMS 13) • When foster care is provided as a short-term break for a child, the arrangements recognise that the parents remain the main carers for the child.(NMS 31)

p.18

The Commission considers Standards 7, 13, and 31 the key standards

to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.18

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

7,13 and 31. The quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service.

p.18

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

The agency was aware of the need to improve its assessment of carers in order to match children with carers so that children’s needs could be met. Foster carers were aware of their responsibilities in promoting the educational achievement of children, and worked well in supporting children in school. Further work needs to be done by the agency to make sure it has all the relevant information to support children’s’ educational progress.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The Manager was aware of the need to improve the quality of the assessments of carers and the matching of children with carers in order to meet identified needs. The Manager said the agency was working to recruit carers from a variety of backgrounds in order to enable as wide a variety of needs as possible to be met. She also said that the issue of ethnicity was to be explicitly identified in the terms of approvals for carers, and training for carers in equality and diversity will be provided as part of the developments in the carer training programme.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Preparation training covered supporting a young person to ensure that their confidence and feelings of self-esteem were developed. One foster carer spoken to said they had found the training “….very thought provoking.” One Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 carer was able to demonstrate that she supported the young person placed with her to have the opportunity to attend local activities, such as going swimming.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Children’s files contained information supplied by the placing authority at or before placement. This normally took the form of the LAC documentation and this contained information on children’s educational needs, attainment and programmes. The Manager recognised that the service had not always collected information in relation to the educational attainment of children looked after by the service, but that it was intended that the process for collection of information would be improved. Some carers expressed concerns about the quality of information available to them. Personal Education Plans (PEP) had not been obtained for all children who should have them. One file did not contain a copy of the Statement of Educational needs.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

One carer whom had an educational background believed that the educational needs of the young person placed with her had not been fully explored by the school. The foster carer said she had informed the agency, via the supervising social worker about her concerns. The carer said she had not been told what had been done about it. Another carer said she had had problems when a child placed with her was excluded from school, and she had not been told about what support the school should provide. The carer said the supervising social worker had been very helpful. It was encouraging to note that carers supported young people with their education. One had bought workbooks to use with the child at home and helped them with their work.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

The service did not have its own educational provision at the time of the inspection. The Manager said that consideration was being given to how educational provision may be incorporated into the service. Improvements in the referral process had enabled the agency to determine the educational support required for young people. Foster carers were seen to be supporting children placed with them in a variety of ways, including liaising with schools, encouraging learning and buying books and educational material.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

Lorimer Foster Service did not provide short term breaks for children at the time of the site visit. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20

p.19

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service promotes contact arrangements for the child or young person. (NMS 10) • The fostering service promotes consultation.(NMS 11)

p.20

The Commission considers Standards 10 and 11 the key standards to

be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.20

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

10 and 11 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.20

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

Carers supported children in establishing and maintaining contacts with identified people where this was in a child’s interests. However, carers needed to have appropriate documentation whenever there was a restriction of contact in place. The service recognised that it needed to develop the arrangements for enabling young people to be consulted.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

Contact arrangements were established as part of the care plan for each child. Information about contact was passed to carers as part of the placement documentation, or in discussion with placing social workers. Carers confirmed that the importance of contact was emphasised, and that they were supported in promoting contact between a child and other significant people. Reference to contact was part of the Foster Carer’s Handbook. Children said that were helped to keep in contact with parents and others, and that carers helped them as much as possible. There were cases where children had restrictions on contact. Although carers said they were aware of these, there were examples of carers not having the documentation – copies of care orders for example – that gave them the evidence of such decisions.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

Contact arrangements were discussed as part of the statutory review process and children’s files contained written records of these meetings and Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 recommendations. Contacts were supported by carers and by support workers. Supervising social workers monitored the arrangements. Foster carers recorded information about contact, and supervising social workers checked on the records kept by the carers.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

The Manager said that the foster service needed to improve the ways in which the views of children were established and that they were taken into account as part of the development of the service. She said it had not been the case that their views were formally obtained previously. There had been no forum for young people, and an inconsistent approach to the ways in which children were dealt with after having expressed concerns about their placement. She also said that the Young People’s Guide were not of a sufficiently high standard. The service intended to identify deficits in placement and to provide an action plan to assist children developing socially and emotionally, and to engage more positively in the community. The agency had no arrangement with any organisation offering independent advocacy. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22

p.21

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service prepares young people for adulthood.(NMS 14) • The fostering service pays carers an allowance and agreed expenses as specified.(NMS 29)

p.22

The Commission considers Standards 29 the key standard to be

inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.22

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

14 and 29 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.22

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

The agency recognised that it needed to develop the systems for supporting young people into adulthood. Carers were generally satisfied with the money they received from the foster service, although it seemed that payments had been individually negotiated between each carer and the agency. There was no explicit structure for payments.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The Manager said that there was an explicit expectation that foster carers would help prepare young people for adulthood, and that this was referred to in the Foster Carers’ Handbook. The reference to this topic was however a one- sentence extract from the relevant national minimum standard. The foster carer training programme did not contain any courses on developing independence or preparing for adulthood. The Manager said that she was aware of what should be done to promote successful moves into independent living, but that it was an area that had not received any attention so had not seen any improvement.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Some foster carers said their allowances were paid regularly and in line with their expectations. Others said there had been problems with the timing and amount of payments. The manager said that records indicated that payments had always been made on time, but there may have been delays in the money transfer process over Bank Holidays, or where payments were over and above the standard amount. An example of this might be a child’s birthday. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 There were however no written guidelines about the payment structure. The amounts payable to carers seemed to have been agreed for each individual case at the time of placement. One carer said she was well paid, and felt it was because she had negotiated her own terms and conditions over the course of the placement.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The Manager agreed that there was a need for a more systematic, transparent and consistent framework within which the amount to be paid to carers should be agreed. Foster carer rates could be included in the Foster Carers’ Handbook. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24

p.23

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• There is a clear statement of the aims and objectives of the fostering service and the fostering service ensures that they meet those aims and objectives.(NMS 1) • The fostering service is managed by those with the appropriate skills and experience. (NMS 2) • The fostering service is monitored and controlled as specified. (NMS 4) • The fostering service is managed effectively and efficiently.(NMS 5) • Staff are organised and managed effectively.(NMS 16) • The fostering service has an adequate number of sufficiently experienced and qualified staff.(NMS 17) • The fostering service is a fair and competent employer.(NMS 18) • There is a good quality training programme. (NMS 19) • All staff are properly accountable and supported.(NMS 20) • The fostering service has a clear strategy for working with and supporting carers.(NMS 21) • Foster carers are provided with supervision and support.(NMS 22) • Foster carers are appropriately trained.(NMS 23)

p.24

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• Case records for children are comprehensive.(NMS 24) • The administrative records are maintained as required.(NMS 25) • The premises used as offices by the fostering service are suitable for the purpose.(NMS 26) • The fostering service is financially viable. (NMS 27) • The fostering service has robust financial processes. (NMS 28) • Local Authority fostering services recognise the contribution made by family and friends as carers.(NMS 32)

p.24

The Commission considers Standards 17, 21, and 24 the key standards

to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.24

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

1,2,4,5,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27 and 28. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.24

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

The appointment of a new Manager and new Chair for the Fostering Panel for had enabled the agency to identify the issues affecting it, and to introduce changes that had begun to have a beneficial impact on the management of the service. Although a number of issues needed resolving, and there remained Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 crucial work to be done, there were a number of improvements to the policies, practices and procedures on which the work of the agency was based. As a result the agency was beginning to operate more effectively and provide better and safer care for children placed.

p.24

EVIDENCE:

Lorimer Foster Care had a new Manager, appointed in January 2006. She had applied to become registered manager. She was a qualified social worker with 16 years of experience working in children’s services, had been a Team Manager for seven years and a Service Manager for two. The Manager said she was about to start a management course.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

In her work so far she has demonstrated an ability to understand the problems facing the agency, and has identified and prioritised the most significant areas for development. She has worked with the new Chairperson to improve the functioning of the panel, and has produced a review of all the Form F assessments undertaken by Lorimer. In so doing been honest and clear about the shortfalls in practice and management, and the areas in need of improvement. Staff said they appreciated the work of the Manager, whom they believed was committed to, and supportive of good practice.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

The Manager and staff recognised that there were issues to do with the management of the service that needed to be resolved. At the time of the site visit the number of social workers was greater than that required for the work of carer approval and supervision currently available. The role of team manager was not clear, and the overlap between the responsibilities of the team manager and panel manager were not clear and appeared to lead to confusion within the social work team. The Manager was actively involved in monitoring the quality of Form F assessments that were being produced by the social workers.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

Lorimer had also employed a Regional Director for Yorkshire and Humberside, and a Team Manager for that region. This was despite the fact that the agency was advised after the previous inspection that it should not expand its operation until the deficiencies in its existing practice and management were resolved. At the time of the site visit there were no assessments or approved carers in the Yorkshire region, although the agency had established a base and was seeking to recruit carers over there.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

The Regional Manager for Yorkshire and Humberside was about to become the reviewing officer for existing foster carers in the North West. Lorimer also employed a Quality Assurance Officer, who was on the point of moving to become marketing director for the whole Lorimer Group. One social worker Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 26 said there had recently been an allocation meeting at which there were as many managers (four) as social workers.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

The Manager had begun to develop policies and procedures and change the practices of the service. As a result a number of improvements had already been made. She recognised however that a great deal more needed to be done and that the changes would take time. It was recognised as important that the changes to be implemented were managed in a structured and prioritised way. The Manager should produce a development plan listing the changes to be made, timescales and responsibilities in order for the entire agency to be aware of what was to happen and for all staff to be working to the same agenda.

p.26

EVIDENCE:

The Manager recognised that the previous inspection had had a considerable impact on the agency and the carers. She said there had been a downturn in referrals and the numbers of placements.

p.26

EVIDENCE:

The financial information made available for the inspection confirmed that the agency had had lost money last year, and had projected a further significant financial shortfall for this year. This gave rise to two concerns, both recognised by the Manager. The first was the possibility that the agency may close, thereby having a potential impact on the security of the current placements. The second concern was that the Manager might be under pressure to shortcut approvals, to approve applicants who may not be suitable, or to match children with carers who may not be able to meet their needs, but who could be placed.

p.26

EVIDENCE:

The Responsible Individual, who was also the owner, said he was committed to maintaining his financial support for the agency as he was confident that the developments in hand, and the staff now in post, would enable Lorimer to offer a quality service and so increase business.

p.26

EVIDENCE:

The Responsible Individual subsequently confirmed in writing that he expected Lorimer Foster Services to require financial support “….until about March 2007.” He also wrote “ I am committed to provide this support as I strongly feel that the agency has an excellent chance of providing its services in a financially viable way in the near future.”

p.26

EVIDENCE:

He also said he left the running of the business to the Manager, and recognised that in the manager and Panel Chair he had two “strong-minded ” people committed to focussing on good practice and the welfare of children. In her written Panel Protocol the chair of the Panel had written “It is not the role of the Panel to manage the business of the Fostering service, or be concerned about the business implications of Panel’s deliberations and recommendations.”

p.26

EVIDENCE:

Three qualified social workers and a team manager had been employed since the last inspection. This enabled assessments and supervision to be managed Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 27 entirely by four qualified social workers employed full time by the agency. This number of staff was more than sufficient to undertake the current workload of the fostering service.

p.26

EVIDENCE:

There were sound employment practices for staff and carers. Both groups said they felt the agency to be fair in its employment practices and conditions of service, although the issue of consistency of a payment structure to carers has already been mentioned.

p.27

EVIDENCE:

The agency had introduced a revised training programme for staff and carers. Both staff and carers said the training provided was appropriate and adequate, although a number of carers commented on the difficulties of accessibility to training as a result of courses clashing with work commitments, and the problems associated with the geographical spread of the carers, who could be from any area within the North West of England. There had been no joint training between staff and carers, and some problems with the attendance of both parties from a couple. Carers said that when they were initially approved they were told that only the main carer need attend training. The Manager said that Lorimer was hoping to establish more localised venues for training across the whole area it covered.

p.27

EVIDENCE:

The Manager also recognised that there were problems with establishing a foster carer forum. One meeting had been arranged but only one carer had attended, and no further dates set. Meetings of children and young people had not been developed, although the Manager said the agency recognised the need and value of such forums, and was exploring ways in which these could be provided.

p.27

EVIDENCE:

Staff supervision was provided and was a clear expectation of practice. Staff confirmed that they received regular supervision and found it supportive. One issue that caused some confusion was the arrangement whereby social workers were supervised in their foster carer supervision role by the team manager, and in their Form F assessment work by the acting Panel Manager.

p.27

EVIDENCE:

The responsibilities of supervising social workers had been clarified, and social workers said they were aware of the need to undertake effective supervision. Records of meetings, including supervision sessions were kept, and carers said that they felt the support to be good. One carer had resigned because, she said, the support provided to her had not been what she needed and she was moving to another agency. Another carer, who did not have a child placed, said she felt that her supervising social worker “…comes more than she needs. Nothing much changes between visits.”

p.27

EVIDENCE:

The Manager could consider the introduction of a written supervision contract between each carer and their supervising social worker. This could reflect the needs of each individual placement and the support it requires. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 28 The Manager said that unannounced visits had not always taken place, but it was now a clear expectation of the social worker’s responsibilities. The purpose and frequency of unannounced visits could be included in the supervision agreement.

p.27

EVIDENCE:

Some foster carers said that they had been worried in the past about the quality of support they received from the agency, and that there had been a high turnover of staff. There was however recognition that things had started to get better, more staff had been employed and they had established regular contact with carers. One foster carer told the inspector “Fair play to them, they seemed to have got their act together. They are much more settled now.”

p.28

EVIDENCE:

Each child in placement had a case record. The agency was dependent on information on children being provided by social workers from the placing authorities. There were a number of files that did not contain all the relevant and current information on children in placement. Although in some instances there were references to the attempts made by phone call or letter to obtain the information, either before, at the time of, or during the placement information was not always available. One carer said she had had a child for three weeks before information was provided. Lorimer should make explicit what it requires from placing authorities, and when, as part of the placement contract. It should also clarify in writing with carers what information should be available to them and when and include in the Foster Care Agreement that carers should not take children without the information identified.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

Both children’s and foster carers’ files varied in content and structure. Although each type of file had a written list of contents at the front the material the files contained varied. There was no evidence that there was a file audit undertaken by a manager. In normal circumstances this would be undertaken by the Team Manager, and evidenced by a written contribution. Foster carer files should contain a signed Foster Placement Agreement in respect of each child placed. Information describing all the training that a carer had undertaken, all the visits from the supervising social worker that had taken place at the home, and records of children placed should be completed in every case.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

One carer had information on two children who had been placed with her, but had been left some time. Supervising social workers should ensure that they collect all information on children once they have left the placement. Carers said they were given lockable boxes in which to store information. These were seen in carers’ homes, although one carer said she had not been given one and had bought her own.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

The fostering service was part of the Lorimer Group, a private agency providing residential and foster care. The office premises were large, well Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 29 designed and secure, and provided accommodation for the fostering service and all associated support services. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 30

p.28

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

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

p.30

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

4 Standard Exceeded (Commendable) 3 Standard Met (No Shortfalls) 2 Standard Almost Met (Minor Shortfalls) 1 Standard Not Met (Major Shortfalls) “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.30

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

BEING HEALTHY ACHIEVING ECONOMIC Standard No Score WELLBEING 12 2 Standard No Score 14 2 STAYING SAFE 29 2 Standard No Score 3 3 MANAGEMENT 6 2 Standard No Score 8 3 1 X 9 2 2 3 15 2 4 2 30 3 5 2 16 2 ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING 17 3 Standard No Score 18 3 7 2 19 2 13 2 20 3 31 x 21 2 22 2 MAKING A POSITIVE 23 2 CONTRIBUTION 24 2 Standard No Score 25 2 10 2 26 3 11 2 27 3 28 3 32 x Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 31 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes

p.30

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Fostering Services Regulations 2002 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales.

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 1 FS12 17(3)(a)(b) The manager must ensure that every foster carer is provided with full and complete information about the health needs of a child, including the arrangements for consent to treatment. 31/05/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

2 FS6 27(d) The manager must ensure that each carer household has an accurate and up to date health and safety assessment. 30/06/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

3 FS8 21(4) The manager must ensure that all social workers undertaking approvals and assessments receive appropriate supervision. 30/06/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

4 FS13 17(3) The manager must ensure that every foster carer is provided with full information and documentation on the education needs of children placed. 30/06/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

5 FS10 14 The manager must ensure that every foster carer is provided with written copies of legal orders and restrictions of contact made in respect of a child placed. 30/06/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

6 FS11 11(b) The manager must ensure that procedures are in place to enable the effective 31/07/06 Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 32 participation of children and young people in the care they receive. 7 FS14 16(5) The manager must ensure that foster carers are trained and supported to promote moves into adulthood for children placed with them. 31/07/06

p.31

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

8 FS5 42 The manager must produce a written development plan for Lorimer Foster Service outlining key tasks, timescales and responsibilities. 31/07/06

p.32

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

9 FS25 30 The manager must ensure that foster carer records contain signed foster placement agreements in respect of each child placed, information about children placed and visits undertaken. 31/07/06

p.32

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

10 FS25 11(a) The manager must ensure that foster carers have written information relating only to children actually placed with them. 31/05/06

p.32

RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out.

p.32

RECOMMENDATIONS

No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations

p.32

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 FS23 The manager should ensure that carers are trained to have the skills to care for the complex needs of children and babies placed with them. 2 FS8 The manager could establish a written protocol for the documentation required at the time of placement and include it in the foster carer agreement. 3 FS17 The manager should clarify the timescales in which foster carer assessments are to be completed. 4 FS29 The manager should produce written guidelines for the principles of payments to be made to carers and include it Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 33 in the Foster Carer Handbook. 5 FS21 The manager could produce a written supervision contract for each individual placement. This would describe the frequency and purpose of visits to be made. Lorimer Foster Services DS0000059742.V287772.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 34

p.32

Commission for Social Care Inspection

CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ

p.34

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.34