Social care · Children's home inspection (SCCIF)
Children's Home run by London Borough of Southwark in Southwark
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
- Inspection datesingle source
26 Jan 2012
- Inspectors verified
Seka Graovac
- URN verified
SC031479
Deep dive
What this report says
In plain English
Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.
Tone of the report
How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.
In line with other reports of this type.
Markers show where typical reports of each grade sit.
How the report reads, start to finish
Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.
Strengths
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
No standout praise found.
Concerns
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
No strong criticism found.
Next steps
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
Anatomy of the report
How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.
- Pages
- 5
- Words of findings
- 143
- shorter than usual (typical 1387)
- Reading level
- Hard
- Flesch 42, typical 50
- Average sentence
- 16 words
- Next steps
- 1
- typical 4
- Hedged sentences
- 0%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Unique reference number SC031479 Inspection date 26/01/2012 Inspector Seka Graovac Type of inspection Interim Provision subtype Children's home
p.1
Date of last inspection 07/10/2011 Website: www.ofsted.gov.uk
p.1
This document may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial educational purposes, provided that the information quoted is reproduced without adaptation and the source and date of publication are stated.
p.2
About this inspection
The purpose of this inspection is to assure children and young people, parents, the public, local authorities and government of the quality and standard of the service provided. The inspection was carried out under the Care Standards Act 2000 to assess the effectiveness of the service and to consider how well it complies with the relevant regulations and meets the national minimum standards.
p.3
About this inspection
The report details the progress made by the provider since the last full inspection, identifies any further strengths, any areas for improvement and makes judgements as outlined in the Inspection of children’s homes – framework for inspection (March 2011).
p.3
The inspection judgements and what they mean
Good progress The children’s home has demonstrated continued improvement in quality of care and outcomes for children and young people and where appropriate has addressed all requirements and the large majority of recommendations that were raised at the previous inspection. Satisfactory progress The children’s home has maintained quality of care and outcomes for children and young people and where appropriate has addressed all requirements and the majority of recommendations that were raised at the previous inspection. Inadequate progress The children’s home has failed to address one or more requirements and/or has not met the majority of recommendations and/or the quality of care and outcomes for children and young people have declined since the last full inspection.
p.3
Brief description of the service
This is a local authority's service. It provides short-term respite care for up to four children who have learning disabilities.
p.4
Brief description of the service
The children’s respite service shares the building with a similar service for adults. The services are kept separate by locked doors, but some facilities are shared. One manager is registered for both children's and adult's service. Staff also work across both provisions. The adult service is inspected separately by the Care Quality Commission.
p.4
Progress
Since their previous inspection the service is judged to be making good progress.
p.4
Progress
The service had a full inspection in October 2011. It was judged as a good service that achieves outstanding outcomes for children. The areas for improvement identified at that visit included the Statement of Purpose, the complaints procedure, the record keeping of behaviour control measures and the environment. The management has successfully addressed all the weaknesses identified.
p.4
Progress
The Statement of Purpose has been updated. This means that the stakeholders have access to the information about the service that is completely accurate.
p.4
Progress
The complaints procedure has been amended to include all required information. This means that the stakeholders have access to the comprehensive procedure that more effectively protects and supports their right to complain.
p.4
Progress
The staff awareness of the good practice in relation to recording of physical interventions has increased. Better record keeping contributes to better monitoring. At the full inspection, Ofsted also recommended that staff receive training in the use of physical intervention techniques. The last time staff had this training was in 2007. The home is making appropriate arrangements for the training to take place, but no date has been fixed as yet.
p.4
Progress
The environment has been much improved and there are firm plans to make it better. A new cooker has been purchased and quotes are being taken for a new kitchen. Carpets have been changed in the lounge and in some of the bedrooms. One bedroom has been fully redecorated. Children enjoy being in a clean and well- maintained environment.
p.4
Progress
The management has recently reviewed the care for each child that comes to the home. This also included a full consultation with parents. With the home's support, the children continue to make exceptional progress. Children and their parents value highly the service they receive. A parent described the service as a life-line.
p.4
Progress
The home's main achievement since the full inspection is that it has been able to extend its service to 13 new families in the borough it serves.
p.5
Progress
Ofsted also recommended that staff receive more regular supervision. This was because some of the staff files examined showed that they had only three supervision meetings in the 12 months. The management has taken this recommendation seriously and is committed to ensure that each staff member receives formal supervision every four to six weeks. A supervision time-table has been produced. It is displayed in the office and is regularly monitored.
p.5
Progress
Monitoring is generally good. However, no visit in line with Regulation 33 took place in December 2011.
p.5
Statutory Requirements
This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Children's Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The registered person(s) must comply with the given timescales.
p.5
Reg. Requirement Due date
(2001) ensure that monitoring visits take place at least once a month. (Regulation 33) 29/02/2012
p.5
Recommendations
To improve the quality and standards of care further the service should take account of the following recommendation(s):
p.5
Recommendations
refresh staff training in the use of physical intervention techniques on a regular basis. (NMS 3.15)
p.5
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion