Social care · Children's home inspection (SCCIF)
Children's Home run by Norfolk County Council in Norfolk
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
- Inspectors verified
Natalie Burton
- Postcode verified
NR1 2DH
- URN verified
SC463902
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.
- 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.6
- At the interim inspections we make a judgement on whether the home has improved in effectiveness, sustained effectiveness, or declined in effectiveness since the previous full inspection. p.6
- This is in line with the Inspection of children’s homes: framework for inspection. p.6
Anatomy of the report
How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.
- Pages
- 6
- Words of findings
- 205
- shorter than usual (typical 1387)
- Reading level
- Very hard
- Flesch 28, typical 50
- Average sentence
- 21 words
- Next steps
- 3
- typical 4
- Hedged sentences
- 0%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Unique reference number SC463902 Inspector Natalie Burton Type of inspection Interim Provision subtype Children's home
p.1
Registered person Norfolk County Council Children's Services Registered person address Norfolk County Council, Chief Executives County Hall, Martineau Lane NORWICH NR1 2DH Responsible individual Peter James Ronan Registered manager Mary Theresa Tuddenham Date of last inspection 31/07/2014 2 of 6 Inspection date 16/02/2015
p.1
Previous inspection adequate Enforcement action since last inspection none
p.2
This inspection
This home was judged adequate at the last full inspection. At this interim inspection Ofsted judge that it has improved effectiveness .
p.2
This inspection
The home was judged as adequate in July 2014. Since that time, the Registered Manager has addressed the four requirements and three recommendations that were raised. This home has continued to make significant progress, which has led to positive outcomes for young people.
p.2
This inspection
The service has made improvements to the home’s admission procedure. This is because young people referred to the home for consideration have their information carefully scrutinised by the manager. Management complete group impact risk assessments, including historical and relevant information and in consideration of the current group dynamic. This informs decision making of any potential impact on young people living at the home and whether the staff can meet the young person’s needs. This ensures that only young people whose assessed needs can be met are admitted to the home.
p.2
This inspection
The service has made improvements to the external monitoring reports. This is through the visitor providing a clear, accurate and up to date report of significant events and information occurring within the home. This ensures that Ofsted, the service and other interested parties are provided with an accurate report to enable effective monitoring of the home.
p.2
This inspection
The Registered Manager has made improvements to their system in ensuring all notifications of significant events are now made to Ofsted and relevant authorities. This ensures effective sharing of information and the action taken following the incidents.
p.2
This inspection
There have been no safeguarding concerns since the last inspection. Management have taken action to address the shortfall regarding a lack of implementation, on occasion, of the safeguarding policy. Managers have discussed the safeguarding 3 of 6 policy, including the action to take if an allegation occurs, with all staff during team meetings and supervisions. In addition, a flow chart is displayed clearly in the office to define the process for all staff. As a result, young people are sufficiently safeguarded because staff have been provided with the information they need.
p.2
This inspection
Since the last inspection, no young people have been missing from the home. This is a significant improvement. The Registered Manager has ensured that if young people were to go missing, there is an individual who is independent of the home, such as a police community officer or the young person’s social worker who would speak with them on their return.
p.3
This inspection
The Registered Manager has made changes to the rota within the home. This includes management completing the rota, with a good knowledge of staff individual strengths, experience, qualification and working relationships. Management arrangements are strengthened, through the appointment of a senior worker and training provided to the team, such as sharing safe practice. As a result, young people are cared for by a staff team that feels supported by management, and has the experience to meet young people’s individual needs.
p.3
This inspection
Staff have made improvements in the records held within the home. Where there have been incidents and significant events, records now detail the action taken and the outcome of the incident. This results in clear, up to date records.
p.3
This inspection
There were some shortfalls noted during this inspection. Measures of controls do not consistently demonstrate the effectiveness of the sanction, or on occasion, do not relate to the incident that has occurred. For example, as a sanction for damage to the home and using a book to light a fire, the young person lost their free time. This does not ensure that young people are consistently helped to understand why their behaviour is inappropriate and the potential dangers linked to these incidents.
p.3
This inspection
Young people are provided with healthy food at the home, and they are able to ask staff for snacks in between meal times. However following some incidents related to food, management made a decision to have all food locked away, limiting the access young people have. Also, the last time food such as snacks was available without request to young people was not known. This has the potential to make the home feel institutionalised.
p.3
This inspection
Young people are positive about the care and support they receive; they have good relationships with staff who they can talk to. Young people feel safe, secure and cared for in this home. They feel empowered by staff who listen to their views and spend quality time with them.
p.3
This inspection
Young people have made significant progress in their education achievement and attendance. They have reduced incidents of putting themselves in risk taking situations, such as going missing. They are all engaging with staff and external agencies where needed, such as the child and adolescent mental health services. 4 of 6 Young people’s achievements are recognised and praised by staff; each young person has an achievement book to show the progress they have made. This further enhances young people’s self-esteem.
p.3
This inspection
There is a commitment from the manager and staff within the home to improve outcomes and raise the standard of care for young people. 5 of 6
p.4
Information about this children’s home
This home is owned and run by the local authority. The home offers short-term care and assessment for up to four young people with emotional and behavioural difficulties.
p.5
Inspection date Inspection type Inspection judgement
31/07/2014 Full adequate 09/12/2013 Full adequate 20/09/2013 Full inadequate
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
ensure sanctions and rewards for behaviour are clear, reasonable and fair and are understood by all staff and children (NMS 3.8) ensure risk reduction does not lead to an institutionalised feel, with particular regard to access to snacks that a reasonable parent would set. (NMS 10.3) Website: www.ofsted.gov.uk
p.5
Recommendations
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.6
What inspection judgements mean
At the interim inspections we make a judgement on whether the home has improved in effectiveness, sustained effectiveness, or declined in effectiveness since the previous full inspection. This is in line with the Inspection of children’s homes: framework for inspection.
p.6
Information 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.6
Information about this inspection
The report details the main strengths, any areas for improvement, including any breaches of regulation, and any failure to meet national minimum standards. The judgements included in the report are made against the framework of inspection for children's homes.
p.6
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion