Setting

X10029.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 FOSTERING SERVICE

p.1

M12 5DR

Lead Inspector Sarah Oldham/Jeff Banham Announced Inspection 6th November 2006 10:00 Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to:

p.1

M12 5DR

• 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

M12 5DR

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 Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.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 Fostering Services. 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

M12 5DR

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

M12 5DR

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

M12 5DR

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. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4

p.3

Name of service

Address Family Placement Service Children`s Services Wenlock Way Offices 5th Floor, Wenlock Way West Gorton M12 5DR Telephone number 0161 881 0911

p.4

Fax number

Email address ciaran.rafferty@notes.manchester.gov.uk

p.4

(if applicable)

Manchester Children, Families and Social Care

p.4

manager (if applicable)

Type of registration Local Authority Fostering Service Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5

p.4

Conditions of registration:

Date of last inspection 16th January 2006

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

Manchester Children and Families and Social Care provides the fostering and adoption service for the City of Manchester. The fostering service offers emergency out of hour placements, short-term, long-term/permanent placements for children and young people who are ‘Looked After’ by the local authority. There is also a Disabled Children’s Family Placement Team that provides short-term placements for families where there is a child with a disability. The service also provides for family and friend carers. An additional service of Support Workers is available and these workers support foster carers and children and young people placed.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

The Fostering and Adoption service is situated in the Gorton area of Manchester in a single office site and is accessible to people with disabilities. The service is in an area that is serviced by good public transport route.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

Manchester Fostering Service is responsible for the recruitment, assessment, approval and support of foster carers. Although, family and friend carers are assessed initially by social workers based in the area teams, the Form F assessments are completed by the family placement workers

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

The fostering service is divided into four teams. The teams are Recruitment and Assessment, Duty and Support, Long Term Fostering and the Disabled Children’s Family Placement Team. Each team has its own designated team manager with responsibility for the management of the team. Each of these teams consists of Family Placement Workers.

p.5

Brief Description of the Service:

At the time of the inspection the service had a total of 495 approved fostering households providing placements for 908 children and young people. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6

p.5

SUMMARY

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

p.6

SUMMARY

The was the announced site visit of Manchester Fostering Service as part of the inspection process. The inspection began on Monday 6 November and lasted for four days with a further two days visiting foster carers and the children and young people placed with them. Two inspectors undertook the inspection. During this time the inspectors met with: • The Principle Manager of the Fostering Service • The managers of the long-term, short-term and children with disabilities teams. • Family Placement Workers • Foster Carers Support Workers • Social Workers who had placed children with the foster service • The Quality Assurance Officer

p.6

SUMMARY

The inspectors also: • Attended a Panel meeting and met with the Chair of the Panel • Attended a foster carer support group • Visited some foster carers and the children/young people that they look after • Sent out questionnaires to carers and young people to gain their views about the fostering service • Looked at files and records that the service kept.

p.6

SUMMARY

This part of the report is written especially for the children and young people who are fostered by Manchester Fostering Service so that they are able to read about the service and what it does well, the things that have improved since the last inspection and what the service needs to do better to meet the needs of the children and young people that are provided with a service.

p.6

SUMMARY

Most requirements made at the previous inspection had been met with two carried forward in this report.

p.6

What the service does well:

The service is generally good at making sure that children and young people get the help and support with their health care. The foster carers are given training and information when they are first approved about helping children and young people to stay healthy. Carers were also able to have additional training about supporting children and young people with their specific health care needs.

p.6

What the service does well:

The service is also good at making sure that those people who are approved as foster carers for the authority have an assessment that makes sure that they have the right skills to be foster carers. The family placement workers support Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 the carers well and try to make sure that they have all the right information and training to look after the children and young people.

p.6

What the service does well:

The inspectors’ spoke with a number of foster carers who were able to explain and show that they knew how to look after children and young people. The service also had carers who came from different backgrounds and cultures. The fostering service made sure that the members of staff that worked for the service had the correct training and skills to support foster carers look after children and young people.

p.7

What the service does well:

The views of children and young people are gained to make sure that they are happy and well cared for in their placement. The quality and assurance officer who undertakes reviews of foster carers makes sure that the views of the children and young people are sought as part of that review. In addition to this, children and young people can attend the Children’s Rights meetings which are held on a regular basis. If children or young people are unhappy with the support that they receive the fostering service had details for young people about how to make a complaint.

p.7

What the service does well:

Foster carers had their own support groups that enabled them to meet to discuss their views regarding fostering and to have some additional training and support to enable them to continue to support the children and young people placed with them.

p.7

What the service does well:

Foster carers said that they received their payments on time and were aware of the payment scale.

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

After the last inspection the fostering service was asked to do some things to make the service better for the children and young people. The service had completed most of the things that they were asked to do. The service showed signs of improvements in the following areas:-

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

• The service had moved to better offices. This provided adequate space for staff to work in. • All foster carers had a Safe Care Policy that included details how they would ensure the safety of the children placed with them • In most cases the health care needs of the children and young people were recorded. This information was given to carers to make sure that they knew what help the children and young people needed with their health care. • In most cases other important documents about the children and young people were provided to carers to enable them to support the children and young people placed with them. • Training for foster carers has increased and each year the fostering service sends out a training brochure to foster carers detailing all the courses available for the next twelve months. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 • Training for staff was also made available to make sure that they have

p.7

What has improved since the last inspection?

up to date information. • Panel members had received training that made sure that they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. • Foster carers said that the family placement workers were helpful and supportive. This helped foster carers provide the right support to the children and young people placed with them. • Children who replied to the questionnaires said that they were “happy” and “looked after” by the foster carers.

p.8

What they could do better:

Staff working for the authority within different roles did not always have the opportunity to discuss with one another what their involvement was with young people and the jobs that they do. The result of this was that although all staff were helping children and young people there was sometimes some confusion about their specific roles. If staff had the opportunity to work together then this would help the children and the young people have a more supportive service.

p.8

What they could do better:

Family placement workers provided support to the foster carers but they did not always record what they did in detail. An example of this was the family placement workers supervised the foster carers but did not record this on a formal supervision record. This meant that supervision records were not available on all the foster carers files examined as part of the inspection. It was therefore difficult to find out what the issues were for carers in supporting the children/young people and how these were addressed.

p.8

What they could do better:

When a placing social worker requested a placement for a child/young person they did not write anything down. Instead they made a telephone call to the fostering service requesting a placement for a child/young person. The fostering service then tried to make sure that the child/young person was placed with carers who could support the young person. The fostering service did not confirm any of the details in writing to the social workers. Sometimes there was some misunderstanding between the fostering service and the placing social workers about the exact needs of a young person. This could result in the child/young person being placed with foster carers who were not able to meet all of the child/young persons needs. Matching decisions were not always recorded clearly on the carers or children/young peoples files, which demonstrate how the decision to place a child/young person with a particular carer was made.

p.8

What they could do better:

The Fostering Panel helps to make decisions about the people who become carers. At the time of the inspection the requirement to have as part of the Panel to have a current practicing social worker was not being met. It is important that there is a practicing social worker on the panel to ensure that the panel had someone with up to date knowledge of social work issues. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 It would also be good if someone on the panel had experience of what it is like to be either fostered or have your own children fostered so they could help the Panel understand fostering from this point of view.

p.8

What they could do better:

The carers said that they had a good level of support from their family placement workers, however, they felt that they did not have the same level of support from placing social workers. Foster carers said that it was difficult to “get in touch” with social workers and they did not always receive a reply to any message that they had left. Some foster carers said that when they contacted the area offices their calls were often ‘cut off’ when they were placed on ‘hold’. Foster carer found this very frustrating.

p.9

What they could do better:

The fostering service had a high number of agency staff as well as regular changes within the staff team. This meant that there was a lack of consistency for carers. The family placement workers also had high numbers of carers to support. This varied between 20 – 30 carers for each worker. A number of cases were not allocated to any worker. This could mean that some carers did not receive the support that they should do in accordance with the fostering services Statement of Purpose.

p.9

What they could do better:

Foster carer support workers were employed on different contracts and terms and conditions. Funding for some of the workers was allocated on a yearly basis and staff said that they were unsure of when or if the following years funding was available. Again there were a number of support workers who were agency workers.

p.9

What they could do better:

The authority had a high number of placements outside of the authority. To accommodate those children and young people placed in external placements the fostering service needed to recruit additional carers. This would impact on the level of work that the recruitment and assessment team undertook and needs to be considered by the authority.

p.9

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. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10

p.9

CONTENTS

Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11

p.10

The intended outcome for this Standard is:

• The fostering service promotes the health and development of children.(NMS 12)

p.11

The Commission considers Standard 12 the key standard to be

inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.11

JUDGEMENT – we looked at the outcome for Standard:

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

p.11

JUDGEMENT – we looked at the outcome for Standard:

The fostering service details the health care needs of the children and young people in placement. In addition, the fostering service provides training and support to enable foster carers to promote the health and development of young people in their care.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

As part of the inspection process a number of children and young people’s files were examined. The files contained the Looked After Children (LAC) documents. The LAC documents included information about their health care needs and how those needs should be met. Most carers spoken to confirmed that the LAC documentation was given to them prior to the child being placed with them. Carers said that this enabled them to continue to meet the needs of the children/young people including their health care needs.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

Children/young people’s health needs are considered as part of the matching and foster carer review process. Progress on health matters is considered as part of the foster carer’s review, particularly in the case of “family and friends” carers. Reviews of these placements are brought back to Panel at regular intervals to assist monitoring of the success of placements.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

One Panel member is the nurse for looked after children. She comments on health needs and ensures that any identified health care needs are taken account of and addressed. In addition, children/young people have access to specialist resources such as Children and Adolescents Mental Health Services (CAMHS), LAC psychologists and counsellors. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Health assessments are carried out on children/young people placed. Where young people are of an age to do so they can make a decision as to whether they have their health care needs assessed.

p.11

EVIDENCE:

The inspector visited a number of carers, some of whom had children placed with them who had complex medical needs. The carers were able to demonstrate how children/young peoples’ needs were met. The carers visited were seen to maintain records and reports of any ongoing medical treatment, hospital appointments and the outcome of the appointments and any changes in health care needs.

p.12

EVIDENCE:

Two of the carers spoken to said that the health care documentation were difficult to obtain from the placing social workers although they had found the family placement workers very helpful in addressing any issues relating to documentation. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13

p.12

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• Any persons carrying on or managing the service are suitable. (NMS 3) • The fostering service provides suitable foster carers.(NMS 6) • The service matches children to carers appropriately.(NMS 8) • The fostering service protects each child or young person from abuse and neglect.(NMS 9) • The people who work in or for the fostering service are suitable to work with children and young people.(NMS 15) • Fostering panels are organised efficiently and effectively.(NMS 30)

p.13

The Commission considers Standards 3, 6, 8, 9, 15 and 30 the key

standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.13

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

3, 6, 8, 9, 15 & 30 The quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service.

p.13

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

The children placed with the foster carers were cared for safely, however some changes in practice with regards the matching of children/young people is required to ensure that appropriate placements are made.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The manager of the service has a social work qualification and the NVQ Level V in Management. He has been appointed as the principle manager of the service following a period as acting principle manager. The service had team managers for the individual teams that formed the fostering services. These staff members had an appropriate social work qualifications and were experienced in family placement work.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

Prior to the inspection, the manager of the service provided details of the service and the developments that had been undertaken and those that were planned. This included the continuation of recruitment and selection of foster carers. This is important as the authority continued to have a high number of children and young people placed outside of the authority. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 A number of assessments of carers were examined and found to contain information relating to how the prospective carer would ensure that they were able to keep the child safe during the placement.

p.13

EVIDENCE:

The carers met during the inspection presented as skilled, competent carers who appeared to be caring appropriately for the young people placed. All carers visited had a Safe Care Policy in place and the carers were aware of their role and responsibilities with regards promoting the safety and well being of the children and young people placed with them. The home’s visited appeared to provide adequate and safe environments for the children/young people.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

Each year the service undertook an updated health and safety assessment for individual carers and a copy of this was evidenced on the files examined.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The service had further developed the training available for carers with regards the protection of children. This included sudden unexplained death training and carers’ spoken to demonstrated understanding and awareness of the issues with regards to child protection. Training that carers had undertaken in the previous 12 months was discussed as part of the foster carer review.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The matching process undertaken by the agency was recorded on some of the files examined. However, information was not apparent on all files examined. Placing social workers said that they discussed with the family placement workers the requirements of the young person and the level of support that was required for the young person. However, no formal documentation was completed by the placing social workers. Family placement workers completed documentation but this information was not written or verbally given to the placing social workers. It is important that this is undertaken to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the matching requirements for the child/young person to ensure the best outcome for them.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

The recruitment and selection procedures for appointing new staff followed good practice guidance in safeguarding children. The files of two staff were selected to be examined by the inspector, one new member of staff and one who had worked for the authority for a number of years. They were found to contain appropriate application forms, references and previous experience to ensure that they had the skills and qualifications to undertake their role. All staff had enhanced Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) disclosures that were renewed every three years. One of the files examined contained the date of when the CRB had been applied for and when it had been returned but did not contain details of the disclosure number. The agency needs to ensure that this is recorded to enable a clear audit trail to be maintained.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

One of the inspectors attended a Panel meeting. The Panel was effectively chaired by the independent chair, and efficiently administered. Panel had Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 access to legal and medical advice although the medical adviser did not sit as member of panel. The Panel meeting observed consisted of only five members as a result of people being away for half term holiday. The person identified as vice-chair has recently left, and a replacement had not yet been made It was further noted that the panel did not have a member who has been in the looked after system, or who has had a child in the looked after child system. In addition an “agency social worker” was not present at this meeting. The chair said that the manager was the agency social worker. It was recommended that that the person acting in that position should be a current and active social work practitioner.

p.14

EVIDENCE:

A fostering Panel steering group meets every three months. This enabled the Chair to feed back issues that have arisen to the Assistant Director and thereby provides a continuous Quality Assurance function.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The Panel did not have a person identified as “panel gatekeeper”. Panel papers were received by an administrator who circulated them to the Panel members. This meant that the Panel sometimes had to check the information and ask for clarification on issues.

p.15

EVIDENCE:

The Panel members had received training. It includes training by the sometimes with assistance of external British Association of Adoption and Fostering (BAAF). This supported the Panel members within their role. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16

p.15

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service values diversity.(NMS 7) • The fostering service promotes educational achievement.(NMS 13) • When foster care is provided as a short-term break for a child, the arrangements recognise that the parents remain the main carers for the child.(NMS 31)

p.16

The Commission considers Standards 7, 13, and 31 the key standards

to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.16

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

7, 13 & 31 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. The individual and the educational needs of the children/young people placed were in the main being met.

p.16

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

The fostering service recognised and valued diversity, recruiting carers from different racial and cultural backgrounds to support the needs of the children and young people placed within the fostering service..

p.16

EVIDENCE:

Through discussions with staff, carers and reviewing the recruitment and selection of foster carers from a range of backgrounds it was evident that the fostering service recognises and values diversity.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The authority promoted equal opportunities through the foster care recruitment policy and equal opportunity policy in the Foster Carers Agreement.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

There was evidence of children and young people placed with carers of the same racial origin to enable them to be supported with their cultural needs as identified on the children/young persons’ care plans. Where a young person was not placed with carers of the same cultural background there was evidence that foster carers had received appropriate training and support to enable them to support the young person with their cultural needs. The Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 fostering service had developed the recruitment of carers from Black and Ethnic minority groups and the managers of the service felt that carers from different backgrounds was a good resource for the fostering service.

p.16

EVIDENCE:

The disabled children’s team enlisted the support of approved foster carers to promote the needs of children and young people with disabilities. The inspectors’ attended a foster carer support group for children/young people with disabilities. The carers demonstrated that they had clear understanding of the complex needs of the children and young people that were placed with them.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The service supported children and young people with their education. Files examined by the inspectors contained Personal Education Plans (PEP’s) for the children and young people. At the Panel meeting issues relating to how prospective foster carers would support the educational needs and progress for children and young people was discussed as part of the approval process.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

Carers’ spoken to were able to demonstrate how they supported the educational needs of the children placed with them. This included attending meetings at school, accessing information, supporting the child/young person with their homework and supporting the child/young person with their school attendance. Some responses from questionnaires sent to foster carers indicated that they felt that it was important to have additional updated information about current educational requirements to enable them to be able to support the young person placed with them with their education. Foster carers were aware of who to contact if there were any issues or concerns regarding educational needs.

p.17

EVIDENCE:

The fostering service had a number of approved foster carers who provided short-term breaks. Those carers were aware of their role and responsibility and there was evidence of good working liaison between a short-term break carer and the parents to ensure that the child received the appropriate support that they needed. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18

p.17

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service promotes contact arrangements for the child or young person. (NMS 10) • The fostering service promotes consultation.(NMS 11)

p.18

The Commission considers Standards 10 and 11 the key standards to

be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.18

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

The quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. The service generally promotes contact for children and young people in placement, however some contact arrangements were not fully supported.

p.18

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

The service consulted with the children and young people to gain their views and opinions.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The fostering service supported contact arrangements for the children and there were clear policies and procedures in place.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Foster carers spoken to were clear about the contact arrangements for the children placed with them and their role in supporting the arrangements. The family placement workers discussed contact arrangements for individual children with the carers. One foster carer spoken to said that contact had been held within the home to ensure that there was continuity for the child placed. Foster carer support workers also facilitated some contact arrangements. Some carers who responded to the questionnaire said that contact was not always well supported by the department and that limited time was given to carers regarding contact arrangements and on other occasions the contact worker did not arrive to support the child with contact. This had resulted in the child not attending the arranged contact session

p.18

EVIDENCE:

The service had recently appointed a quality assurance officer who was responsible for undertaken reviews. The wishes and views of the children and young people was sought and included in the foster carer review. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Questionnaires received from young people indicated that they felt that they had the opportunity to say how they felt and how things were for them.

p.18

EVIDENCE:

Questionnaires received from foster carers indicated that they felt that the service did consult with them but on occasions this could be improved. Some carers raised concern about the contact that the children placed with them received from placing social workers. This was on occasions very limited and the foster carers reported that they experienced difficulty contacting the social worker. They felt that the impact of this was that the child/young person was not being supported well by the authority as a whole. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20

p.19

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• The fostering service prepares young people for adulthood.(NMS 14) • The fostering service pays carers an allowance and agreed expenses as specified.(NMS 29)

p.20

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

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

p.20

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

Information about foster carers allowances were provided in written form to all carers.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

Each foster carer received an allowance that had been agreed as part of the registration process. Foster carers’ spoken to confirmed that their allowances were received at the appropriate time. A copy of the scale of allowances was given to foster carers prior to a child being placed and this is updated on a yearly basis.

p.20

EVIDENCE:

Foster carers spoken to or who returned questionnaires felt that the payments were generally received on time and that there were no problems with them. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21

p.20

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• There is a clear statement of the aims and objectives of the fostering service and the fostering service ensures that they meet those aims and objectives.(NMS 1) • The fostering service is managed by those with the appropriate skills and experience. (NMS 2) • The fostering service is monitored and controlled as specified. (NMS 4) • The fostering service is managed effectively and efficiently.(NMS 5) • Staff are organised and managed effectively.(NMS 16) • The fostering service has an adequate number of sufficiently experienced and qualified staff.(NMS 17) • The fostering service is a fair and competent employer.(NMS 18) • There is a good quality training programme. (NMS 19) • All staff are properly accountable and supported.(NMS 20) • The fostering service has a clear strategy for working with and supporting carers.(NMS 21) • Foster carers are provided with supervision and support.(NMS 22) • Foster carers are appropriately trained.(NMS 23)

p.21

The intended outcomes for these Standards are:

• Case records for children are comprehensive.(NMS 24) • The administrative records are maintained as required.(NMS 25) • The premises used as offices by the fostering service are suitable for the purpose.(NMS 26) • The fostering service is financially viable. (NMS 27) • The fostering service has robust financial processes. (NMS 28) • Local Authority fostering services recognise the contribution made by family and friends as carers.(NMS 32)

p.21

The Commission considers Standards 17, 21, 24 and 32 the key

standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period.

p.21

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

2,17, 19, 21, 22, 24 & 32 The quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service.

p.21

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

The service is generally well managed however the service need to further develop its recruitment and retention of staff to ensure a consistent service is provided. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22

p.21

EVIDENCE:

The service had recently moved to an office block in the Gorton area of Manchester. This provided the fostering service with a greater area of space and facilities. However, there were no signs to indicate that the office was based there, which could make it difficult for people to locate where the service was situated.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The authority as a whole had a ‘Service Improvement Plan’ that was an initiative to improve services. Some staff felt that this did not pay sufficient attention to the strategic review of the service, and could have considered issues of communication and organisation of family placement service. However, the manager felt that this was not the case and that the service was linked in with the overall Service Improvement Plan.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The fostering service continued to experience difficulty with the recruitment and selection of staff. A high proportion of staff in post were agency staff. There was a high rate of turnover and it was felt that this in turn leads to continual changes to caseload, lack of continuity for carers, and it impedes the ability of the service to engage staff in long-term strategic development. Staff and managers considered that an additional issue was the number of cases that individual workers were responsible for. Caseloads for family placement staff ranged between 20 and 30 and the service also had a number of unallocated cases. Again this impacted on the service that the children and young people received.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

Staff said that they were involved in ongoing training and development and all new staff received induction training. Staff received supervision to enable them to identify any training or developmental needs that they had. Foster carers also received supervision, however, this was not recorded on any specific format and foster carers did not always receive details of their supervision. Dates of supervision visits were included on the foster carer review format. The role of the supervising social worker seemed to be interpreted differently by the workers. Unannounced visits were not for a specific purpose, and some carers were not sure if they had had one. It is recommended that the carer’s files should have a monitoring sheet that recorded all visits and their purpose, and thus provide ease of monitoring. It was recommended that this format be developed to ensure a consistent level of support and monitoring for all foster

p.22

EVIDENCE:

In most cases information relating to the approval status of foster carers was completed, however, there was some signs of inconsistency with this. For example on one carer’s file it was recorded that the carer was approved for one child per placement of either gender, age 0-15. The fostering services Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 computerised system stated that the carer is approved for 2 children aged 0 to 8.

p.22

EVIDENCE:

The authority continued to support the roles of family and friend as carers. Assessment team social workers placement workers spoke about their involvement with kinship carers at early stages of a placement. They do carer assessments on their own. It was felt that standard notification to family placement team and joint viability assessment would improve working relationships between teams and improve support to carers due to family placement workers having current knowledge of requirements of placements and payments scales and arrangements for carers.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

There was a general view that the workload caused by family and friends carers was significant and not fully appreciated. The number of family and friend carers currently runs at approximately 65% of the total number of carers.

p.23

EVIDENCE:

Discussions were held with social workers and family placement workers about improving joint working at the earliest stage of involvement with a family and a number of suggestions were put forward that included • Immediate notification of any placement with family and friends to family placement team. • Allocation of family placement worker, and joint visit with social worker to offer advice and guidance. • Joint viability assessment completed by social worker and family placement worker. In addition to improving quality of assessment it would improve working relationships between social workers and family placement workers • Family placement worker could offer information about viability of placement, support groups, training and financial support. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24

p.23

SCORING OF OUTCOMES

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

p.24

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 BEING HEALTHY ACHIEVING ECONOMIC Standard No Score WELLBEING 12 3 Standard No Score 14 X STAYING SAFE 29 3 Standard No Score 3 3 MANAGEMENT 6 3 Standard No Score 8 2 1 X 9 3 2 3 15 3 4 X 30 2 5 X 16 X ENJOYING AND ACHIEVING 17 3 Standard No Score 18 X 7 3 19 3 13 3 20 X 31 3 21 2 22 2 MAKING A POSITIVE 23 X CONTRIBUTION 24 2 Standard No Score 25 X 10 3 26 X 11 3 27 X 28 X 32 3 Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? YES

p.24

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Fostering Services Regulations 2002 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales.

p.25

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 1. FS8 33 The Service must record all matching decisions and a copy must be maintained on individual’s file. (Previous timescale of 30/06/06 not met) 30/03/07

p.25

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

2 FS22 35 (3)(b) The fostering service must ensure that there is a written report prepared and shared with the carer following supervision. 30/03/07

p.25

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

3. FS24 17 The Service must ensure that all the key documents regarding the care and support of the child/young person are issued to the foster carer to ensure that they are able to provide the appropriate service to the child/young person. (Previous timescale of 30/06/06 not met) 30/03/07

p.25

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

4 FS30 24 (4) The Panel must appoint a person to act as Vice Chair who will act as chair in the absence of the person appointed as Panel Chair 30/03/07 Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26

p.25

RECOMMENDATIONS

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

p.26

RECOMMENDATIONS

No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations

p.26

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 FS30 It is recommended that the agency appoints a panel member who has experience of being a looked after child or has had a child who has been looked after. 2 FS13 It is recommended that the fostering service provides additional training to carers regarding supporting children/y0oung people with their educational needs. 3 FS22 It is recommended that the fostering service ensures that current foster placement agreements are held on foster carer files to enable these to be monitored by the family placement staff 4 FS22 It is recommended that the Family Placement worker is involved on a formal basis at the foster carer review. 5 FS22 The carer’s files could have a visit monitoring sheet that recorded all visits and their purpose. 6 FS23 Foster carer agreement should reinforce carers’ responsibility to attend identified training after agreement with supervising social worker. 7 FS25 It is recommended that the service has a formal audit

p.26

RECOMMENDATIONS

record of carers files 8 FS30 It is recommended that that the person acting in that position should be a current and active agency social work practitioner.

p.26

RECOMMENDATIONS

9 FS30 It is recommended that the agency appoint a panel gatekeeper to identify any issues that may require clarification prior to the panel meeting. Manchester Fostering Service DS0000045099.V311073.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27

p.26

Commission for Social Care Inspection

CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ

p.27

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.27