Other · Ofsted report
Setting
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
- Postcode verified
RG40 1WQ
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.
Reads more critically than most reports of this type.
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.
Next steps
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
- However, there are some examples of initial and core assessments which are of satisfactory or better quality. Some initial assessments are signed off prematurely by managers in order to meet timescales. p.2
- In addition, individual assessments are not consistently completed for each child within sibling groups. Thresholds for assessment and services for children in need are not consistently applied. Case recording is not consistently up to date and does not always report the activity which has taken place. p.2
- Case records do not consistently demonstrate casework supervision and direction. The views of children and their families are not consistently taken into account in assessments or service delivery. The identity, ethnicity, religion and cultural needs of children and their p.2
- There is insufficient live access to the system for the out of hours social work service. p.2
- The council recognises this and plans to implement a new electronic recording system later this year. Performance monitoring arrangements of case work practice have only recently been established and are at a basic stage. p.2
- Further development relies upon the implementation of the new electronic recording system later this year. There are limited numbers of experienced permanent social workers and managers and a continuing over-reliance upon agency staff. p.2
- This visit has identified the following area(s) for priority action. p.3
- Therefore the council does not have a sufficient overview of frontline practice and managers are not able effectively to monitor the quality of the service that is delivered to children and their families. Previously poor assessment of child protection risk has led, in some instances, to premature case closure. p.3
What the report dwells on
Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.
Anatomy of the report
How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.
- Pages
- 3
- Words of findings
- 838
- shorter than usual (typical 1049)
- Reading level
- Very hard
- Flesch 20, typical 45
- Average sentence
- 26 words
- Next steps
- 8
- typical 5
- Hedged sentences
- 16%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Ms Heather Thwaites Interim Director of Children’s Services Wokingham Borough Council PO Box 156 Shute End Wokingham Berkshire RG40 1WQ
p.1
assessment arrangements within Wokingham Borough Council
This letter contains the findings of the recent unannounced inspection of contact, referral and assessment arrangements within local authority children’s services in Wokingham Borough Council which was conducted on 2 and 3 September 2009. The inspection was carried out under section 138 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. It will contribute to Ofsted’s annual review of the performance of the authority’s children’s services, for which Ofsted will award a rating later in the year. The inspection identified two areas for priority action and a number of areas for development, which are detailed below. The inspection sampled the quality and effectiveness of contact, referral and assessment arrangements and their impact on minimising the incidence of child abuse and neglect. Inspectors considered a range of evidence, including: electronic case records; supervision files and notes; observation of social workers and senior
p.1
assessment arrangements within Wokingham Borough Council
practitioners undertaking referral and assessment duties; and other information provided by staff and managers. Inspectors also spoke to a range of staff including managers, social workers, other practitioners and administrative staff. I am grateful to you and your staff for your help and the time given during this inspection.
p.1
assessment arrangements within Wokingham Borough Council
From the evidence gathered, the inspection identified a number of areas where the contact, referral and assessment arrangements were delivered satisfactorily in accordance with national guidance, in particular:
p.1
assessment arrangements within Wokingham Borough Council
The very recently established referral and assessment team is managing the risk of harm to children referred to the service appropriately. Child protection practice and procedures are compliant with statutory requirements. In particular, recent child protection strategy meetings are timely and robust. Freshford House Redcliffe Way Bristol BS1 6NL T 08456 40 40 40 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk Direct T 0117 9456448 Direct F 0117 9456554 Lac.safeguarding@ofsted.gov.uk Child protection enquiries are timely and are carried out by suitably experienced social workers. Communication and inter-agency working between statutory partners are effective and well established. Support and training including that provided to those who are newly qualified, are highly regarded by frontline staff. There is recent evidence of improvements in the timeliness of initial and core assessments which is now satisfactory.
p.1
assessment arrangements within Wokingham Borough Council
From the evidence gathered, the following strengths and areas for development were also identified:
p.2
Strengths
Capacity in frontline services has been strengthened through the provision of substantial additional resources. In particular a new electronic recording and performance management system has been commissioned and social care management capacity has been improved. Frontline caseloads are low and are supporting recent improvements in assessments and service delivery.
p.2
Areas for development
Some assessments are not sufficiently analytical and do not have clear service recommendations and specific and measurable action plans. However, there are some examples of initial and core assessments which are of satisfactory or better quality. Some initial assessments are signed off prematurely by managers in order to meet timescales. In addition, individual assessments are not consistently completed for each child within sibling groups. Thresholds for assessment and services for children in need are not consistently applied. Case recording is not consistently up to date and does not always report the activity which has taken place. Case records do not consistently demonstrate casework supervision and direction. The views of children and their families are not consistently taken into account in assessments or service delivery. The identity, ethnicity, religion and cultural needs of children and their
p.2
Areas for development
families are not always appropriately considered in assessment and planning. The current electronic recording system is outdated and does not store information securely. There is insufficient live access to the system for the out of hours social work service. The council recognises this and plans to implement a new electronic recording system later this year. Performance monitoring arrangements of case work practice have only recently been established and are at a basic stage. Further development relies upon the implementation of the new electronic recording system later this year. There are limited numbers of experienced permanent social workers and managers and a continuing over-reliance upon agency staff.
p.2
Areas for development
This visit has identified the following area(s) for priority action.
p.3
Area(s) for priority action
Arrangements for the internal quality assurance of case work practice are not established. Therefore the council does not have a sufficient overview of frontline practice and managers are not able effectively to monitor the quality of the service that is delivered to children and their families. Previously poor assessment of child protection risk has led, in some instances, to premature case closure. The potential safeguarding concerns about these cases have yet to be addressed.
p.3
Area(s) for priority action
The areas for priority action identified above will be specifically considered in any future inspection of services to safeguard children within your area.
p.3
Area(s) for priority action
Heather Brown Divisional Manager, Social Care Safeguarding
p.3
Area(s) for priority action
Copy: Ms Susan Law, Chief Executive, Wokingham Borough Council Mr Stephen Barber, Chair of Wokingham Safeguarding Children Board Mr Rob Stanton, Lead Member for Children’s Services, Wokingham Borough Council Mr Andrew Spencer, Department for Children, Schools and Families
p.3
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion