Kent – Swale 4 Children’s Centre Group

Kent – Swale 4 Children’s Centre Group Hilton Drive, Sittingbourne, ME10 1PT

p.1

This inspection: Requires improvement 3

Previous inspection: Not previously inspected Access to services by young children and families Requires improvement 3 The quality of practice and services Requires improvement 3 The effectiveness of leadership, governance and management Requires improvement 3

p.1

This children's centre group requires improvement. It is not good because:

 Despite registrations increasing, not enough priority families are accessing services regularly and the centre has not yet looked hard enough at why this is.  The take-up of free education by eligible two-year-olds living in Grove Park’s reach area is not at the high level seen in Woodgrove.  The use of services available to improve adults’ education and training, particularly for those who are workless, is too low, and developing partnerships in support of this work have yet to have an impact.  There is limited follow-up of how well adults get on when they are signposted to courses in order to check the longer-term impact of the group’s work in supporting their economic well-being.  The district advisory board and local steering group are supportive, but their checks on the group’s performance are not sharp enough; currently, too few parents are actively involved in their decision- making.

p.1

This children’s centre group has the following strengths:

 The group’s work to help children prepare for school is of good quality and assists their learning and development. A higher proportion of children achieve a good level of development by the end of the Early Years Foundation Stage than is seen nationally.  Family support work is a strength. The group’s partnerships with different agencies ensure that joined-up, timely help is available to families, particularly in times of crisis. One parent’s comment is typical: ‘The staff are always there for you and have helped my family in becoming stronger.’  Despite not having a specific forum, the parents’ voice is captured effectively by a range of means. Parents’ comments are valued; they are displayed prominently and demonstrate that families are very satisfied with the services offered.  Staff work hard and with determination and leaders have a clear view of strengths and areas for development. The group has been well managed during a very challenging year when Woodgrove

p.1

This children’s centre group has the following strengths:

was faced with closure. Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 2 of 8

p.1

Information about this inspection

The inspection of this children’s centre was carried out under Part 3A of the Childcare Act 2006, as amended by the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009. The centres that form part of this children’s centre group are Grove Park and Woodgrove.

p.2

Information about this inspection

This inspection was carried out by three additional inspectors.

p.2

Information about this inspection

The inspectors held meetings with the centre manager, local authority officers, local steering group and district advisory board members, staff, partners, parents and volunteers.

p.2

Information about this inspection

The inspectors undertook a number of shared observations at both centres, such as ‘Come and Play’, with the group manager. They looked at the group’s view of its own performance, the development plan, the annual conversation report, a sample of the group’s practice, policies and procedures concerning safeguarding, a selection of case studies and a wide range of other relevant documentation.

p.2

Inspection team

Lead inspector, Christine Field Additional inspector Aileen King Additional inspector Anthony Mundy Additional inspector Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 3 of 8

p.2

Information about the group

Kent – Swale 4 Children’s Centre Group has two centres which opened in 2009: Grove Park and Woodgrove. The group is run by the local authority and has a local steering group comprising staff, parents and partners who provide governance. The Swale 4 staff team works with a range of partners to deliver the services that the group provides. The manager oversees both centres and has temporary oversight of two other centres which form part of a network of ten children’s centres, subject to separate inspections. The district advisory board undertakes a strategic role for the ten children’s centres in this part of Kent.

p.3

Information about the group

Grove Park children’s centre has 1,022 children under the age of five years living in the reach area and is located on the site of Grove Park Primary School (URN:138151). Woodgrove children’s centre has 965 children under the age of five years living in the reach area and is located on the site of Westlands Primary School (URN:136270) which is part of Westlands Academies Trust. The group’s catchment area includes 14 primary schools, one secondary school and 20 early years’ settings. Children typically enter early years provision at levels below those expected for their age.

p.3

Information about the group

Swale is identified as being the second most deprived district in Kent. The areas served by the group include a mix of urban neighbourhoods and rural villages, some of which fall within the 30% most deprived nationally. There is a high level of social housing in the local neighbourhoods and in the more isolated rural communities such as Newington. Around a fifth of families are in receipt of out-of-work benefits. Most families are of White British heritage, with African, Polish, other Eastern European and Asian families moving into the area. There are also well-established Traveller sites at Murston and Iwade.

p.3

Information about the group

The centre has identified its main priority groups as families living in the most deprived neighbourhoods, minority ethnic families, teenage parents, fathers, and workless families.

p.3

Information about the group

Woodgrove children’s centre was faced with closure but following consultations held during 2013 it is being kept open. The delivery, staffing and management of children’s centres in Kent are currently under review as part of the county’s 2013–16 strategy.

p.3

Information about the group

Schools and registered early years providers are subject to separate inspection arrangements. Reports can be found at http://ofsted.gov.uk Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 4 of 8

p.3

What does the group need to do to improve further?

 Increase the engagement of minority ethnic families, fathers and workless families throughout the group’s reach area, and of all families living in the most deprived neighbourhoods, so that the large majority regularly access appropriate services.  Work with the local authority and early years partners to increase the take-up of free education by eligible two-year-olds living in Grove Park’s reach area.  Press ahead with developing key partnerships to increase the take-up of adult learning services that enhance education, skills and employability, particularly by workless parents; and keep a close check on how well participants get on when they undertake courses.  With the local authority, enhance the work of the district advisory board and local steering group in looking critically at how well the group is performing, by injecting challenge into decision-making, holding the group to account for meeting its priority targets and ensuring that parents living in the

p.4

What does the group need to do to improve further?

group’s reach areas are fully represented on both.

p.4

Inspection judgements

Access to services by young children and families Requires improvement

p.4

Inspection judgements

 At 65%, the large majority of families with young children, including from minority ethnic backgrounds and in the most deprived neighbourhood of Woodgrove, are registered with the group. All young and teenage parents are registered but only a minority of fathers.  Registration rates are increasing but only a minority of families from all priority groups regularly access services. The outreach services at Newington are attended well by families across priority groups, and managers are keen to use this model to widen access to families living a distance away from the centres and to attract those not yet engaging with the group’s services.  Nine out of ten eligible two-year-olds living in the Woodgrove reach area take up their entitlement to early education, but this drops to six out of ten children in the Grove Park reach area. This means that too many children are not benefitting from additional education to help their learning

p.4

Inspection judgements

and development. Both centres are usefully developing specific work with early years partners to help children’s achievement, such as by putting on the ‘Stepping Stones’ programme, which is well planned, closely tracks children’s progress and successfully assists their readiness for school.  The partnership with health is strong, and the high level of immunisation (95%) is one indicator that families are in regular contact with this service. There is close contact with expectant mothers and midwives visit the vast majority of parents within the first ten days of a new birth. Health clinics and children’s development checks held at both centres are helping to improve the numbers from some of the key groups who access services, but this is not yet to the level required.  The number of individual families referred to the centres for one-to-one support is increasing significantly, and the most vulnerable children and families engage well across the group.

p.4

Inspection judgements

The quality of practice and services Requires improvement

p.4

Inspection judgements

 The quality of practice and services requires improvement because the engagement rate of some target groups is too low. Although there is a wide range of services and an appropriate balance of targeted services with those open to all, leaders have not yet looked hard enough into why too few families from target groups attend.  The group has prioritised the need to enhance the provision made for adult learning and skills development, but the pace of improvement stalled last year, with relatively low attendance rates at family English and mathematics courses. The growing partnership with ‘Doorstep Learning’ has attracted 41 new learners, but not enough is yet known about retention, success rates or pathways to employment. The link with Jobcentre Plus is also developing and meetings are in hand to establish a shared approach to engaging more adults, particularly workless parents, in appropriate services.

p.4

Inspection judgements

Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 5 of 8

p.5

Inspection judgements

 An increasing number of families experience significant challenges in their lives, and the centres’ work to help them get back on track is effective. Case files are maintained to a good standard and provide compelling examples of strong multi-agency work and the positive impact this has on reducing inequalities and improving families’ lives. Staff have initiated a ‘How we work together’ agreement that is signed at the outset and explains the shared approach between families and workers and the actions required to ensure successful outcomes.  Parenting skills, first aid courses and the home-safety checks undertaken by staff all have a positive impact on parents’ ability to support their children and keep them safe. Sessions such as ‘Big Tums and Little Ones’ and ‘Active Learners’ enable those who attend to enjoy time with their babies, as they experience high quality multi-sensory activities, learn about the stages of their

p.5

Inspection judgements

child’s development and make new friends.  Health outcomes, such as the number of mothers breastfeeding at six to eight weeks, are moving in the right direction, albeit rather slowly, while obesity levels in young children are lower than average and reflect the centre’s strong focus on encouraging a healthy lifestyle through innovative projects such as ‘Community Allotment’ where families grow fruit and vegetables, ‘Community Chef’ which promotes cooking on a budget, and the tried and tested ‘Eat Well Plate’ which is linked to diet and portion control.  Sessions such as ‘Come and Play’ are well planned to help children learn successfully. Learning journeys provide useful information about children’s progress, with the ‘Look What I Did Today’ sheet sent home to keep parents abreast of their child’s development. At 67% across the group, the proportion of children achieving a good level of development is 15% above the national

p.5

management

 There are some strong features of governance; for example, the district advisory board members have a good knowledge of the reach area which they use to help managers allocate resources that are attracting an increasing number of families to register. However, the board has not kept a close enough check on the group’s performance and some priorities, such as improving breastfeeding locally and across the Swale district, have slipped. Parents who do attend board meetings are not representative of the Kent – Swale 4 group. The local steering group is supportive of the centre, but it too is not challenging enough and for some time there have been no parents involved in its decision-making.  Leadership is focused well on the need to drive continuous improvement, but the time available to work strategically across the group has been taken up with matters concerning the local authority review and the interim oversight of two other children’s centres. Nevertheless, there is good day-to-

p.5

management

day management of the group and it runs smoothly even during a period of significant and ongoing challenge.  Staff feel valued in role, and well led and managed. They show a strong determination to do their very best to help local families improve their well-being and lead happy, fulfilled lives. Staff supervision is regular and supportive and links well to appraisal and professional development training.  Safeguarding is a high priority across the group and policies and procedures, including staff vetting checks, reflect this. Children who are subject to a child protection plan, and those in need or who are looked after in the local area, are known about, and staff work closely with social care and health partners to give full support through the use of the Common Assessment Framework and Team Around the Family procedures.  Parents’ views are regularly sought after sessions and courses. The fathers’ drop-in run at weekends

p.5

management

was changed to ‘Family and Me’ and held at a different time in response to dads’ feedback, and this is encouraging higher numbers to attend. Displays are used to let parents know how their views have been taken on board. The bright and stimulating foyers at both centres offer a welcome in a range of community languages, provide a wide range of easily accessed information, and invite parents to attach their child’s dummy to the ‘fairy tree’ where it will be exchanged for a special gift. Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 6 of 8

p.5

Grade Judgement Description

Grade 1 Outstanding Practice consistently reflects the highest aspirations for children and their families and as a result inequalities are reducing rapidly and gaps are closing. Grade 2 Good Practice enables most children and their families to access good quality services that improve children’s wellbeing and achieve the stated outcomes for families. Grade 3 Requires improvement Performance is not as good as it might reasonably be expected to be in one or more key areas. Grade 4 Inadequate The needs of children and families in its area are not being met and/or the leaders and managers are not providing sufficient challenge to bring about improvement to the quality of services. Inspection report : Kent – Swale 4 Page 7 of 8

p.6

Children’s Centre Group details

Unique reference number 80150 Local authority Kent Inspection number 433104 Managed by The local authority

p.7

five in the reach area

Centre leader Rob Jobe Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected Telephone number 01795 477446 Email address Rob.Jobe@kent.gov.uk

p.7

This group consists of the following children’s centres:

 Grove Park  Woodgrove guidance ‘raising concerns and making complaints about Ofsted', which is available from Ofsted’s website: www.ofsted.gov.uk . If you would like Ofsted to send you a copy of the guidance, please telephone 0300 123 4234 , or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk .

p.7

This group consists of the following children’s centres:

(Ofsted) regulates and inspects 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 Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, work-based learning and skills training, 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. Further copies of this report are obtainable from the school. Under the Education Act 2005, the school must provide a copy of this report free of charge to certain categories of people. A charge not exceeding the full cost of reproduction may be made for any other copies supplied. If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille,

p.8

This group consists of the following children’s centres:

please telephone 0300 123 4234, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk . You may copy all or parts of this document for non-commercial educational purposes, as long as you give details of the source and date of publication and do not alter the information in any way. To receive regular email alerts about new publications, including survey reports and school inspection reports, please visit our website and go to ‘Subscribe’.

p.8

This group consists of the following children’s centres:

T: 0300 123 4234 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 E: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk W: www.ofsted.gov.uk ©Crown copyright 2014

p.8