New Leaf Adoption

New Leaf Adoption Inspection report for voluntary adoption agency

p.1

Unique reference number SC472828 Inspection date 20−24 February 2017 Inspector Ros Chapman Type of inspection Full Provision subtype Domestic adoption

p.1

Setting address 2a Railway Street, Pocklington, York YO42 2QZ

p.1

Telephone number 01759 303979 Email info@newleafadoption.co.uk Registered provider Iain Dickinson Agency manager Jane Bradley Responsible individual Iain Dickinson Date of last inspection 19/12/2014

p.1

Brief description of the service

New Leaf adoption agency was registered on 20 January 2014. It is a small, non- faith-based, stand-alone voluntary adoption agency. It recruits, prepares, assesses, approves and supports adopters for domestic adoption only, and works with local authorities to place children who need an adoptive family. Since April 2016, it has approved 10 adoptive families and placed 15 children with its adoptive families. There are nine prospective adoptive families currently being assessed/awaiting approval and six families are waiting for placements.

p.2

The inspection judgements and what they mean

Outstanding : An agency demonstrating and exceeding the characteristics of a good judgement where children and young people are making significantly better progress and achieving more than was expected in all areas of their lives. Good : An agency where children and young people, including those with the most complex needs, have their individual needs met and their welfare safeguarded and promoted. They make good progress and receive effective services so they achieve as well as they can in all areas of their lives. Requires improvement : An agency that may be compliant with regulations and observing the national minimum standards, but is not yet demonstrating the characteristics of a good judgement. It therefore requires improvement to be good. There may be failures to meet all regulations or national minimum standards, but these are not widespread or serious; all children’s and young people’s welfare is safeguarded

p.2

The inspection judgements and what they mean

and promoted. Inadequate : An agency where there are widespread or serious failures, which result in children and young people not having their welfare safeguarded and promoted.

p.2

Overall effectiveness

There are significant shortfalls in the quality of service provided, safeguarding and leadership and management. Although most adopters express a high level of satisfaction about the service that they receive, the deficits which underpin the structure of the service mean that the safety and well-being of children and positive outcomes cannot be assured. The agency does not comply with regulatory requirements during the assessment and approval of adopters. Although this has led to speedy assessments and approvals, these have not been robust, as not all the required checks have been undertaken. The adoption panel is not constituted correctly, and its challenge to the agency has been limited. Staff are not recruited in line with safe recruitment and vetting practices. These shortfalls do not support or promote a safe service. Significantly, the management, monitoring and oversight of the agency are poor.

p.2

Overall effectiveness

Decisions to support safe social work practice have not been taken in a timely way, resulting in a suspended and subsequently deregistered social worker continuing to play an active role in the adoption agency and carrying out some social work tasks. Poor and unsafe practice has gone unchallenged as the manager and social workers do not have the requisite knowledge and experience of adoption. Despite these shortfalls, children who have the most complex needs have been placed successfully with adoptive families. They have made good progress and have benefited from stable and secure family life. Most adopters feel well supported and speak highly of their social workers and support workers. Seven requirements have been made as a result of this inspection. These relate to the assessment and approval process of adopters, the functioning of the adoption panel and staff recruitment and vetting. In addition, a further nine recommendations

p.3

Overall effectiveness

have been made to improve practice. These relate to monitoring reports and monitoring, record-keeping and audits, panel members’ and staff recruitment, training and appraisal, and the children’s guide.

p.3

Statutory requirements

This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person(s) meet(s) the Care Standards Act 2000, the Voluntary Adoption Agencies and the Adoption Agencies (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2003, the Adoption Agencies Regulations 2005 and the national minimum standards. The registered person(s) must comply within the given timescales.

p.3

Requirement Due date

The adoption agency must prepare a written plan in consultation with the prospective adopter (‘the prospective adopter stage one plan’) which includes the following matters— (a) information about the counselling, information and preparation for adoption to be provided under regulation 24; (b) the procedure for carrying out police checks under regulation 25; (c) details of any training that the prospective adopter has agreed to undertake; (d) information about the role of the prospective adopter in the stage one process; (e) any applicable timescales; (f) information about the process for making a representation (including a complaint) under the 1989 regulations; and 30/04/2017 (g) any other information that the agency considers relevant. (‘Adoption agencies miscellaneous amendments regulations’, 2013, (regulation 22)) The adoption agency must: (a) obtain the information about the prospective adopter which is

p.3

Requirement Due date

specified in part 1 of schedule 4; (b) obtain a written report from a registered medical practitioner about the health of the prospective adopter, following a full examination, which must include the matters specified in part 2 of schedule 4, unless the agency has received advice from its medical adviser that such an examination and report is unnecessary; (c) obtain a written report of each of the interviews with the persons nominated by the prospective adopter to provide personal references for the prospective adopter; (d) where the adoption agency considers it necessary, obtain a personal reference from the prospective adopter’s former spouse, civil partner or partner; and (e) where it is not the local authority in whose area the prospective adopter has their home, ascertain whether the local authority in whose area the prospective adopter has their home has any information about the prospective adopter, which may be

p.4

Requirement Due date

relevant to an assessment of the prospective adopter’s suitability to adopt, and, if so, obtain from that authority a written report setting out that information. (‘Adoption agencies miscellaneous amendments regulations’, 2013, (regulation 26)) * 23/06/2017

p.4

Requirement Due date

The adoption agency must, taking into account the information obtained under regulations 25 and 26, decide— (a) whether the prospective adopter may be suitable to adopt a child; or (b) that the prospective adopter is not suitable to adopt a child. (4) Where the adoption agency decides that the prospective adopter may be suitable to adopt a child, the agency must— (a) as soon as practicable, notify in writing the prospective adopter of its decision; and (b) explain to the prospective adopter that they must notify the adoption agency that they wish to continue with the assessment process within six months of the date on which the notification is given. (5) Where the adoption agency decides that the prospective 30/04/2017 adopter is not suitable to adopt a child, the agency must as soon as practicable after making the decision notify the prospective adopter in writing of its decision together with reasons for its

p.4

Requirement Due date

decision. (‘Adoption agencies miscellaneous amendments regulations’, 2013, (regulation 27(1)(4)(5)) The adoption agency must prepare a written plan in consultation with the prospective adopter (‘the prospective adopter assessment plan’) which includes the following matters— (a) the procedure for assessing the prospective adopter’s suitability to adopt a child; (b) any applicable timescales; (c) the arrangements for the prospective adopter to receive any additional counselling or preparation for adoption; (d) details of any training that the prospective adopter has agreed to undertake; (e) information about the role of the prospective adopter in the assessment process; (f) information about the process for submitting representations or applying to the Secretary of State for a review under regulation 30B(5)(c); and (g) any other matters which the agency considers relevant. (‘Adoption agencies miscellaneous amendments regulations’, 2013,

p.5

Requirement Due date

An adoption agency must maintain a list of persons who are considered by it to be suitable to be members of an adoption panel (‘the central list’), including— (a) one or more social workers who have at least three years' relevant post-qualifying experience, and (b) the medical adviser to the adoption agency (or at least one if more than one medical adviser is appointed). (‘Adoption agencies and independent review of determination (amendment) regulations’, 2011, regulation 3(1)) 30/04/2017

p.5

Requirement Due date

The adoption agency must constitute one or more adoption panels, as necessary, to perform the functions of an adoption panel under these regulations (5) and must appoint the panel members from the persons in the central list, including— (a) a person to chair the panel, being an independent person, who has the skills and experience necessary for chairing an adoption 30/04/2017 panel; and (b) one or two persons who may act as chair if the person appointed to chair the panel is absent or that office is vacant (‘the vice chairs’). (‘Adoption agencies and independent review of determination (amendment) regulations’, 2011, regulation 4(1)(b)) 14(1) The registered provider, the manager and, in relation to any branch, the branch manager, shall not— (a) employ a person to work for the purposes of the agency unless that person is fit to work for the purposes of an agency; or (b) allow a person to whom paragraph (2) applies, to work for the

p.5

Requirement Due date

purposes of the agency unless that person is fit to work for the purposes of an agency. (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a person is not fit to work for the purposes of an agency unless— (a) he is of integrity and good character; (b) he has the qualifications, skills and experience necessary for the work he is to perform; (c) he is physically and mentally fit for the work he is to perform; and (d) full and satisfactory information is available in relation to him in respect of each of the matters specified in schedule 2. (‘Voluntary adoption agencies and adoption agencies regulations’, 2003, regulation 14(1)(3)) * 23/06/2017

p.6

Requirement Due date

*These requirements are subject to a statutory requirement notice.

p.6

Recommendations

To improve the quality and standards of care further, the service should take account of the following recommendations:

p.6

Recommendations

 Ensure that the adoption panel provides a quality assurance feedback to the agency every six months on the quality of reports being presented to the panel. This includes whether the requirements of the restrictions on the ‘Preparation of adoption reports regulations’, 2005, have been met and whether there is a thorough, rigorous, consistent and fair approach across the service in the assessment of whether a child should be placed for adoption, the suitability of prospective adopters and the proposed placement. (National minimum standard 17.2)  Ensure that the children’s guide to adoption support services contains information on how a child can find out their rights, how they can contact their independent reviewing officer, the children’s rights officer or Ofsted, if they wish to raise a concern with inspectors, and on how to secure access to an independent advocate. (National minimum standard 18.6)

p.6

Recommendations

 Ensure that the manager has on taking up the post: a. a recognised social work qualification or a professional qualification, at least at level 5, relevant to working with children, b. at least two years’ experience relevant to adoption within the past five years, c. at least one year’s experience supervising and managing professional staff, and d. in-depth knowledge and experience of childcare law and practice, and f. the adoption agency manager has a qualification in management at least at level 4 and, from January 2011, the level 5 diploma in leadership for health and social care and children and young people’s services. (National minimum standard 19.2)  Ensure that all people working in or for the purposes of the agency, and persons applying to be included on the central list, are interviewed as part of the selection process and have references checked to assess suitability before taking up their duties, and that telephone enquiries are made to each referee

p.7

Recommendations

to verify the written references. (National minimum standard 21.1)  Ensure that each person on the central list has access to appropriate training and skills development and is kept abreast of relevant changes to legislation, regulation and guidance. (National minimum standard 23.16)  Ensure that there are clear and effective procedures for monitoring and controlling the activities of the agency. This includes the financial viability of the service, any serious incidents, allegations or complaints about the service and ensuring quality of the agency. (National minimum standard 25.1)  Ensure that the voluntary adoption agency’s provider/trustees, board members or management committee members: − receive written reports on the management, outcomes and financial state of the agency every six months; − monitor the management and outcomes of the services in order to satisfy themselves that the agency is effective and is achieving good

p.7

Recommendations

outcomes for children and/or service users; and − satisfy themselves that the agency is complying with the conditions of registration. (National minimum standard 25.6)  Ensure that the agency has and implements a written policy that clarifies the purpose, format and content of the information to be kept on the agency’s files, on the child’s and prospective adopters’ case records. (National minimum standard 27.1)  Ensure that there is a system in place to monitor the quality and adequacy of record-keeping and take action when needed. (National minimum standard 27.2)

p.7

and young people

Since its registration, the agency has placed 41 children with its approved adoptive families. Most of these children are considered to be ‘harder to place’ by virtue of their age, their disability, their ethnicity or because they are being placed with their brothers and sisters. Quite remarkably, six brothers and sisters have been placed together in one adoptive family, offering them the opportunity of being brought up together and maintaining their identity. Some of the children placed have significant disabilities. Many are over five years old, and one child is 11. Given the complexities of these children, placement stability is very good. Only three of the 41 children placed have not remained with their adoptive families. Consequently, children who otherwise may not have had the chance to benefit from a stable and secure family life are having this opportunity. Children make good progress, physically, emotionally and socially, in their adoptive

p.8

and young people

families. One social worker said: ‘I was blown away with how well he had come on. There has been a massive improvement.’ Another social worker said: ‘The changes are unbelievable. He is coming on so well.’ Children settle and start to develop attachments. One adopter said of her child: ‘He has settled so well. He has come on in leaps and bounds.’ A child’s social worker also commented about a different child, saying: ‘He is doing fantastically well. He has settled really well.’ Children benefit from positive experiences with their adoptive families. They take part in family events, they start to make friends and they develop their skills and confidence by attending sports and leisure facilities, such as football clubs and dancing classes. Children maintain their sense of identity through positive and appropriate contact with their birth families. This is usually by means of ‘letterbox contact’. Adoptive

p.8

and young people

families are assisted to write letters and given training to enable them to understand the importance of sustaining this contact.

p.8

Quality of service

Adopters feel welcome when they contact New Leaf for the first time. They receive a speedy response to their enquiry, which includes an initial visit and written information. This enables them to explore whether adoption is right for them. Timescales for the preparation, assessment and approval of adopters are extremely quick. However, this is because the agency has not complied with the regulatory framework for stages one and two of the approval process. There are no stage one plans, and some of the actions that should take place in this stage are left until later in the process. For example, interviews with referees and medical assessments are not undertaken in stage one, although the regulations are clear that they must be. Prospective adopters are not told that they have successfully progressed from stage one, and there is no formal decision-making that the adopter can progress into stage two. Further shortfalls identified are that the adopters do not submit their formal

p.8

Quality of service

application, there are no stage two plans, stage two is started before the completion of stage one checks and, in some cases, not all required checks are undertaken or completed in a timely way. For example, not all the local authorities in which applicants have lived in the last 10 years are asked for information and, in some cases, there is no record of the outcome of these requests on file. In other cases, adopters are approved before the outcome of overseas checks are known and before the medical adviser has given her opinion about the suitability of a prospective adopter’s health history. Interviews with prospective adopters’ adult children and contact with adopters’ children’s schools appear, at times, to be after-thoughts, when such checks are vital to ensure the safety of children placed. The speed and lack of robustness result in prospective adopter reports that lack analysis and, in some cases, the required information to enable the adoption panel to make a sound and

p.9

Quality of service

safe recommendation of approval. This also means that adopters may be approved when further information may have cast doubt on their suitability to care for children. Some cases have had to be deferred due to lack of information. These shortfalls also call into question the rigour of the quality assurance process. There are a number of shortfalls in the functioning of the adoption panel, a mechanism designed to support safe adopter approval through its independence, checks and balances. The agency does not have an accurate central list of people who are able to sit as panel members. On occasions in the past, the agency has used members of staff to sit as panel members when there has been a shortfall in quoracy. These people have not been named on the central list. This breaches regulations, which are designed to ensure that panel members are appropriately recruited and selected for their expertise. There is no one appointed as vice chair in

p.9

Quality of service

the event that the chair of the panel is unavailable. The adoption panel does not comment on timescales or compliance with the restriction on the preparation of reports regulations. It has not provided a report to the agency on the agency’s performance to drive improvement. Panel members are committed and bring a range of personal and professional experience in adoption. Although there are times when they have deferred making a recommendation due to the quality of information, there are other times when their lack of knowledge about legal requirements, such as quoracy and panel membership, have not led to challenge. Panel members have not had an appraisal in 2016, and there is no evidence of their training. Consequently, their competence as panel members has not been formally assessed. The minutes of the adoption panel meeting reflect the discussion and reasons for the recommendation. However, they are not sent to all the panel members to agree as

p.9

Quality of service

final minutes prior to being sent to the agency decision-maker. Therefore, the decision-maker cannot be assured that these are fully accurate. The agency decision- maker makes the decision in good time, taking into account the relevant information and the draft panel minutes. Adopters are well supported to make an informed judgement about whether they can meet the needs of the children whom they are considering. A child’s social worker commented: ‘New Leaf definitely helped them understand the implications. I could see they had had those discussions.’ The agency ensures that adopters receive full information, and it supports them in meeting with children’s social workers and their attendance at life appreciation days. Adopters do not feel pressured to take a child whose needs they may not be able to meet, and they are able to say no. They are also supported in introductions. This consideration and support contribute to

p.9

Quality of service

placement stability and positive outcomes. Most adopters feel well supported. One adopter said: ‘I have been supported really well. My social worker is absolutely amazing, practical and hands on. There is nothing else she could do. She actively listened to us.’ All adopters have an allocated parenting worker who works alongside the social worker, to provide direct work to children and families, particularly in relation to using recognised techniques to promote attachment. Adopters said that this has been very helpful and, in some cases, it has sustained placements. A child’s social worker reinforced this, saying of the support worker: ‘I am impressed with the lengths he has gone to to support the placement. He has used a wealth of knowledge to get them to where they need to be.’ There are also social events, additional training and a newsletter, to keep adopters informed of what is on offer. One adopter commented about the training,

p.10

Quality of service

saying: ‘It has helped absolutely. New Leaf are good at providing training opportunities, which are practical and tailored to where we are at. They are good at accommodating you and getting things you need.’ In contrast, one adopter was less than satisfied with the support that the family received, describing the workers as ‘unprofessional and inexperienced.’

p.10

Safeguarding children and young people

There are serious failings in the recruitment and vetting of staff and panel members. The agency has not assured itself that people employed to work for the agency are suitable and safe to do so. For example, the last employer has not consistently been contacted, not all staff have two references, none of the references appears to have been verified and some files contain no proof of identity. In one case, the application form and references had been falsified. Not all panel members have two references or Disclosure and Barring Service checks. Non-compliance with statutory requirements to assure the suitability of staff is a significant issue that calls into question the commitment of the agency to promote safe practice. The agency has the necessary policies and procedures to underpin safeguarding practice, which include historical abuse, children missing from home, extremism and sexual exploitation. Staff have had recent training in safeguarding and are aware of

p.10

Safeguarding children and young people

their responsibilities. One issue of concern had been appropriately referred to the relevant safeguarding agencies and challenged when the response was slow. Adopters demonstrate a good understanding of the impact of abuse and trauma on ways in which their children may react and behave. This enables them to respond in a way that supports the development of attachments. The initial training gives them a good grounding in these issues, and further training supports the development of their knowledge and understanding, such as training on empathic parenting. They are also made aware of the risks from social media and of how to protect their children from these risks. The agency has a complaints procedure, which has been used on one occasion in the last year. Although this complaint has not been satisfactorily resolved, the agency uses complaints and feedback to try to improve its services. Children have

p.10

Safeguarding children and young people

information in the children’s guide about how to complain.

p.11

Leadership and management

There have been significant shortfalls in the leadership and management of the agency in the last year. The responsible individual has failed to act promptly and with sufficient rigour in response to concerning information about the co-director’s suitability to practise as a social worker. He failed to notify the board of governors when the issue first came to light, with the result that governors were unable to exercise their role in providing an additional tier of advice and guidance. He did not show sufficient oversight in ensuring that the co-director ceased to undertake social work tasks during a period of suspension and subsequent removal from the register of social workers. This has potentially left adopters and children at risk because of poor social work practice carried out by someone no longer registered as a social worker. The adoption manager has similarly failed to exercise the necessary oversight of the

p.11

Leadership and management

agency. The serious shortfalls in the quality of service have not been challenged effectively, and the quality assurance of work has been poor. The manager does not have the necessary knowledge, experience or qualifications to provide the required advice, guidance and support to the social work staff. She has been hampered in this by the previous manager, who was also the co-director, remaining in situ and continuing to play an active role in the running of the service. The co-director has now resigned, leaving the responsible individual as the sole director of the agency. He, along with the board of governors, is fully aware of the actions that they now need to take to ensure that the service is safe. They are committed to making the necessary improvements that are required to promote safe and secure outcomes for adopted children and young people. The board of governors acknowledges that it should have been more visible and its governance should have

p.11

Leadership and management

been stronger. Although governors met quarterly with the directors, they did not receive written reports on the functioning of the agency in order to assure themselves that the agency was effective and achieving positive outcomes in line with its conditions of registration. This limited their ability to provide effective challenge. The agency has been successful in recruiting adopters nationwide. One disadvantage of offering a nationwide service is the potential impact on time constraints because of the distance that social workers and support workers have to travel to see adopters, both for the assessment and for support. The agency is not a member of the local consortium, which limits its understanding and knowledge of the needs and requirements of local authorities that are closer to home. It also limits the sharing of information and learning with other adoption agencies. Monitoring and evaluation of the service to drive improvement have not been

p.11

Leadership and management

systematic or robust. Adopters’ views are currently only canvassed after training, rather than used as a means of identifying where improvements should be made. There has not been the necessary monitoring of day-to-day practice or record- keeping. This could have led to the identification of some of the shortfalls highlighted in this report. There is no report to demonstrate that the service has been reviewed and evaluated in order to identify where improvements need to be made. There is a small staff team, comprising three social workers, two support workers and an administrative worker. Adopters speak highly of individual workers, describing them as ‘fantastic’, ‘brilliant’, ‘very supportive’, and, ‘only a phone call away’. However, although they are appropriately qualified, their knowledge and experience of adoption are limited. This may have affected their ability to challenge and question someone whom they perceived as being very knowledgeable.

p.12

Leadership and management

Five recommendations to improve practice were made at the last inspection in December 2014. These related to developing a policy on record-keeping, file audits, panel minutes, supervision records and information in the children’s guide. Although there has been some effort to address these, this has been ineffective in three areas. Record-keeping remains poor. Despite there being a policy, staff have not implemented this in practice. Important information, such as the notes of adopter assessment visits and interviews with referees, is shredded and not maintained in the case file. Information which should be on a case file is, at times, contained within emails, which are not accessible to other people, including children or adopters wishing to access their case records. File audits, although carried out occasionally, have not been effective in improving practice. The children’s guides do not contain information about independent advocacy and how to contact their independent

p.12

Leadership and management

reviewing officer. These three recommendations have, therefore, been repeated. Supervision records are now signed and dated, and panel minutes now record the reason for the recommendation, so those two recommendations are met.

p.12

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, to consider how well it complies with the relevant regulations and meets the national minimum standards and to support services to improve.

p.13

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 voluntary adoption agencies.

p.13