365 Foster Care

Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 1 365 Foster Care

p.1

8 Orgarswick Avenue, Dymchurch, Kent TN29 0PA Monitoring visit Inspected under the social care common inspection framework

p.1

Information about this independent fostering agency

365 Foster Care is a privately owned fostering agency based in Dymchurch, Kent. At the time of this monitoring visit 10 active fostering households were providing placements for nine children and young people.

p.1

Information about this independent fostering agency

Date of previous inspection: 2 October 2017

p.1

This monitoring visit

This monitoring visit was carried out following the agency being judged inadequate at the last inspection on 2 October 2017. At that inspection, 12 requirements and 22 recommendations were issued.

p.1

This monitoring visit

Six compliance notices were issued from that inspection, and the purpose of this monitoring inspection was to examine the progress made against each of these.

p.1

This monitoring visit

Two social care regulatory inspectors conducted this inspection over two days. A significant number of the steps required to meet the notices have not been met. This finding questions the fitness of the agency in terms of its ability to provide safe and competent care for children.

p.1

(Regulation 8 (1) (b))

The particular steps required were to ensure that the registered person has the necessary skills and understanding of their safeguarding and regulatory roles, and that an audit is undertaken to identify and address any gaps in their knowledge. In addition, the registered person is to maintain an oversight of all aspects of the agency, with sufficient knowledge of the foster carers and the children that the agency supports. The registered person is to ensure that staff and foster carers understand the objectives of the agency and are provided with regular, good-quality Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 2 supervision.

p.1

(Regulation 8 (1) (b))

Since the last inspection, the provider has terminated the manager’s employment; hence, the overall responsibility for the operation of the agency currently lies with the responsible individual. The agency has failed to undertake an appropriate audit in relation to the skills, and gaps in the knowledge, within the leadership and management team. There are no systems in place to drive improvement, and the agency does not have a development plan. The responsible individual does not have a good overview of the service, and has little knowledge of actual safeguarding incidents that have occurred. The supervision of staff is of poor quality. Consequently, there has been a failure by the responsible individual to act on widespread failures across the agency, or to address shortfalls in respect of the safety and welfare of children, and make the necessary improvements.

p.2

(Regulation 11(a))

The particular steps required were to ensure that an audit of the safeguarding training for staff and foster carers is undertaken, and to produce a training plan which addresses any identified gaps. Also, steps are to be taken to ensure that risk assessments are in place for each child which provide clear guidance to foster carers with regards to keeping children safe. The provider is to ensure that all matching considerations are reviewed by a manager or appropriately trained and qualified staff member, and are based on sufficient referral information. The provider should also ensure that matching tools demonstrate that the foster carer is compatible and sufficiently knowledgeable, and is able to safeguard the child’s welfare. This includes identifying any gaps and detailing how these are to be addressed.

p.2

(Regulation 11(a))

At this monitoring visit, the responsible individual told the inspectors that an audit of safeguarding training for staff and foster carers has taken place, but she was unable to provide evidence of this. The current training matrix indicated that no such audit has occurred. Some piecemeal training has happened. For example, one foster carer has been provided with one-to-one training in relation to safeguarding issues by her supervising social worker, and two foster carers have attended de-escalation training. However, one fostering household has provided a placement to a mother with drug-related issues, and her baby. These foster carers have not been highlighted as requiring training in relation to caring for a parent and child, or training which raises their awareness of drug-related behaviour. The agency’s failure to conduct the required audit leaves some fostering households continuing to be vulnerable in terms of their ability to provide safe and competent care.

p.2

(Regulation 11(a))

The agency has developed a new matching tool, and the matching process is now overseen by an appropriately qualified member of staff. However, one foster carer was unaware of the allergies pertaining to a child recently placed with her, despite this being detailed in the matching tool. Information in relation to this child Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 3 demonstrates a high risk of him going missing, and while the agency’s missing-from- care policy has been updated, the responsible individual failed to provide evidence of training or guidance being provided to the foster carers in relation to this risk. Risk assessments were not carried out at the point of the child being placed; thus, the foster carers have not been provided with the necessary guidance to keep the child safe.

p.2

(Regulation 11(a))

Children’s risk assessments have not been updated since the last inspection. Risk management strategies remain rudimentary and do not provide foster carers with sufficient information about how to reduce risk or prevent further harm. This is exacerbated by the agency’s failure to ensure that staff and foster carers undertake the necessary safeguarding training. As a result, the agency has failed to fully identify the risks to children, or effectively intervene in order to keep them safe.

p.3

(Regulation 12(1)(a)(b))

The particular steps were to undertake a review of the agency’s safeguarding policies and procedures, and to ensure that managers, staff and foster carers have sufficient knowledge of these, with evidence of how their competency has been assessed. Safeguarding concerns are to be escalated to appropriate professionals, with detailed recordings of the actions taken by the agency in relation to these. The agency is to ensure that specific risk assessments are undertaken, and that these are appropriately reviewed. When children go missing, they should be given the opportunity to receive an independent return home interview, and the agency should evidence challenge of the local authority when this has not happened.

p.3

(Regulation 12(1)(a)(b))

Safeguarding policies and procedures have been reviewed by managers and social workers. Consequently, this guidance now provides clear information about the processes designed to keep children safe. While there have been no instances requiring the escalation of safeguarding concerns to appropriate professionals, guidance has been developed in the event of this occurring.

p.3

(Regulation 12(1)(a)(b))

The reviewed safeguarding policies and procedures have not been cascaded to foster carers and other staff members, rendering these individuals ill-equipped to reduce or respond to any prevalent risks to children. The competency of managers, staff and foster carers has not been assessed. Consequently, foster carers continue to lack the necessary knowledge and skills to identify and assess the risks, resulting in failure to implement appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures to protect the children.

p.3

(Regulation 12(1)(a)(b))

Children’s risk assessments have not been updated since the last inspection. In the case of one child who is at significant risk of sexual exploitation, going missing and self-harming behaviours, the agency’s lack of action continues to leave this child vulnerable to further exploitation and harm. Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 4 One foster carer’s adult son and his dog have stayed in the foster carer’s home for an extended period of time; however, no risk assessment of the man or his dog has been undertaken. The agency is unaware of the breed of the animal or its propensity to cause harm, resulting in a potential significant risk to children placed.

p.3

(Regulation 12(1)(a)(b))

There have been no incidents of children going missing since the last inspection; hence, there was no opportunity at this inspection to assess actions taken in relation to return home interviews.

p.4

(Regulation 17 (1) (2) (3))

The particular steps were to identify the necessary competencies and skills required for foster carers to care for vulnerable children with complex needs, by conducting a skills audit and review of all foster carers’ understanding and training needs in relation to their caring role and safeguarding responsibilities. An action plan is to be devised to identify any gaps in this regard, and to include the dates of any training arranged. In addition, the agency is to ensure that each foster carer has a personal development plan that identifies their particular training needs and how these are to be met. Training needs are to be discussed in each foster carer or staff member’s supervision, and monitoring systems put in place to provide an accurate overview of foster carers’ training. This will ensure that leaders and managers have an oversight of foster carers’ training, including second carers and those who are hard to reach.

p.4

(Regulation 17 (1) (2) (3))

The inspectors found that no audit of the competencies and skills of any foster carers had been undertaken. No audit or review of foster carers’ understanding and training needs in relation to their caring role and safeguarding responsibilities had been conducted. Foster carers do not have personal development plans, and the agency is unable to demonstrate that training needs are discussed as part of the supervision process. There are no systems in place for leaders and managers to monitor the training needs of foster carers, nor are there any measures in place to ensure that training is accessible to second and hard-to-reach foster carers.

p.4

(Regulation 17 (1) (2) (3))

Since the last inspection, two foster carers have attended de-escalation training. One foster carer has received one-to-one training in relation to self-harming behaviour. The agency’s training policy outlines a number of courses with dates for foster carers to attend, but there is no measure in place to ensure that carers undertake any of the training identified. Since the last inspection, no other training has taken place. Figures show that:

p.4

(Regulation 17 (1) (2) (3))

47% of foster carers have not undertaken training in positive behaviour.  62% of foster carers have not completed first aid training.  62% of foster carers have not completed the training, support and development standards. Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 5  80% of foster carers have not undertaken any training in child sexual exploitation. These include foster carers who care for children who regularly go missing.

p.4

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

The particular steps were to ensure that all managers and staff involved in the recruitment of staff complete safer recruitment training, that a review of the agency’s recruitment policy and procedures is undertaken, and that managers and staff involved in the recruitment processes have sufficient knowledge of the recruitment checks that are required by regulation. Other steps are to review all recruitment files of staff employed since September 2016, ensuring that all required recruitment checks are in place, and that steps are taken to ensure that a risk assessment is in place and actions taken to safeguard children until all such checks are obtained. The agency must ensure that all checks are completed prior to employing any new member of staff. All staff members must have a clear job description, and the agency should identify the competencies and skills necessary for staff members to carry out their respective job role and functions. Unqualified staff

p.5

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

members’ practice is to be overseen by an appropriately qualified member of staff, and all staff should receive regular supervision.

p.5

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

At the last inspection, significant and widespread failures in the agency’s recruitment processes and practice were identified, and during this monitoring inspection, the inspectors found that few of the steps had been taken to address these shortfalls. The manager, who has since left, had completed safer recruitment training, and a review of the agency’s recruitment policy and procedures had been undertaken. Despite this, no other steps had been taken to remedy the identified failures, and un-vetted staff remain employed by the agency. These include support workers, independent assessors, administrative staff, the placement officer, drivers and panel members. This is contrary to the agency’s reviewed recruitment policy and procedures, and continues to be in breach of regulations. One staff member who is currently working within the agency to cover administration and placement officer duties does not have a recruitment file, and told the inspectors that she is not

p.5

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

employed by the agency. There are no risk assessments in place for her, or for other staff where the necessary checks have not been obtained. One person employed to transport children by car does not have a DBS check, and the evidence obtained demonstrates that the agency does not have documentation detailing this person’s legal name.

p.5

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

The agency failed to demonstrate that all staff members receive supervision or sufficient oversight of their practice.

p.5

(Regulation 20(1)(a)(2)(a)(b)(c))

No evidence was provided to demonstrate that all staff recruitment files have been reviewed since the relevant compliance notice was issued, and the remaining Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 6 shortfalls are those that were identified at the last inspection.

p.5

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

The particular steps were to design and implement systems to monitor children’s experiences and progress, including how regularly children’s and foster carers’ files should be reviewed. An action plan is to be provided identifying how shortfalls in a child’s care will be addressed. The plan will include timeframes and details of when each action will be reviewed, which will evidence how the actions taken have improved the individual experiences of children. Systems designed to monitor and review all aspects of the service are to be implemented, in addition to the action plan which identifies how shortfalls will be addressed, including the timeframes for the review of the actions identified. The agency is to carry out consultation with children, foster carers and any other stakeholders, including a record of the feedback received and how this has been acted on.

p.6

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

At this monitoring visit, evidence provided demonstrated that leaders and managers have not developed systems which enable them to monitor the quality of care provided to children, and have not devised an action plan identifying shortfalls and the actions to be taken to address these. The agency did not provide a record of feedback or evidence of consultation with children, foster carers and other stakeholders. The agency did not provide evidence demonstrating a robust overview of service delivery, children’s experiences, and progress, and did not provide evidence of actions taken to improve these.

p.6

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

There was evidence to demonstrate that a detailed review by managers and social workers had taken place in relation to one young person, however no further evidence was provided to demonstrate if any of the identified shortfalls had been addressed. The responsible individual informed inspectors that the manager had not undertaken any file audits, despite requests to do so. The responsible individual stated that she undertakes audits of foster carers and children’s files on a quarterly basis, but there was no evidence found of this occurring.

p.6

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

A draft regulation 35 report was provided to the inspectors. The responsible individual explained that she had asked the manager to complete this report, but that he had not done so adequately, which resulted in her compiling the report herself. The report was weak and did not provide a thorough evaluation of the quality of the service provided, and did not include consultation with or feedback from children who are supported by the agency. Areas for improvement were not identified, and the report did not demonstrate a robust overview and knowledge of the service.

p.6

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

The lack of effective monitoring systems and oversight by leaders and managers has resulted in inadequate practices, and safeguarding concerns not being acted on. The Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 7 responsible individual was unaware that risk assessments for the children the agency supports have not been reviewed, nor the extent to which gaps in foster carers’ knowledge and training were prevalent. The responsible individual demonstrated little knowledge of the children in placement or any of prevalent safeguarding issues. She was unaware of the risks posed to a child recently placed, and maintained that risk assessments were to be completed at the placement planning meeting which was to take place one week after the child was placed. Given the child’s pre- disposition to going missing, his allergies and his risk of offending behaviour, it is extremely concerning that a risk assessment was not devised at the point of

p.6

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

placement in order to provide the carers with strategies and guidance in relation to keeping the child safe at such a vulnerable time.

p.7

(Regulation 35(1)(a)(b)(2)(3))

The significant failings of the provider and the responsible individual to carry out their roles and responsibilities in line with the Fostering Services (England) Regulations 2011 raise serious questions about the fitness of this agency.

p.7

Conclusion:

Since the last inspection, the appointed manager is no longer employed by the fostering agency.

p.7

Conclusion:

The provider has failed to meet or make significant progress against the compliance notices by the time of this monitoring inspection, which is of serious concern. Consequently, Ofsted is now considering further enforcement action. Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 8

p.7

Information about this inspection

The purpose of this visit was to monitor the action taken and the progress made by the independent fostering agency since its last Ofsted inspection.

p.8

Information about this inspection

This inspection was carried out under the Care Standards Act 2000.

p.8

Independent fostering agency details

Registered provider address: 8 Orgarswick Avenue, Dymchurch, Kent TN29 0PA

p.8

Inspectors:

Jacqueline Georghiou, social care inspector Helen Lee, social care inspector Inspection report for independent fostering agencies - monitoring: 365 Foster Care 9 to achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of all ages. It regulates and inspects childcare and children’s social care, and inspects the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, further education and skills, adult and community learning, and education and training in prisons and other secure establishments. It assesses council children’s services, and inspects services for looked after children, safeguarding and child protection.

p.8

Inspectors:

If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille, please telephone 0300 123 1231, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk . You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence , write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk .

p.9

Inspectors:

Interested in our work? You can subscribe to our monthly newsletter for more information and updates: http://eepurl.com/iTrDn .

p.9

Inspectors:

T: 0300 123 1231 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 E: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk W: http://www.gov.uk/ofsted

p.9