Setting

Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 1 ADOPTION SERVICE

p.1

NE61 6NF

Lead Inspector Marian Denny Announced Inspection 3rd October 2006 9:30 Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to:

p.1

NE61 6NF

• Put the people who use social care first • Improve services and stamp out bad practice • Be an expert voice on social care • Practise what we preach in our own organisation

p.2

NE61 6NF

Reader Information Document Purpose Inspection Report Author CSCI Audience General Public Further copies from 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) Copyright This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Internet address www.csci.org.uk Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Adoption. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop

p.2

NE61 6NF

Every Child Matters, outlined the government’s vision for children’s services and formed the basis of the Children Act 2004. It provides a framework for inspection so that children’s services should be judged on their contribution to the outcomes considered essential to wellbeing in childhood and later life. Those outcomes are: • Being healthy • Staying safe • Enjoying and achieving • Making a contribution; and • Achieving economic wellbeing.

p.3

NE61 6NF

In response, the Commission for Social Care Inspection has re-ordered the national minimum standards for children’s services under the five outcomes, for reporting purposes. A further section has been created under ‘Management’ to cover those issues that will potentially impact on all the outcomes above.

p.3

NE61 6NF

Copies of Every Child Matters and The Children Act 2004 are available from The Stationery Office as above. This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4

p.3

Name of service

Northumberland County Council Adoption Service

p.4

Name of service

Address Tweed House Hepscott Park Northumberland NE61 6NF

p.4

Fax number

Email address klocke@northumberland.gov.uk

p.4

manager (if applicable)

Type of registration Local Auth Adoption Service Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5

p.4

Date of last inspection

The National Commission for Social Care Inspection carried out the last inspection on 22 nd July 2003.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

Northumberland is England’s most northerly county and has a population of approximately 309,200. At the time of the inspection, Northumberland’s childcare services were delivered by generic childcare teams in the north and west of the County and over nines and under nines teams in the remainder of the County. These were shortly to become integrated children’s teams under the Family and Children’s Trust.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

The County Council operated its own adoption service, which was provided by the permanence Team and located within the authority’s Children’s Services Directorate, Family Support Service. The principal officer for looked after children (LAC) was also located in this service and was responsible for the commissioning of placements, the provision of management information and with the assistance of a marketing officer, for foster care and adoption recruitment. The head of the family support service had overall responsibility for the strategic management of the adoption service, with the permanence team manager undertaking the every day management of the service and also acting as the adoption panel adviser. A senior family placement social worker, who had supervisory responsibility for the five family placement workers in the team, assisted the team manager for the permanence team in her duties. In

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

addition, the adoption service had five permanence workers located in four child-care teams, who were based in four locality offices. There were also two adoption support co-ordinators employed in the team. The head of family support was based in County Hall. The permanence team manager was based at Tweed House, Hepscott Park, together with the Senior Practitioner, the family placement workers, the adoption support co-ordinators and the administrative staff. Tweed House was situated just a few miles outside Morpeth and was accessible by car, as well as public transport. The premises were fit for purpose.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

A comprehensive adoption service was provided to children and adults, which included the recruitment, preparation, assessment and approval of adopters for both domestic and inter country adoptions. The pre and post-placement support of adopters, as well as the approval of non-agency adopters was also provided. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 In addition, the service assisted field work staff in the assessment of children’s needs, preparation of children for adoption, which included undertaking life story work with the child, the production of relevant reports for court, the matching and placement of children with adoptive parents; support for children pre and post-placement and post adoption contact. The service also provided and maintained a post-box scheme that supported information exchange in adoption placements. An independent counselling and support service was

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

provided to birth parents, their families and adopted adults, via a service level agreement with a voluntary adoption agency. In addition, a birth records’ counselling and support service was provided to adopted adults. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7

p.6

SUMMARY

This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection.

p.7

SUMMARY

Northumberland’s senior management team demonstrated a real commitment to this inspection and had prepared for it in an excellent manner. All the pre- inspection documentation provided was thorough and arrived within the agreed timescales. Arrangements made for the inspection were thoughtful and enabled inspectors to make effective use of their time. The facilities and resources provided were of a good standard and everyone involved in the inspection were most helpful and courteous.

p.7

SUMMARY

Prior to the inspection, the pre-inspection material and the questionnaires, which had been returned to the inspection team were read and analysed. The information obtained from these documents has been incorporated into the inspection findings.

p.7

SUMMARY

The inspection, itself, was carried out over four days and involved two inspectors. In addition, one inspector observed an adoption panel for half a day. Interviews were undertaken with the director of schools and family support, the director of special needs and community support, who was also the agency’s decision maker, the head of the family support service, other senior personnel, team managers including the team manager for the permanence team, adoption and childcare social workers, as well as the administrative manager and his staff. An elected member, who had lead responsibility for children’s services, was also interviewed, as well as the adoption panel’s chairperson and legal adviser. A selection of children and adopters’ files were read and four adoptive families and one birth grandmother interviewed. A variety of agency records were inspected, administrative sources examined and the agency’s office premises were seen. Security issues

p.7

SUMMARY

relating to both record keeping and the premises were also considered.

p.7

SUMMARY

In addition, the inspection team received thirteen questionnaires from prospective and approved adopters, one from birth family members, fifteen from placing social workers and four from specialist advisors. However, it would appear that some of the adopters’ returned questionnaires were received from adopters, who had been approved over twelve months ago. Consequently, some of the comments made regarding certain aspects of the adoption service’s practice were no longer relevant, as the practice had changed. The inspection team were mindful of this and have done their utmost to ensure the responses received from these questionnaires, relate to the service’s current practice. These responses from the returned questionnaires, together with the information obtained from interviews with adopters have been reflected in the main body of this report.

p.7

What the service does well:

Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 The Council demonstrated an understanding and commitment to the corporate parenting role. The executive member of the Council, with lead responsibility for children’s services was a good advocate and supported the development of good practice and outcomes for children.

p.8

What the service does well:

The management team had the experience and skills to manage and organise the adoption service in an effective and efficient manner.

p.8

What the service does well:

Staff communicated effectively with their manager, respected her and had confidence in her ability to manage the service.

p.8

What the service does well:

Adopters were generally satisfied with the service received from the permanence team and several stated, “I would recommend them to anyone who wants to adopt a child”.

p.8

What the service does well:

There was a clear well structured preparation programme. Adopters indicated that the preparation training was of an “excellent quality” and had prepared them well to adopt.

p.8

What the service does well:

Adopters were also positive about their assessment, indicating that it had been “professional”, “thorough” and “undertaken in a “sensitive way”.

p.8

What the service does well:

The agency gave careful consideration to matching a child with adopters to ensure that good practice and outcomes were achieved.

p.8

What the service does well:

The adoption panel was properly constituted and demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of the complexity of adoption work. The panel was well chaired, the administrative support provided was of a good standard and decision-making was thorough.

p.8

What the service does well:

The agency’s specialist advisers were extremely knowledgeable; child focussed and provided a good service to the adoption agency.

p.8

What the service does well:

A clinical psychologist and an assistant had been employed on a part-time basis to undertake work for the permanence team.

p.8

What the service does well:

The life-long implications of adoption were recognised. The inclusion of birth parents/ families in the adoption process was reflected in the agency’s policies and procedures and in the independent counselling services commissioned from After Adoption. Good practice was seen of birth parents and their families being engaged and involved in the care planning process for their child, which had included choosing a family for their child. The importance of obtaining information regarding a child’s early life was clearly recognised and efforts were made to obtain this information at an early stage.

p.8

What the service does well:

The staff working in the permanence team had a wealth of knowledge, experience and skills in both the field of childcare and adoption. Staff used Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 this knowledge and skills to achieve a high standard of practice to the benefit of adopters and their children.

p.8

What the service does well:

The quality of the administrative support provided to the adoption service was of a high standard. Adopters stated the administrative staff were “friendly and helpful” and were clearly a real asset to the agency.

p.9

What the service does well:

The council was considered to be a fair and competent employer.

p.9

What the service does well:

Adopters and children’s files were generally of a good standard.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

The statement of purpose had been revised, its contents was in accordance with the adoption National Minimum Standards (NMS) and regulations.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

The agency had produced a children’s guide, which was available in a variety of formats, able to meet the differing needs of children, and contained all the necessary information as prescribed by regulation.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

A marketing officer had been appointed and the agency’s recruitment strategy developed. This had resulted in targeted recruitment of adopters for older children and sibling groups.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

The adoption service was developing some support services themselves for adopters, which included a newsletter, a twenty-four week training course and a monthly support group.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

Birth parents were being directly referred to the voluntary adoption agency for independent counselling and support.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

The Adoption and Children Act had resulted in the establishment of a new adoption and permanency panel, which had a different panel chairperson. The panel was properly constituted and its membership effectively reflected the authority’s community.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

The adoption service had access to a number of specialist advisers including access to a dedicated clinical psychologist and her assistant.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

There had been some improvement in the personnel and panel members’ files.

p.9

What has improved since the last inspection?

Archived records had been stored in new premises. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 The family placement workers now shared the same office. This had resulted in improved communication and a much stronger team identity had developed.

p.9

What they could do better:

The effectiveness of the agency’s recruitment activities should be evaluated on a regular basis.

p.10

What they could do better:

Adopters found the agency’s preparation training “extremely valuable”. However, its effectiveness could be further enhanced if the agency in collaboration with another or other agencies provided a preparation groups for second time adopters.

p.10

What they could do better:

Adopters’ assessments were generally of a good standard, though they could be further improved with a more robust quality assurance system. Practice could also be enhanced if the current pet and health/safety checklists used were developed.

p.10

What they could do better:

The agency should consider introducing life appreciation days to the service, as this would provide adopters with an opportunity to receive first hand, qualitative information from professionals, previous carers and other individuals who have known their child.

p.10

What they could do better:

Capacity issues within the permanence team needs to be addressed if the service is to be effective and services developed. Similarly, the current level of administrative resources provided by the agency should be reviewed.

p.10

What they could do better:

The agency’s child protection procedures should include specific references to children placed for adoption and staff should be provided with up-dated child protection training.

p.10

What they could do better:

The agency had adoption panel policies and procedures, however these should be revised in accordance with recent legislation. The panel minutes could be enhanced if they were more clearly structured.

p.10

What they could do better:

The independent counselling and support service commissioned by the Authority should be proactively promoted.

p.10

What they could do better:

All adopters’ files should show clear evidence of managerial oversight, audits and case decisions. It is recommended that the audit tool currently used be revised to meet the specific needs of the agency’s adoption records and this should include an action plan.

p.10

What they could do better:

Panel members’ files were not kept in accordance with the adoption regulations and this must be immediately addressed. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 There was evidence that some of the agency’s adoption records were not effectively safeguarded through an appropriate back up system and attention should be given to this. The agency should also develop a disaster recovery plan specific to the adoption service.

p.10

What they could do better:

Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12

p.11

CONTENTS

Being Healthy - There are no NMS that map to this outcome

p.12

CONTENTS

Achieving Economic Wellbeing - There are no NMS that map to this outcome

p.12

CONTENTS

Statutory Requirements identified during the inspection Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13

p.12

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• The agency matches children with adopters (NMS 2) • The agency assesses and prepares adopters (NMS 4) • Adoptors are given information about matching (NMS 5) • The functions of the adoption panel are as specified (NMS 10) • The constitution and membership of adoption panels are as specified (NMS 11) • Adoption panels are timely (NMS 12) • Adoption agency decision is made without delay and appropriately (NMS 13) • The manager is suitable to carry on or manage an adoption agency (NMS 15) • Staff are suitable to work with children (NMS 19) • The agency has a robust complaints procedure (NMS 24 Voluntary Adoption Agency only)

p.13

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality in this outcome area is adequate. The judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.13

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

The agency had effected some successful placements. However, robust monitoring and quality assurance systems must be developed to ensure the child’s welfare is promoted and safeguarded.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

A marketing officer had recently been appointed to the service, who was to develop the agency’s recruitment plans and ensure the recruitment activities were effectively targeted to meet the needs of local children requiring adoption. At the time of the inspection, the marketing officer’s work was very much in its infancy, however evidence obtained indicated that the marketing officer was likely to be a very valuable resource to the adoption service in increasing adopter recruitment and raising the profile of adoption in the county.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The agency had also developed a tracking system to monitor the progress of prospective adopters’ applications and all children with an adoption plan. This information was shared on a regular basis with managers and staff. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 This system clearly had the potential to ensure the agency’s recruitment activities were effectively targeted and together with managerial monitoring was a useful mechanism to prevent the drift of children in the care planning process.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Evidence obtained in this inspection confirmed that the introduction of permanence workers, operating alongside child care workers in the locality offices, had very much raised awareness of permanency planning and had significantly contributed to the increased numbers of children identified for adoption. The permanency workers had also been extremely effective in keeping the child’s permanency plan on course and preventing drift. There were also arrangements in place for permanency workers to be involved at the outset of a child’s care planning process, for example, in the early looked after children’s (LAC) reviews. These arrangements though required to be formalised in the permanency policy and procedures.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

There was clear, recorded evidence of children’s wishes and feelings being taken into account in the care planning and matching process. It was also evident that the adoption service was extremely child focussed and as a consequence, every effort was made to ensure children were matched with adopters who best met their needs. The service had well-established and positive links with their local adoption consortium and there was evidence of the consortium, as well as other national facilities, such as “Be My Parent”, “Adoption UK” and the “National Adoption Register” being used to meet the needs of children, who had an adoption plan. Excellent practice was seen of children, with disabilities, as well as those from ethnic minority groups and large sibling groups being carefully matched with adopters, in a timely manner. The quality of the agency’s matching process and practice was such that the agency experienced relatively few disruptions in adoption placements. The low

p.14

EVIDENCE:

rate of disruptions was also partly attributable to some excellent direct, preparatory work undertaken by the permanency workers. However, not all children, who had an adoption plan, received the same high quality service and this should be addressed.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

A formal preparation, assessment and approval process was carried out in respect of adopters and there was a clear commitment to ensuring foster carers, who adopt a child they have previously fostered, received the same services as other prospective adopters.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

At the time of the inspection, the adoption service was considering whether they should provide information meetings to adopters. Whilst considering this matter, the agency was undertaking visits to adopters and providing information to them on a one to one basis. Records of these visits were thorough and of a good standard.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The agency’s preparation course “Making New Families” (MNF) is held four times a year. The programme was clear, well structured and its contents of a Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 good standard. The course was routinely evaluated and changes implemented, where necessary. Observations made of adopters during the preparation course were recorded and used in the assessment process. Adopters were made fully aware of this and a written record outlining their attendance and participation in the training was included in the report presented to panel.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Adopters spoken with, together with information obtained from returned questionnaires, indicated that the preparation training was delivered in a speedy manner. The programme was said to be well organised and presented, with materials used being of an “excellent quality”. The venue used by the agency was spoken of in a favourable manner and adopters generally indicated that they were held at convenient times. However, some adopters stated that they would have found it helpful if the course had been held in the evenings or weekends. A number of adopters stated that the introduction to the groups had been “warm and friendly” and the programme was “informative”, “stimulating” and “enjoyable”; others stated that it had afforded them the opportunity to explore a variety of adoption issues, which had proved to be an “invaluable” experience. Several adopters commented on how useful it had been to hear about the experiences of adopters, whilst on the course. One

p.15

EVIDENCE:

adoptive family and another adoptive family, who were adopting a second child, stated that they had not been invited to attend a preparation course. In view of the fact that several years had past since they last attended one and given the changes that have occurred in the adoption field during this time, the families should have been provided with the opportunity to attend another course. The agency may wish to consider whether in working collaboratively with another or other agencies second time adopters’ preparation groups can be introduced to the service. Similarly, whilst adopters who are adopting a child from overseas receive additional advice at the agency’s preparation course, the agency may wish to consider whether in working collaboratively with other agencies, specialist preparation courses could be established for inter –country adopters.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

A number of placing social workers/authorities stated that the agency had provided “good preparation training” and adopters had been “extremely well prepared to adopt a child.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

Adopters spoken with, together with information obtained from the returned questionnaires, indicated that the assessment process had commenced in a timely manner. They stated that the assessment process itself had been “clear,” “well structured,” and undertaken at a “pace appropriate to their needs”. However, adopters generally spoke positively about their assessment, which they described as “thorough”, “comprehensive” and stated that staff had handled the personal issues that arose in a “sensitive,” “thoughtful” manner. A number of adopters commented on the “knowledge” and “professionalism” of their worker. The majority of adopters indicated that through out the adoption process, they had been kept fully informed of their progress. A number of adopters commented on the accuracy of their written assessment ( form F), Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16

p.15

EVIDENCE:

which they indicated portrayed them “very accurately”. Several of the adopters stated that they had received a copy of their form F. They were also aware that they had to send any observations regarding their assessment, in writing to the agency, within a specified period.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

A similar picture was presented by placing social workers regarding the quality of adopters’ assessments. Several workers stated that the assessments were “thorough”, “well written” and a number said the written assessment provided an “accurate” picture of the adopters.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

A sample of adopters’ files were examined, the assessments seen were generally of a good quality, in so far as they were detailed, insightful and demonstrated a great deal of sound professional analysis. However, in one assessment, therapeutic services were being provided to some of the children in the adoptive family and this matter had not been as fully explored in the assessment, as one would have expected. Similarly, despite the fact three of the children attended school, no educational references had been sought, however, such references may have informed the agency about the couple’s parenting capacity and in so doing enhanced the agency’s assessment of them. In another file, no employer reference had been sought despite the fact the female adopter was employed in a role, which involved her in working with children. There was evidence that the agency considered the adopters’ capacity to look after children in a safe and responsible manner with

p.16

EVIDENCE:

health/safety and dog questionnaires consistently used and found on file. The agency may wish to consider developing these questionnaires though, in order to enhance this aspect of the work.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

In the light of the shortfalls found, it is recommended that managerial scrutiny of the assessment process should be increased, to ensure all relevant matters in relation to the adopters’ application have been addressed.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The agency had recently produced written information about the matching, introduction and placement process. There was also written information regarding the role of the adoption register. Adopters, who had received this written information, indicated that it had been most helpful and enabled them to gain a good understanding of all the stages in the adoption process.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The agency’s practice was child focussed, with careful consideration being given to matching a child with adopters, as evidenced in the agency’s thorough matching meetings and quality of the matching reports. The agency may wish though to consider revising its selection process documentation, so that the details of other adopters considered for the child are recorded and the reasons why these adopters were not considered to be an appropriate match recorded. In situations where the permanency worker has undertaken an adopters’ assessment, the agency needs to consider the appropriateness of that worker chairing the selection meeting. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 There was evidence that the agency makes every effort to ensure adopters receive all the necessary information regarding their child, for example, adopters regularly meet with the panel’s medical adviser to obtain detailed

p.16

EVIDENCE:

medical information regarding their child’s medical condition and are able to discuss the full implications of this in caring for the child.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The agency had also made strenuous efforts to ensure child’s permanence reports were of a good standard with the provision of training and mentorship to childcare staff. Those seen were of good quality, as were the contact agreements, placing meeting minutes, introductory programme and mid-way reviews. These records also demonstrated that the adoption service was extremely sensitive and flexible to children’s needs and well managed.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

Adopters spoken with and information obtained from the returned questionnaires indicated that the agency had provided adopters with a great deal of information about the child. However, three adoptive families stated that initially they had not received all the information relating to their child and that further information had been provided to them, several months after placement. In view of the fact that children sometimes have a number of social workers whilst being a “looked after child”, the adoption agency may wish to consider the use of “life appreciation days”. This would ensure adopters benefited from first hand, qualitative information about a child’s life.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

In examining a sample of children’s files, there was clear evidence that work was being undertaken to prepare and enable them to move into their adoptive placement, though in others, where children had the same needs, there were delays in the work being carried out. The agency should ensure direct work, where appropriate, is carried out in a timely manner to ensure placement stability.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

There was evidence that the agency had developed an effective system to record the adoptive parents’ decision regarding notifying the agency, if an adopted child dies during childhood or soon afterwards.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The agency ensured adopters provide information about themselves through the completion of a family book and these books were often used as an effective tool in preparing a child prior to placement.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The Council’s child protection procedures do not specifically refer to children placed for adoption and this must be addressed. In addition, it is also recommended that all adoption staff receive up-dated child protection training.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The agency had written adoption and permanence panel policies and procedures, however this documentation needs to be revised to fully meet the requirements of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Prospective adopters were invited to attend panel and information about this process was provided. The service was also in the process of producing a panel leaflet for adopters, which would include panel members’ photographs. The inspectors were pleased to learn of this development and would endorse this action. Responses from the returned questionnaires and several adopters spoken with commented positively on their experiences of attending panel and stated that panel members had been “friendly” and had “put them at their ease”. A number of adopters stated that the meeting was “well chaired” and several indicated that the questions asked of them at panel had been

p.17

EVIDENCE:

appropriate. However, one adopter stated that they had been asked an extremely personal question at panel and given the setting this had not been appropriate. This matter was discussed with the agency’s senior management team at the time of the inspection.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The agency’s adoption and permanency panel was properly constituted. Observation of the panel demonstrated that the members had a good knowledge and understanding of the complexity of adoption work and paid a great deal of attention to the details of the cases presented. Their thoroughness of scrutiny ensured relevant concerns were noted and effectively addressed.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

There was evidence to confirm that new panel members were provided with an opportunity to observe the adoption panel before commencing in their roles. They also received regular and appropriate training fro their roles.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

A sample of panel members’ files were seen and with the exception of one file, where a new Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check had been applied for, after the panel member had commenced their work, all contained the documents identified in 11.3 of the National Minimum Standards. However, there were other shortfalls in the files and these have been discussed in the “Management Section” of this report.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Panels were convened on a regular basis to avoid unnecessary delay in the approval of adopters or the matching of a child. Panel members received information on adopters and children in advance of the panel date so ensuring panel members had the necessary time to read the documentation. The panel minutes seen were generally of a good standard and clearly indicated the reasons for the panel’s conclusions and recommendations, however they could be enhanced if they were rather more structured.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The agency decision-maker took his responsibilities very seriously, with all panel papers and minutes received and examined, prior to the agency’s decision being made. However, whilst the agency’s decision was made without delay, the agency decision maker’s letter was not always quickly sent out to prospective adopters, for example, in two files examined the letters were not sent out until 10 and 28 days after the agency decision had been made. This clearly is not good practice and needs to be urgently addressed. The agency Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 decision maker may also wish to consider signing this letter personally, as in so doing it clearly emphasises the importance of such a decision.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

There were clearly written recruitment and selection procedures. However, in two files seen, it was unclear whether telephone enquiries had been made to verify the legitimacy of references.

p.19

EVIDENCE:

All staff working within the adoption service were suitably qualified and had considerable childcare and adoption experience. The inspectors were advised that any student on placement in the service would not have any case responsibility and would always be carefully supervised by qualified staff with the requisite years of experience. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20

p.19

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• The adoption agency provides support for adoptive parents (NMS 6) • The agency has access to specialist advisers as appropriate (NMS 18

p.20

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality in this outcome area is good. The judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.20

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

The agency provided a variety of support and specialist advice for adoptive families with a view to maintaining placement stability for children. However, capacity issues within the adoption service were in danger of compromising the quality of this support.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

The agency recognised adoption support was an important component of adoption, as a consequence, this matter was discussed with adopters throughout the preparation and assessment phases. Adoption support reports were completed on each family and submitted to the adoption and permanency panel, together with the prospective adopters report at the approval stage. Similarly, an adoption support report was presented when the panel were considering whether a child should be adopted.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

At the matching stage the adopters’ and child’s adoption support reports were refined, amalgamated and the adoption support plan presented to panel.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

In the pre adoption stage, the child’s social worker, the permanence worker and the family placement worker ensured the necessary support was provided. In addition, the agency had employed two adoption support service co- ordinators (A.S.S.C.’s), who would meet adopters at the preparation course and again at the meeting, which drew up the adoption placement report. A.S.S.C. ’s were also consulted about the adoption support plan and involved in the production of any contact agreements.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

In the post adoption stage, the A.S.S.C. ’s were involved in the ongoing review of adopters’ support needs and where necessary signposted adopters to a range of in house and externally provided support services. The A.S.S.C. ’s Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 also carried out assessments in relation to the support needs of new adoptive families and their children, including those who had adopted over three years ago and were residing in the authority. In addition, they facilitated post box contact between the child and their birth family, were responsible for the annual review of the scheme and undertook birth records counselling.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

At the time of the inspection, a variety of support services were provided to domestic and intercountry adopters and their children in both the pre and post adoption stages. These support services included various financial support packages, for example, settling in grants, adoption allowances and assistance to purchase a suitable motor vehicle for the family.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The service’s permanence workers were also used to assist the child’s social worker to prepare a child for placement and complete their life storybook. The permanence team also had the services of a clinical psychologist, who was able to undertake some direct work with adoptive families and provide training on a variety of issues, including attachment. At the time of the inspection, the psychologist, together with permanence worker were providing a twenty-four week course for post adoptive families, whose children had emotional problems. This programme had clearly been extremely successful, as all adopters had regularly attended and were planning to continue to meet on a monthly basis, when the course ended. The agency also ensured children, who were placed for adoption and were experiencing educational difficulties had access to the education support team. Similarly, children placed for adoption

p.21

EVIDENCE:

or adopted children had access to the children and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS), the care trust and other medical specialists . In addition, where there were difficulties in placement, the agency was able to spot purchase therapy packages from independent sources to support an adoptive family. There were also plans to develop a newsletter for adopters. Assistance with contact arrangements was provided for adopted children and their birth relatives. There was also a service level agreement with a voluntary agency to provide training and support services to adopters. At the time of the inspection, the service was developing its procedures regarding the support provided intercountry adopters.

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The voluntary agency, which the service commissioned, provided information regarding the support services they provided. However, the agency itself had recently produced written information regarding all the support services available. A start had been made on publicising this information and there were plans to develop this further, for example, through an adopters’ newsletter. A number of adopters spoken with and responses obtained in the returned questionnaires indicated adopters were unsure of the precise services available to them. The service might therefore wish to consider whether an attractively presented, user - friendly leaflet outlining the support services available to adopters would be effective in advertising these services. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Adoption support plans were found on all the files seen and were of a good

p.21

EVIDENCE:

standard, as they fully addressed the needs of the children and adopters.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Adopters were generally complimentary about the support they had received, for example several said the support was “good”, “very helpful”. One adopter though stated that the service had withdrawn their support at a really difficult time in the placement and although they had managed to overcome these difficulties, they had been very disappointed by the service’s actions. Another adopter stated that when their worker was off work due to illness, staffing levels within the service had prevented another worker being allocated to them and as a consequence, they had not received the support they required. One adopter indicated that they had to wait for some time to access a service from CAMHS. A couple of adopters stated that they had found it hard to approach the service when they had experienced some difficulties as they had not had any contact with the agency since the adoption order had been made. The

p.22

EVIDENCE:

agency may wish to consider some of the issues raised by these adopters when reviewing the support services currently being provided.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Information obtained from placing authorities and social workers’ returned questionnaires and those spoken with, indicated that adopters generally received a good level of support from the service.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The creation of two A.S.S.C. posts clearly demonstrated the service’s commitment to enabling adopters to access the various support services available. However, further consideration needed to be given as to the role of the A.S.S.C. ’s and how their work could be more effectively integrated into the service. Consideration should also be given to the current workloads and staffing hours allocated to these posts. Indeed, staffing levels within the adoption service generally needs to be kept under close review, if support services are to be increased and developed. A clear emphasis will also need to be placed on increased partnership and collaborative working with other agencies both within and outside the authority . This task may perhaps be made easier as a result of the planned creation of integrated services within the authority.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

There was evidence that the agency’s preparation training, assessment and matching process provided adopters with information about a child’s history and its relevance in enabling a child to develop a positive self-image. It also enabled adopters to understand the need and to develop strategies in assisting a child to address all forms of discrimination. The importance of keeping safe information provided by birth parents and families was clearly addressed through out the preparation and assessment process. Direct work was completed with children and life storybooks completed. Some examples of the work carried out were seen and found to be of a good standard. However, as stated earlier in the report, not all life story work was completed in a timely manner. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 The agency had access to a variety of specialist advisors and services to meet

p.22

EVIDENCE:

its needs. These included CAMHS, the education of looked after children support team, a looked after children’s nurse, the overseas adoption helpline, as well as the panel medical and legal adviser. Staff confirmed that the advisers were available for consultation, if required and were described as being “extremely knowledgeable” and provided “a good service”. It was reported that all the advisers were highly committed to their work and extremely “child focussed”.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

The agency had an agreement within the consortium for managers to chair each other’s disruption meetings of consortium inter agency placements. There was evidence that the learning gained from any disruption was carefully considered and used to inform the agency’s future practice.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

The agency had written protocols governing the role of specialist advisers Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24

p.23

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Birth parents and birth families are involved in adoption plans (NMS 7) • Birth parents and birth families are involved in maintaining the child’s heritage (NMS 8) • The Adoption agency supports birth parents and families (NMS 9)

p.24

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality in this outcome area is good. The judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.24

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

The adoption agency demonstrated a commitment to developing and improving support to birth parents and their families. A coherent strategy for working with birth parents and families is required though, if the outcomes of these standards are to be fully achieved.

p.24

EVIDENCE:

The agency clearly recognised the life-long implications of adoption and this was effectively evidenced in their statement of purpose. Parents were provided with information regarding the care planning processes for their child. Both placing and permanence social workers worked in an open and honest manner with birth parents and their families and actively encouraged them to become involved in the care planning processes for their child.

p.24

EVIDENCE:

Birth parents were also encouraged to contribute to information included in the child’s written assessment. There was also an expectation that birth parents were aware of the contents and able to comment upon the information contained in it. In the files examined and panel papers seen, there was clear evidence of the birth parents’ views about adoption and contact being clearly recorded. There was also evidence in several files of birth parents being well supported by the permanence workers. In one file, there was evidence of a birth mother helping workers to choose the adopters for her child. This was clearly excellent practice and highly commendable.

p.24

EVIDENCE:

Permanence workers also encouraged and facilitated birth parents and families to provide information and photographs of their child so that they might contribute to the child’s sense of heritage through the completion of life Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 storybooks. There was evidence of life story work being completed to a good standard and several good examples of life storybooks were seen. However, in the adopters’ returned questionnaires a few adopters reported difficulties with life storybooks and stated that they had received them rather late. These difficulties were clearly reflected in the sample of children case tracked, as several did not have a completed life storybook, despite the fact they were in adoptive placements. Since the completion of life story work is of vital importance for the child and greatly assists in placement stability, such work

p.24

EVIDENCE:

should be carried out with every child who has a permanency plan, in a timely manner. It is also recommended that the agency consider introducing life appreciation days, as this provides adopters with an opportunity to meet professionals, previous carers and other individuals who have known the child and are able to give anecdotal information about the child that is not always available in written documentation.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

Birth parents and families were given further opportunities to maintain and up- date their child’s heritage through direct or indirect contact via the agency’s post box system. This system provided birth parents and their families with a real opportunity to contribute to the maintenance of their child’s heritage. The agency though may wish to consider whether the system could be improved in using the expertise of its administrative service.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

In addition to the work undertaken by the children service’s staff, there was a service level agreement with a voluntary agency to provide independent counselling and support to birth parents where there was a permanence plan for their child. At the time of the inspection, birth parents were provided with information regarding the services provided by this voluntary agency and all birth parents were referred to this agency. The service may wish though to adopt a more proactive stance in promoting this service, for example, in ensuring written information about this service is available in a variety of settings such as Citizen Advice Bureaus and solicitor’s reception areas. At the time of the inspection, the agency was considering introducing a more qualitative monitoring system in relation to the support services provided by the voluntary agency. The inspectors would fully endorse this action.

p.25

EVIDENCE:

The Commission received one birth family members’ questionnaire and interviewed a birth family member. In the returned questionnaire, the response was extremely positive with comments made such as I was “respected,” “listened to”, “my views were taken into account”. However, the respondent stated that their opinion regarding the overall service they had received had not been sought. The agency may wish to consider establishing such a system to enable birth parents and their family’s views regarding the service they have received to be obtained and evaluated. In the interview undertaken by the birth family member, there had clearly been good partnership working and again the service was generally spoken of in a positive manner. However, it was rather disappointing to find that since the children had been placed with the adopters, the birth relative stated she had not been Northumberland County Council Adoption

p.25

EVIDENCE:

Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 informed of the children’s progress and was unsure of the future contact plans. This matter was discussed with the manager of the service at the time of the inspection, who readily agreed to address the matter. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27

p.26

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• There is a clear written statement of the aims and objectives of the adoption agency and the adoption agency ensures that it meets those aims and objectives (NMS 1) • The agency provides clear written information for prospective adopters (NMS 3) • The manager has skills to carry on or manage the adoption agency (NMS 14) • The adoption agency is managed effectively and efficiently (NMS 16) • The agency is monitored and controlled as specified (NMS 17) • The staff are organised and managed effectively (NMS 20) • The agency has sufficient staff with the right skills / experience (NMS 21) • The agency is a fair and competent employer (NMS 22) • The agency provides training for staff (NMS 23) • Case records for children and prospective / approved adopters are comprehensive and accurate (NMS 25) • The agency provides access to records as appropriate (NMS 26) • The agency’s administrative records processes are appropriate (NMS 27)

p.27

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• The agency maintains personnel files for members of staff and members of adoption panels (NMS 28) • The premises used by the adoption agency are suitable for purpose (NMS 29) • The adoption agency is financially viable (NMS 30, Voluntary Adoption Agency only) • The adoption agency has robust financial processes (NMS 31)

p.27

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

1,3,14,16,17,20,21,22,23,25,26,27,28 and 29,

p.27

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

Quality in this outcome area is good. The judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service.

p.27

JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s):

The adoption agency was well managed and a good service was provided to children and adopters, however a more robust quality assurance system would enhance the service. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28

p.27

EVIDENCE:

The agency had a statement of purpose, which contained all the information required under the Adoption Services Regulations 2003. The statement of purpose had been circulated to staff. At the time of the inspection, the agency’s written policies and procedures were being revised in line with the adoption agency regulations. Those seen accurately reflected the agency’s statement of purpose.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

The service had a children’s guide, which contained all the necessary information prescribed in the National Minimum Standards and Adoption services regulations 2003. This guide could be produced in a variety of formats to meet the differing needs of children.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

The agency’s statement of purpose clearly emphasised the importance of ensuring those enquiring about adoption were welcomed without prejudice and treated in a fair, open and respectful manner. This statement contained the agency’s eligibility criteria, which was inclusive and indicated that the adoption service would not automatically exclude people on any grounds, other than those specified by regulations. Evidence obtained in the inspection, confirmed that these principles were reflected in the agency’s practice.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

The agency provided information to all those who made enquiries about adoption. This pack contained clear, well - written information about the adoption process. Information was also provided about the needs of local children, who required families. The service also intended to provide this information on a regular basis in a newsletter, which would be circulated to the services adopters, who were waiting to be matched with a child.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

Adopters indicated that the agency responded to their initial enquiries in a “warm”, “welcoming” manner and they found staff extremely “helpful”. They also stated that the information pack had been sent out “promptly”, had been “clear”, “informative” and had met their needs. There was evidence that the agency ensured that all foster carers, who applied to adopt, received the same information as other adopters. Those adopters who wished to adopt a child from overseas were referred to the various websites specialising in this field for example, the Department for Education and Skills (DFES) and the Inter- country Adoption Centre (IAC) websites.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

The agency had systems in place to ensure that prospective adopters, who were most likely to meet the needs of children waiting to be adopted, were prioritised for assessments.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

Both the team manager and the senior practitioner in the adoption team had extensive knowledge of child-care and considerable knowledge, experience and skills in adoption. Staff interviewed spoke extremely highly of them and Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 29 clearly held them in high esteem. The manager was said to be “visible” and her management style was described as being “open”, “approachable”, “helpful” and “supportive”. Both the manager and senior practitioner were said to be extremely child focussed and enthusiastic about the work, with both taking a genuine interest in any issues discussed with them.

p.28

EVIDENCE:

There was evidence to confirm that the agency operated in accordance with its statement of purpose and was managed efficiently and effectively. There were written job descriptions available for the manager of the agency and well- defined managerial arrangements in place to identify, who was in charge when the manager was absent. There were clear roles for managers and staff, with well-established lines of communication and accountability. A supervisory and appraisal system was in place, which was used to monitor staff’s performance and ensure a quality of service. There was evidence that staff were being supervised and appraised in accordance with the agency’s policies. An administrative staff review was taking place though and could result in changes to current supervisory arrangements.

p.29

EVIDENCE:

The agency ensured managers and staff were aware of their responsibility to declare any possible conflict of interests, which was clearly outlined in the council’s code of conduct and available on the authority’s website.

p.29

EVIDENCE:

There were a number of procedures in place for monitoring and controlling the activities of the adoption service. A tracking system was being developed to monitor the care planning process for the child and adopters. There were also supervision and appraisal systems in place, which monitored the adoption workers’ performance. The adoption team manager had established a file auditing system to monitor the agency’s case records and ensure they met the required standard. Reviewing officers, who chaired looked after children’s reviews, carried out a monitoring and quality assurance role in respect of the adoption service. Similarly, the adoption panel carried out a quality assurance role in relation to the cases presented to the panel, as did the agency decision- maker. Information regarding the performance of the agency was regularly presented to the senior management team. The elected member, who had

p.29

EVIDENCE:

lead responsibility for children’s services, was also regularly up-dated on the adoption service. A six monthly and an annual adoption report were presented to the executive committee of the Council. Interviews with members of the senior management team, as well as the elected member confirmed that councillors took their corporate parenting role seriously and carefully scrutinised all information presented.

p.29

EVIDENCE:

The service was organised and managed in an efficient and effective manner. Staff working within the adoption team were an extremely experienced group of staff, who had the necessary qualifications and experience to undertake the agency’s work effectively. Adopters made a number of positive comments regarding individual adoption workers’ practice, for example, they were described as “knowledgeable”, “professional,” “extremely committed”, “very child focussed” and “skilled in their approach to the assessment”. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 30 One adoptive family stated that their worker had been “excellent” and stated that they “could not fault the service that they had received”. A number of adopters stated that they had recommended the service to their friends and colleagues.

p.29

EVIDENCE:

The childcare social workers interviewed showed a real commitment to providing a good, qualitative service to the children and their families. They stated that they worked well with the adoption staff and that there was good communication between them. A number of childcare workers spoke positively about the knowledge and skills of the adoption workers; they clearly had a great deal of respect for them and found them extremely helpful and supportive. A number of staff provided evidence of excellent family finding in relation to several “hard to place” children and sibling groups. Similar views were also expressed in the returned placing social workers/authorities questionnaires.

p.30

EVIDENCE:

The adoption agency did not have a workload management system in operation. Staff were generally of the view that workloads were being appropriately allocated though the current staffing levels in the service at times compromised the effectiveness of allocation. This was also confirmed in the evidence obtained in this inspection and a requirement has therefore been made regarding this.

p.30

EVIDENCE:

The administrative support provided to the adoption team was of an extremely high standard and good administrative systems had been developed to assist staff to carry out their work in an effective and efficient manner. This was also reflected in the positive comments made by adopters, who described the administrative staff as “friendly”, “helpful” and efficient. However, in view of recent legislation and the increased demands placed on the adoption service, the agency needs to review the current administrative resources provided.

p.30

EVIDENCE:

The managers and staff interviewed generally considered the Council was a fair and competent employer. The agency enabled staff to access internal, external training and post qualification study as part of their professional development. However, staff indicated that latterly, external training had become increasingly limited, due to current budgetary constraints. Staff indicated though that the training provided was generally of good quality and effectively met their needs.

p.30

EVIDENCE:

There were written policies and procedures in place for case recording, as well as the maintenance and formatting of adoption case records. Examination of a sample of records indicated that these policies and procedures were being followed with the records seen generally well organised and in good order. There were some shortfalls in the adopters’ files though, for example, in some files there were no case decision records or evidence of managerial audits on file. There were also some shortfalls in relation to enquiries being made to an adoptive family’s children’s school and the CAMHS service, which are referred to in this report, under the section entitled “Staying Safe”. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 31 In a couple of files checklists at the front of the file had not been fully completed. In several files the case records had not been signed by the

p.30

EVIDENCE:

worker, nor the manager and in others such signatures were inconsistently applied.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

Similarly, with regard to the children’s files some shortfalls were found, for example, in one file, the case decisions arising from the worker’s supervision meeting did not cover the whole period the service had been responsible for the child, in another file, the childcare social worker did not appear to have carried out a statutory visit in accordance with the prescribed frequency. In two files there was no later life letter. A similar difficulty also emerged with regard to two children’s life storybook.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

The agency had a system in place to ensure confidentiality, which was in accordance with current legislation. Staff, panel members and specialist advisors were fully aware of this system and strictly adhered to it.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

The Council had a written policy and procedure in relation to access to records, which met the requirements of the adoption national minimum standards and current regulations.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

The agency had a system to monitor the quality and adequacy of records, however this system required improving so that it met the specific needs of the agency’s adoption records; this tool should also include an action plan.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

Separate records were kept of complaints, allegations and staff. There was evidence to confirm that the agency’ s current adoption records were stored securely in locked cabinets. The premises where the archived records were held were not inspected. The inspector was advised though that these records were stored appropriately and in accordance with the relevant legislation.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

In the sample of panel members’ files seen, they failed to comply with the adoption regulations, for example in one file there was no proof of identity, in another there was only one reference and in one file there were no references; in others there was no employment history and in those where this existed there was no written explanations of gaps in employment. The shortfalls found in the panel members’ files must be urgently addressed.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

The service’s current adoption records were effectively safeguarded through an appropriate back up system, however, the archived records were not safeguarded and this now needs to be urgently addressed. At the time of the inspection, the Council had a disaster recovery plan; the adoption service though had not developed a specific disaster recovery plan for their agency. Some attention should now be given to this.

p.31

EVIDENCE:

The adoption agency had identifiable office premises, which were fit for purpose. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 32

p.31

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Adoption have been met and uses the following scale.

p.32

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

4 Standard Exceeded (Commendable) 3 Standard Met (No Shortfalls) 2 Standard Almost Met (Minor Shortfalls) 1 Standard Not Met (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable

p.32

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

BEING HEALTHY MAKING A POSITIVE Standard No Score CONTRIBUTION No NMS are mapped to this outcome Standard No Score 7 3 8 2 9 3

p.32

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

STAYING SAFE ACHIEVING ECONOMIC WELLBEING Standard No Score Standard No Score 2 3 No NMS are mapped to this outcome 4 2 5 3 MANAGEMENT 10 2 Standard No Score 11 2 1 3 12 3 3 3 13 2 14 3 15 3 16 3 19 3 17 3 24 N/A 20 3 21 2 ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING 22 3 Standard No Score 23 3 6 3 25 2 18 3 26 3 27 3 28 1 29 3 30 N/A 31 N/A Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 33 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection?

p.32

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Voluntary Adoption and the Adoption Agencies Regulations 2003 or Local Authority Adoption Service Regulations 2003 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales.

p.33

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 1 AD4 Local Authority Adoption Service (England) Regulations 2003 7(a)(b). The manager of the agency must implement and maintain robust quality assurance systems for all aspects of the adoption service. 01/02/07

p.33

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

2 AD4 A.A.R.2005, S.I. 2005 no.389, Schedule 4, part 1, 17 & The manager of the agency must ensure all necessary information has been completed in relation to adopters, prior to their approval and a child’s placement. 01/01/07

p.33

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

3 AD2 LAAS Reg. ‘03 9(1)(a)(b) The agency must ensure that its child protection policies and procedures specifically refer to the measures intended to safeguard children placed for adoption by the authority from abuse and neglect. 01/02/07

p.33

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

4 AD11 AD19 AD28 LAAS Reg. ‘03 6(2)(c), 11(3)(d), 15(1) & The manager of the service must ensure that information is held on all persons who work for the adoption service in accordance with Schedule 30/12/06 Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 34 Schedule 3 & 3 and 4. This applies to all panel members and specialist advisors, who provide services to the agency. 5 AD6 AD19 AD21 Local Authority Adoption Service (England) Regulation 2003, 10(a) & 10(b). The manager of the service must ensure that there are a sufficient number of competent, experienced social work and administrative staff working for the purposes of the adoption agency. 01/02/07

p.33

RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out.

p.34

RECOMMENDATIONS

No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations

p.34

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 AD4 Times held for preparation groups should be kept under review to ensure they remain appropriate to the needs of adopters. 2 AD4 The establishment of preparation groups for second time adopters and inter country adopters should be considered. 3 AD4 Consideration should be given to the service developing its health and safety checklist and introducing a pet questionnaire. 4 AD4 AD5 All agency records should be signed and dated by the author, where relevant the manager. 5 AD5 The service should consider revising its selection process document and review who should be the chairperson for such meetings. 6 AD5 Consideration should be given to the introduction of life appreciation days into the service. 7 AD5 AD8 AD25 The agency should ensure that clear and appropriate information is obtained for the child about themselves and life before adoption. This information should be provided in a timely manner and in accordance with their needs.

p.34

RECOMMENDATIONS

8 AD2 The service should consider providing up-dated child protection training to its staff. 9 AD10 The Adoption Policies and Procedures should be revised in accordance with recent legislation. 10 AD12 The agency should consider providing more structure to the panel minutes. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 35 11 AD13 Adopters should be notified of the agency’s decision in a timely manner. 12 AD13 The agency decision maker should give consideration to signing the agency decision letter 13 AD28 Telephone enquiries made to verify the legitimacy of references should be clearly recorded. 14 AD6 AD8 The service should consider whether its post box system could be improved upon by using the expertise of its administrative service. 15 AD8 The independent and support service provided to birth parents and their families should be more actively promoted. Consideration should also be given to the

p.34

RECOMMENDATIONS

development of a qualitative monitoring system being introduced in respect of this service 16 AD7 AD8 The agency may wish to consider establishing a system to obtain the views of birth parents and their family’s about the service they have received. 17 AD25 The agency should ensure all statutory visits to children are undertaken at the prescribed frequency and in line with relevant guidance and legislation. 18 AD27 The system to monitor the quality and adequacy of adoption records should be developed. 19 AD27 A disaster recovery plan specific to adoption should be produced. Northumberland County Council Adoption Service DS0000050042.V315363.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 36

p.35

Commission for Social Care Inspection

North West Regional Office 11th Floor West Point 501 Chester Road Old Trafford M16 9HU

p.36

Commission for Social Care Inspection

National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI

p.36