Foundations Wigan

Foundations Inspection report for residential family centre

p.1

Unique reference number SC482588 Inspection date 12 January 2016 Inspector Maria McGranaghan Ceri Evans Type of inspection Full

p.1

Setting address 98-100 Atherton Road, Hindley, WIGAN, Lancashire, WN2 3RN

p.1

Telephone number 01142800200 Email info@progressivecare.co.uk Registered person Mr Mohammed Ali Registered manager Vacant Post/ Annemarie Jones Responsible individual Mr Mohammed Ali Date of last inspection N/A

p.1

Brief description of the service

Foundations is a residential family centre, registered to provide assessment, care and accommodation for up to six families. Families are referred for assessment to the centre by the courts or Local Authority.

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

The overall experiences of children and parents require improvement

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

The centre has been fully operational for approximately four months. This inspection is the first for the service. The manager who was initially registered with the service has since left. Appropriate interim arrangement have been made and a new manager is now in post. A number of breaches in regulations have been identified during this inspection. These relate to the quality of assessment, effectiveness of the home’s management, and the overall quality of the service. That said, since the appointment of the new manager greater emphasis is being placed on roles and responsibilities and embedding systems to improve the overall quality of the provision.

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

A key strength of the centre is the quality of relationships between staff and families. The atmosphere is relaxed and welcoming and relationships are mutually respectful. This enables parents to feel safe and secure throughout their assessment. Staff spoken with during the inspection are passionate about helping parents make progress and overcome barriers that impact on their ability to care, bond and keep children safe.

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

The current complaints system is ineffective. The centre does not have a system that enables parents to make a complaint anonymously. Furthermore, not all parents have had the complaints procedure explained to them as part of their induction to the service. Consequently, parents are not appropriately informed about what to do if they are dissatisfied with any aspects of the service.

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

Key records such as risk assessments, care plans and health plans are not routinely monitored and updated. Care plans state that each parent is given the opportunity to record what they want to achieve from the service and review their individual goals on a regular basis. However, there is little evidence to suggest this is the case as records do not include their comments or are signed by parents. This is not a collaborative approach to care planning as it fails to consider any emerging views of individual parents. More positively, the centre is exceptionally well decorated and offers ideal space for families to either spend time alone with their child or time with the other families. Observations of families sitting and chatting together alongside staff in a relaxed and calm atmosphere confirm that relationships are forged and this helps parents share experiences with each other. Regular meetings take place between the families and

p.2

The overall experiences of children and parents

staff to discuss how the centre is run and views and suggestions are encouraged from families. However, there is a lack of structure and agenda for the meetings. This means that meetings are brief because parents are not empowered to set an agenda in order to discuss matters important to them.

p.3

Statutory Requirements

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

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

4 The registered person shall keep under review and where appropriate revise the statement of purpose and residents guide and notify Ofsted within 28 days of any such revision (Regulation (4)(a)(b)) 29/02/2016

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

11 The registered person shall make arrangements for the recording, handling, safe keeping, safe administration and disposal of medicines received into the residential family centre (Regulation 11 (2)) 29/02/2016

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

13 The registered person shall before providing a family accommodation in the residential family centre, or as soon as possible thereafter draw up a written plan setting out an assessment of risk, which a resident may present to their own health, safety and welfare or that of other residents at the centre (Regulation 13 (1) (c)) 29/02/2016

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

13 The registered person must ensure that the conclusions or recommendations are made as a result of the assessment or monitoring and that are objective and based on verifiable evidence and the evidence on which they are based are capable of being presented in a manner that is clear, accessible and appropriate for the persons who will need to consider them (Regulation 13A (4)(a)(b)) 29/02/2016

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

15 The registered person shall ensure that there is a sufficient number of qualified, competent and experienced persons forking for the residential family centre in order to safeguard and promote the health and welfare of residents (Regulation 15 (b)) 29/02/2016 17 The registered person shall ensure that all persons employed by him receive appropriate training, supervision and appraisal (Regulation 17 (5)(a)) 29/02/2016

p.3

Reg. Requirement Due date

19 The registered person shall maintain in respect of each family accommodated in the residential family centre records which include information specified in Schedule 3 and ensure these records are kept up to date (Regulation 19 (1)(a)(b)) 29/02/2016

p.4

Reg. Requirement Due date

23 The registered person shall establish and maintain a system for reviewing and improving the quality of care provided at the residential family centre. This system shall provide consultation with residents (Regulation 23 (1)(a)(b)(3)) 29/02/2016

p.4

Reg. Requirement Due date

25 The registered person shall supply a copy of the report required under Regulation 25 (4) (c) to Ofsted (Regulation 25 (4)(c)) 29/02/2016

p.4

Recommendations

To improve the quality and standards of care further the service should take account of the following recommendation(s):

p.4

Recommendations

Parents, and children of an appropriate age, are encouraged to attend school, college, alternative provision, training and employment, where appropriate. With specific reference to ensuring appropriate levels of support to ensure families have access to appropriate training and employment opportunities (NMS 6.8)

p.4

Recommendations

ensure that staff complete a written family placement plan. The plan should specify the objectives and intended outcomes of the placement, details of training, assistance, assessment, supervision and protection to be provided at the centre, and how the child’s welfare will be promoted. Plans should be reviewed, kept up to date and written in consultation with families (NMS 9.2)

p.4

Recommendations

The registered person has an effective procedure for considering complaints and responding to them in accordance with legal requirement (NMS 19.8)

p.4

Quality of assessment

The quality of assessment requires improvement

p.4

Quality of assessment

Not all parents are positive about the quality of their assessment. One stated: ‘we get on well with our keyworker, she’s gives us feedback, but we haven’t got anything down in writing. We don’t have copies of our plans.’ A placing social worker also expressed concern about the effectiveness of collaboration. She stated: ‘while things have improved in recent weeks, I haven’t always been kept informed about the progress the family are making, in fact I have had to request written weekly updated which sometimes contradicts what I was told over the phone.’

p.4

Quality of assessment

Staff spoken with during the inspection demonstrated an understanding of the assessment process and the individual elements explored with each family. Parents confirm that direct work is undertaken with their key worker. However, specific sessions as identified in the families guide and Statement of Purpose do not take place. Furthermore, staff are unclear about what services are available to the parents in the local area. Consequently, families are not provided with suitable direct work and keywork sessions to help them progress through their formal parenting assessment. This is something the manager has acknowledged and stated: ‘we recognised the areas that require improvement and are taking steps to address the shortfall.’

p.5

Quality of assessment

Weekly appraisals with parents are not consistently undertaken. This is a key opportunity to consult with families, review their progress and set objectives. Of the sessions that have taken place records are poor. For example, action plans around shortfalls in parenting capacity are not set and there is little evidence of consultation. This means there is no record to demonstrate that parents are able to exercise their rights and give their views to influence their assessment.

p.5

Quality of assessment

The use of surveillance is supported by policies and procedures. CCTV cameras are located within the home and in external areas. When surveillance system are not used for the purposes of the assessment cameras are covered up in order to respect the privacy of parents. Parents confirm they know about the use of CCTV, but not all have appropriate agreements on file to evidence they understand the reasons for its use.

p.5

Quality of assessment

The final assessment report is completed by a qualified social worker. The report is of a sufficient standard and offers an account of how the assessment was completed. Clear recommendations are made within the report and this enables the court and placing authority to make the necessary decisions in the best interests of the child. The service uses a phased assessment process that covers primary care tasks, routines and emotional aspects of parenting. Staff use monitoring, role modelling, advice and demonstrations to collate their evidence. However, records of these sessions are not consistent and contain conflicting information. This is not good practice as records made in this way hinder the assessor’s ability to evaluate information and weakens the overall assessment process.

p.5

How well children and parents are protected and helped

The service requires improvement at how well children and parents are protected and helped.

p.5

How well children and parents are protected and helped

Since the centre was registered there are no incidents involving, restraint; child sexual exploitation; residents being reported as missing or behaviour that is deemed unacceptable or dangerous. Parents say they feel safe living at the centre. The manager and staff aim to provide a safe and supportive environment where families can have a positive experience. Staff spoken with during the inspection demonstrated a good understanding of child and adult protection practices and are trained to operate within safeguarding procedures. This is positive as it demonstrates that the team know what to do in the event of a concern.

p.5

How well children and parents are protected and helped

The current admissions process is not robust. The assessment of risk in relation to the impact of admissions is unclear. There is little evidence to show how the admission of families may impact on the risky behaviour of others. To date, this has not impacted on families. However, this weakens the effectiveness of the centre’s matching process and their ability to make well informed decisions about admissions.

p.6

How well children and parents are protected and helped

When admissions are made in an emergency, families do not consistently receive comprehensive information to ensure they understand why they have been placed, and how the assessment will be undertaken. Therefore, the quality of the admission process is inconsistent with some families having a formal induction while others haven’t received a copy of the welcome book. This means that families are not consistently welcomed into the centre in a sensitive manner.

p.6

How well children and parents are protected and helped

The overall quality of risk assessments are poor. Risks such as; self-harm, substance misuse and prescription management are not consistently identified and therefore strategies to manage such risks are not in place. While risk assessments are completed they are not routinely shared with the staff team or residents in order that they are appropriately monitored and reviewed. Consequently, the shortfalls in risk management serve to compromise the safety and wellbeing of those resident.

p.6

How well children and parents are protected and helped

Safe practice is followed in the recruitment and selection of staff with all pre- employment checks and references complete before any new staff members start their role. The manager adopts a robust procedure to ensure the thorough scrutiny of applicants prior to their employment in the centre. This helps prevent unsuitable people from having access to vulnerable young people.

p.6

Working with partners to improve outcomes

The service requires improvement for working with partners to improve outcomes.

p.6

Working with partners to improve outcomes

The centre does have links with health professionals such as the local GP, health visitors and psychologists, and regular visits are undertaken by the health visitor. This is positive because families can receive specialist support around health and development. However, evidence gathered at this inspection highlights that collaboration between the centre and health services requires improvement. For example, a recommended dose of infant gaviscon was tripled by staff with no record of this being discussed with a health professional; this is poor practice and fails to demonstrate that staff seek advice from relevant partners. A further shortfall relates to health plans. These do not include pertinent information essential to maintaining the health and wellbeing of those residing in the centre. Where medication is prescribed, details of how this is to be administered is confusing. This has the potential to compromise the health and wellbeing of children and their parents.

p.6

Working with partners to improve outcomes

Links with education and training providers are limited. A social worker commented: ‘Progress is slow. I have a very committed family who are not receiving the support we agreed to get them back into education or employment. It is disappointing.’ The education and training opportunities as detailed in the home’s Statement of Purpose are also limited. Currently, families are unable to access on-line courses because the home’s computer is broken. This seriously hinders the parents’ ability to progress and plan for their future.

p.7

Working with partners to improve outcomes

As noted earlier in this report some placing social workers commented that communication from the centre has not always been effective. That said, there is an acknowledgement that things have started to improve. Where shortfalls have been identified leaders and managers have started to implement changes to ensure the work undertaken with families is consistent and of a good standard. The newly appointed manager provides visible leadership. She is driven to improve the quality of the service and is working towards addressing the identified shortfalls. Some action has already been taken which demonstrates the centre’s capacity to improve.

p.7

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

The effectiveness of leaders and managers requires improvement

p.7

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

As noted, the centre was registered in September 2015 with a newly appointed Registered Manager. A wrap around support package was agreed at the point of the manager’s registration in the knowledge that this was a new venture and the manager would require support and guidance. The Registered Manager resigned from her post in December 2015. Senior managers confirm that the support package was not implemented by the organisation as planned. Since December, an experienced manager has been appointed and her application for registration has been received by Ofsted. She presents as skilful, knowledgeable and committed to improve the service.

p.7

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

Leaders and managers have not yet established sufficient quality assurance systems. Internal monitoring systems are in place but do not serve to strengthen the service provision. While some matters for development are identified they are not reviewed on a consistent basis. As a result, records in the home are not updated, reviewed or further developed in line with the plans set out for individual families. Furthermore, internal monitoring does not evaluate or provide a suitable analysis of the progress or developmental areas for the centre or families. This means there is no clear overview which compromises the future planning for the families and their children accessing the centre.

p.7

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

External monitoring also takes place on a regular basis. This monitoring identifies some areas for development and highlights specific actions for the manager to address. However, some reports highlight there are no concerns for matters such as staff supervision, though files had not been accessed. Likewise, there is insufficient analysis of the home’s practice in order for the report to be beneficial to the ongoing development of the centre. Furthermore, there have been no reports submitted to Ofsted since the centre’s registration. This is a clear breach in regulation.

p.7

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

Not all staff receive regular supervision. This means they have not had the opportunity to formally reflect upon their practice. Lack of professional supervision greatly hinders the manager’s ability to routinely monitor staff performance, competency and conduct. The manager is currently addressing this shortfall and is committed to getting things back on track.

p.8

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

The majority of staff have undertaken mandatory training in order to support their work within the centre. However, some staff have not undertaken essential training such as paediatric first aid and physical intervention training, contrary to the centre’s Statement of Purpose. This lack of training compromises both the staff and the families’ should an incident require these specific skills.

p.8

The effectiveness of leaders and managers

Since opening five members of staff have left the service. While steps are taken to bridge the gaps using staff from another centre, it is evident upon review of staff rotas that there are several occasions where the centre was not sufficiently staffed or lead by a senior worker. This practice demonstrates the inconsistencies that are threaded through the current service provision. Moving forward, the centre has now appointed a new staff team who are appropriately qualified and experienced. This is essential in order to develop and improve the service.

p.8

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.9

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 inspection framework and the evaluation schedule for the inspection of residential family centres.

p.9