Kent County Council Adoption Service

Kent County Council Adoption Service Inspection report for la adoption agency

p.1

SC055722 Unique reference number 15 September 2008 Inspection date Margaret Lynes / Lindy Latreille Inspector Key Type of Inspection

p.1

Kent County Council Address Kroner House The Eurogate Business Park Ashford Kent TN24 8SB 01233 652160 Telephone number

p.1

Email

Kent County Council Registered person Vanessa Glen Registered manager

p.1

Responsible individual

18 December 2006 Date of last inspection .

p.1

Responsible individual

This document may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial educational purposes, provided that the information quoted is reproduced without adaptation and the source and date of publication are stated.

p.2

Responsible individual

You can obtain copies of The Children Act 2004, Every Child Matters and The National Minimum Standards for Children's Services from: The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Cripins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop

p.2

About this inspection

The purpose of this inspection is to assure children and young people, parents, the public, local authorities and government of the quality and standard of the service provided. The inspection was carried out under the Care Standards Act 2000. This report details the main strengths and any areas for improvement identified during the inspection. The judgements included in the report are made in relation to the outcome for children set out in the Children Act 2004 and relevant National Minimum Standards for the establishment.

p.3

The inspection judgements and what they mean

this aspect of the provision is of exceptionally high quality Outstanding: this aspect of the provision is strong Good: this aspect of the provision is sound Satisfactory: this aspect of the provision is not good enough Inadequate: 3 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008

p.3

Brief description of the service

Kent County Council's adoption service is part of the County's specialist children's services. It is made up of a number of individual teams set across three districts. It is managed by an adoption manager who is based in Ashford. The stated purpose of the team is to provide a comprehensive social work service under the 2002 Adoption and Children Act. This includes assessing and supporting potential adopters; working in partnership with the children's social workers in seeking a permanent adoptive placement for the child; assessing and supporting children who have a concurrent plan for adoption; assessing and supporting step parents/family relatives who wish to adopt, and assessing and supporting those who are seeking to adopt from another country. The county works with a number of partners both within its borders and externally in order to meet the individual needs of both looked after children, prospective

p.4

Brief description of the service

adopters and families who have adopted. The County has commissioned the Kent Independent Support for Kinship and Adopters (KISKA), via NCH, to offer independent support to birth parents and their families. This service will also provide direct contact and letterbox services, counselling, guidance, intermediary services and support access to birth records.

p.4

Summary

During this announced visit the adoption service demonstrated its commitment to this inspection and had prepared well for it. All of the pre-inspection documentation was returned within the timescale indicated, and inspectors were provided with a well equipped base from which they could work. On behalf of Ofsted questionnaires were sent out to all relevant parties. These were returned to the inspection team and their analysed findings have been incorporated into this report. This report contains three actions and five recommendations. The actions relate to the need for the service to improve its staff recruitment documentation; to take steps to increase the recruitment of adopters from black and minority ethnic communities, and to ensure that there is a policy in place for dealing with allegations of historical abuse. The recommendations relate to the need to clarify the application process for adopters in terms of clearly establishing

p.4

Summary

what constitutes an application form and the date that the assessment process starts; to clarify the purpose of the post panel meeting of the decision maker and the panel advisor; to ensure that administrative staff receive appropriate safeguarding training; to improve the quality monitoring of files; and to ensure that archived files are not at risk from damage by water. This inspection found that the adoption manager had already identified a number of these issues through a recently conducted audit, and had started to plan the necessary action to rectify them. An action plan had been produced which listed the action needed, who was responsible for carrying them out, and the deadline for doing so. The overall quality rating is good. This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection.

p.4

Improvements since the last inspection

The last full inspection of this service took place in September 2005. It resulted in 13 actions and 23 recommendations. A follow up inspection in December 2006 indicated that steps had been taken to rectify all but one of the actions, and nine of the recommendations. The remaining action concerned the need to ensure that all of the required information about persons working for the service is obtained. This included obtaining information about panel members. As can be seen from the comments in the summary section above, there remain some omissions in this 4 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 regard, and the action has been repeated. It is noted that responsibility for recruitment documentation falls outside the remit of the adoption service. Nevertheless attention is drawn to it in this report as the implications upon the service can be significant. The outstanding

p.4

Improvements since the last inspection

recommendations related to quality assurance systems; health and safety checklists; the adoption support budget; adoption support packages; partnership arrangements with other service providers; the capacity and role of specialist advisors; qualitative monitoring of the independent and support services and risk assessing the means of storage used for files with regard to the risk of fire or water damage. With the exception of the first and last of these, it was felt that sufficient action had been taken or was in the process of being taken. Recommendations regarding quality monitoring of files and the safe storage of archived files have been repeated.

p.5

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

The provision is good. The local authority has a designated team and a number of strategies to recruit suitable adopters. It also works jointly with the fostering and the concurrency teams. A variety of recruitment methods are used including a website. A specific gateway team deals with all initial phone or website enquiries. Approximately 500 enquiries are received each year, while the website has had over 12000 hits in the last 12 months. The team is currently determining the best method to evaluate how successful these enquiries are, and how many actually lead to adopters being approved. The team does not target any specific group for recruitment, but tries to raise the profile of adoption in all sections of the community, making good use of local knowledge and resources. The effect of this is an under representation of black and minority ethnic adopters. Assurances were given that this shortcoming has been noted and that discussions are underway

p.5

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

to improve recruitment in these sections of the community. At present most children from black and ethnic minority origins are placed with adopters from outside the authority. Publicity and recruitment drives are planned around key events such as national adoption week. The team is also keen to seek feedback from adopters to ascertain what it was about the information they were provided with pre application that was useful, what was not helpful, and what could be done differently. The local authority has a specific matching officer who, once they have received the child's permanency record and the assessment Form F, will commence the matching process by identifying up to three potential adopters. This information is sent to the child's social worker and the adopters' social worker. If there is no suitable match within the county then the consortium is consulted. Potential adopters from outside the county will only be

p.5

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

considered if there are no suitable matches in-county or through the consortium. The agency also has a specific family finder to assist in the placement process. The average waiting time for a child to be placed is some seven to eight months (up to nine months for children from a black or ethnic minority group); while the waiting time for an adopter to be matched with a Kent child averages nine months. A number of strategies are used to find suitable matches including participation in exchange days with other consortium members. In the financial year preceding this inspection some 63 new adopters were approved. A total of 87 children were placed or matched in the same period, however there were also 90 adopters waiting for a suitable match to be found and 105 children waiting to be matched. This latter figure has now reduced to 40. Positive links are maintained with the regional consortium, and 10 placements

p.5

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

were made using this avenue in the aforementioned period. The concurrency team continues to operate, and was highly spoken of by adopters who had used this element of the adoption 5 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 service. Adopters also indicated that the information provided to them at their initial enquiry was helpful, and they felt that they were treated in a friendly and positive manner. From the information in the files examined, and from discussion with adopters it is evident that the matching process is child focussed and consequently good matches are generally achieved. There have been a number of disruptions however there is evidence to indicate that the agency is meeting the requirements of its own guidelines with regard to dealing with these occurrences. Disruption meetings examined the probable causes of the breakdown, and the area of improvement that the adoption service could make. In some cases the cause of the disruption

p.5

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

was due to circumstances beyond the adoption service's control. In others staff considered that it was possibly due to over-expectations of adoption outcomes by the judiciary. It was noted in panel minute that the members of the panel were diligent and raised queries where needed regarding the matches being proposed. There is a formal preparation, assessment and approval process in place, however it was noted that formal applications are taken after the preparation as opposed to before as clearly stated in the guidance to the adoption legislation. This made it difficult to determine whether or not the agency was meeting the required timescale for completion of the assessment process. The views of adopters who had been through the process were mixed. Some commented that their assessment and approval had been carried out speedily, whilst others were less complimentary and felt that there had been delays. Feedback from

p.6

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

adopters with regard to communication during this process was similarly mixed. Some applicants felt that they were kept informed of progress, however others felt that they had to initiate contact and request feedback. All commented favourably on the preparation programme, stating that the opportunity to meet adopters who had gone through the process was invaluable. Some felt that more time during the programme needed to be spent on discussing how family dynamics can dramatically change when a second child is introduced into a family. Adopters commented that the assessment process was thorough, comprehensive and sensitively handled. While the process was intrusive, they stated that the understood the need for this detailed examination of their lives. Examination of a sample of adopters' files indicated that the reports of the assessments were generally well written, detailed and were focused on ensuring that the

p.6

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

applicants had the capacity to look after children in a safe and responsible manner. All the files seen contained a health and safety assessment , including pet assessments where necessary. The process should include obtaining Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) disclosures for family members over 18, however in one file these checks could not be evidenced. A similar omission was also noted during the last inspection of this service. It was also noted that on one occasion the agency had not carried out as thorough checks relating to a birth family as was needed. Adopters also commented that the introduction of the child to them, although often exhausting, was well managed through clear planning and the provision of up to date and relevant information about the child. All were aware of the adoption register and used it. Adopters are required to sign a declaration agreeing to notify the agency if the adopted child dies, and also

p.6

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

agreeing to any contact arrangements that the agency feels are appropriate. They also stated that they were made fully aware of the importance of memorabilia and the need to ensure that this was safely kept for their adopted child. The agency runs seven panels, and during this inspection one of these was observed. It was well organised, chaired and operated in an efficient and empathetic manner. Adopters stated that they felt that they had been well prepared for the panels, although comment was made regarding the very small cramped room that is used for one panel. The adoption manager meets with the panel chairs and the panel advisors at regular intervals, and also periodically observes a panel in progress. A number of panel members are reaching the end of their term of office. The manager indicated that the intention is to recruit new members from a wider audience than has previously been canvassed. This, she

p.6

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

6 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 hopes, will help to increase both the level of experience and the diversity of the panels. The panel observed was quorate. The panel chair confirmed that papers are sent out in a timely manner. The lead panel adviser stated that panel members are enabled to attend an annual training day however this is not a joint training day with members of the adoption staff as outlined in the National Minimum Standards. Panel members felt that the training was beneficial, and enabled them to remain abreast of current practice. From observation it was evident that the panel members had familiarised themselves with the cases being presented, and had no difficulties in challenging the information provided if they felt it was inaccurate, inconsistent or inadequate. All panel members receive an annual appraisal which has proved to be beneficial

p.6

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

to panel member and agency alike. The appraisals cover a number of areas including individual strengths, areas of development, training needs and a self evaluation. The files of a number of panel members were examined. They contained the necessary information however it was noted that renewal of CRB checks was not always carried out promptly. The panels are supported by dedicated administrative staff. Panel members and the lead panel advisor commented that this support was excellent. Panel members are provided with an annually reviewed handbook which contains panel policies and procedures, guidance, legal updates and a schedule of the forthcoming panel dates. Regular meetings take place between the panel chairs, panel advisors, adoption team leaders and the specialist advisors to the panels. Panel attendees, both adopters and social workers are asked to complete feedback forms regarding the performance of the

p.7

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

panel and the experience it provided. From discussion with adopters it was evident that they felt that most but not all panels were efficiently organised. There has been the occasional delay and postponement of a panel hearing due to the late arrival of relevant information. The organisation of the panels is currently being reviewed, with the possibility or reorganising the system into three distinct areas, each of which would have two panels. This would mean that if one panel was oversubscribed, cases could be moved to the other panel, which would be taking place no more than two weeks later. At present each panel takes place on a monthly basis. Staff also felt that it would enable a more equitable distribution of panel work across the county as a whole. Consideration is also being given to reducing the number of professional panel advisers but at the same time making them specific posts so that the incumbents do not

p.7

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

also have to carry a caseload as is the situation at present. Three of the agency's decision makers were interviewed as part of this inspection process. They were of the opinion that the quality of the paperwork that they received from the panel was of a good standard. If they have any concerns regarding the paperwork, this is fed back to the team manager who in turn would be expected to raise the concerns with the individual staff concerned. They stated that the expectation was that a decision would be reached within seven days of the panel recommendation being made. The panel administrator joins the decision maker to discuss the recommendations. How independent this makes the decision could be debated. The agency manager is relatively new in post, but has brought to this position a considerable amount of prior relevant experience and a notable amount of enthusiasm and drive to move the service forward. She has been appropriately vetted, and has a current CRB disclosure, although the

p.7

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

latter was not actually on file. The file also lacked details of her induction to this post. A number of staff files were examined. They did not contain evidence of the interview process, which meant that it was not possible to determine whether or not any gaps in employment had been explored with the relevant individual. Neither was it possible to evidence that references had been followed up by telephone. The files contained copies of qualifications but these had not been signed or dated. It was difficult to assess each individual's start date from the information provided, which in turn made it difficult to determine if CRB's were being renewed on a regular basis. A number of staff moved internally from post to post but there did not appear to be any 7 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 clear, equality driven process for this. Staff had the appropriate experience and qualifications

p.7

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

to enable them to undertake assessments of prospective adopters. Social workers who provide birth record counselling have additional skills in this area. There was evidence of satisfactory interagency working between the authority staff and the staff from the independent adoption support agency commissioned by the authority to provide a variety of support services. This independent agency welcomed the opportunity to establish closer working ties. The safeguarding lead officer shares the local authority designated officer role with a colleague. Their role is to improve standards and performance. They do not directly manage safeguarding issues but take a non operational overview. Operational staff can consult directly with them however. They carry out audits of both individual cases and the overall general performance relating to safeguarding issues. They are not responsible for ensuring staff receive regular safeguarding

p.8

Protecting children from harm or neglect and helping them stay safe

training but do provide some specific courses, and support the induction programme. District teams will initially deal with safeguarding issues unless there is a major incident. They can call upon the safeguarding lead officer and her team for assistance to chair meetings or for advice as and when needed. Examination of the staff training records indicated that staff had had a number of opportunities to attend safeguarding training during the past year. These courses have not been extended to administrative staff, however senior staff were of the view that safeguarding issues were included in a variety of training courses accessible to this group of staff. There has been only one safeguarding query in the past year which was satisfactorily dealt with by the authority's legal team.

p.8

Helping children achieve well and enjoy what they do

The provision is good. The local authority provides an adoption and special guardian support team. Adoptive parents are made aware of the possible support both in the preparation groups and at the matching stage. Once they have adopted a child they are formally contacted and sent a pack outlining the support available. The team provides a helpline and support groups (buddy groups). A monthly meeting, facilitated by a social work assistant, encourages mutual support and provides activities for children. Workshops are available which deal with issues such as keeping your cool; strategies for dealing with difficult behaviour; theraplay and story books. Training opportunities and family assessments are also available. It provides seven support groups across county, one of which is for parents of children with disabilities who need respite. The authority also facilitates an adoption advisory group, made up of adoptive parents. This group is a valuable

p.8

Helping children achieve well and enjoy what they do

resource if somewhat underused at present. Specialist input can be arranged, although it was noted that some such arrangements had not gone through the appropriate commissioning process. The views gained from adopters on adoption support were mixed. Some stated that the possibility of post adoption support had been raised with them and while they did not wish to access it currently they were confident that they could contact the adoption service and acquire assistance should they need it. Others stated that there was a lack of information about support groups and that promised support never materialised. Several were of the opinion that they would not ask for support as it might imply a failure in their parenting skills. There was a clear suggestion from presenting social workers during the panel observed that it was difficult to access support services. The panel chair made a number of recommendations in this respect.

p.8

Helping children achieve well and enjoy what they do

Adoption allowances can be applied for through the adoption support board. Some adopters commented that they would not apply as the additional form filling and means testing was too discouraging. Overall however, adopters felt that the support service pre adoption was very good, while post adoption it was satisfactory. In both cases the outcomes for children were generally good. The local authority's adoption support services adviser (ASSA) role is currently 8 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 held by the adoption service manager. This is on a temporary basis while the remit of the post holder is redefined. The manager is of the opinion that close working partnerships need to be developed with specialist support providers such as CAMHS (children and adolescent mental health services), and she is clear that it is not the role of the ASSA to unilaterally decide what

p.8

Helping children achieve well and enjoy what they do

type of support is needed in each individual case. This requires a level of clinical expertise which must come from the aforementioned specialist providers. The need for greater collaborative and multi-agency partnership working was also commented on in the last inspection report. Consideration is being given to identifying a practice supervisor in each District office who will take responsibility for some of the ASSA work. They will liaise with a lead ASSA situated in the adoption support team. In a meeting with the disability team managers they confirmed that children with disabilities receive the same adoption service in the same manner as all other children. The philosophy for them is the same as for able bodied children. The disability team may not always be the case holders which can cause some shortcomings in communication. They commented that the adoption team manager has brought in clearer directions around

p.9

Helping children achieve well and enjoy what they do

what it is reasonable to expect any parent to do, and what additional services should be considered for a child with disabilities. They are keen to promote joint working with both children and family and adoption staff. It is generally considered that people affected by adoption receive a service from this agency that is appropriate and tailored to their particular needs. They are treated fairly and openly and with respect. Service uses are made aware of how to make a complaint or raise a concern. The views of the children to be adopted are not overlooked, although the quality of the recording of this information varied. The information gathered by the concurrency team in this respect was of a good quality.

p.9

Helping children make a positive contribution

The provision is good. At present the support service for birth parents is provided by KISKA (Kent Independent Service for Kinship and Adoption). They also have a remit to facilitate contact, provide mediation services, and support access to birth records. The contract for this service has recently been extended for a fixed term, and during this period there will be a review of the provision with the intention of ensuring that adoption support resources are being used in the most efficient, effective and qualitative manner. Kent County Council takes the lead for the provision of support for adopted children and adopters. It has recently been identified that there is no specific support mechanism for the parents of relinquished babies. The adoption team manager is looking to address this. The manager of the service also stated that birth parents involved in legal proceedings are given information about KISKA, and indeed KISKA will support but

p.9

Helping children make a positive contribution

not advise them during court attendance. KISKA currently provides supervised direct and letter box contact to approximately 500 clients. Some adopters felt that there could be some improvement in the management of the period immediately pre and post contact. At these times it is most likely that they can inadvertently come into contact with birth parents, which is not always the desired outcome. A number of birth parents kindly met with the inspectors, and provided some excellent feedback about their experiences. To a greater or lesser degree they felt that they had been left out in the cold during the adoption process. They did not feel that they had been given sufficient information, and often the post adoption contact that had been agreed had not materialised. The adoption team's expectation is that birth parents will be involved in their child's care plan, and invited to Looked After Children reviews. If this is

p.9

Helping children make a positive contribution

not materialising then the reviewing officer should become involved. All of those present spoke positively about the support they received from KISKA, even though the majority said they had to go out and find this support for themselves. Collectively they felt that the service needed 9 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 to improve its communication. Nevertheless, at the conclusion of this inspection it was not felt by the inspectors that the authority's commitment to developing services to birth parents had diminished from the good standard observed during the last inspection. The concurrency project was spoken of in a much more positive light. Parents were made to feel that they mattered and they were treated as human beings. The concurrency team works intensively with birth parents in an effort to return their children to them, or prepare them for possible future adoption.

p.9

Helping children make a positive contribution

There was evidence to indicate that birth parents and families are asked to contribute to the provision of information about themselves for their child's life story. In a number of instances however, this important documentation had not been acquired pre adoption. The local authority has an adoption and fostering policy and performance manager whose role includes providing staff with appropriate policies, procedures and guidance relating to the work they do. Staff can access the most up to date policies and procedures via the internet, and they can contact the manager directly if they have queries. It was noted that the local authority did not have written procedures for dealing with allegations of historical abuse which may be made by service users during the course of service provision. The local authority indicated that it had the capacity to act in a proactive and innovative manner. This was demonstrated, for example, in projects

p.10

Helping children make a positive contribution

such as the Staying Together project where long term fostered children were adopted by their foster parents. The adoption manager demonstrated that she was fully informed of the current level of service provision with regard to each service provided by the adoption service, and was aware of which members of staff were involved in delivering each of those services. The staff also demonstrated their commitment to providing a quality service.

p.10

Organisation

The organisation is good. There is a Statement of Purpose in place which contains the aims and objectives of the service, and describes the facilities and services that are provided. It does not make mention of the recruitment of adopters, and the need to extend recruitment to all sections of the community. There is also a colourful informative children's guide. It contains a summary of what happens at each stage of the adoption process, and includes information on how a child can make a complaint. It was clearly evident that the number of approved adopters, and the number of children waiting to be adopted from black and ethnic minority communities was very small, and not reflective of the demography of the county. The adoption manager acknowledged that this was the case, and strategies to recruit more adopters from these groups are being considered. The lack of diversity amongst adopters is mirrored in the lack of diversity within

p.10

Organisation

the adoption team itself, including a noticeable lack of male staff. There are some systems in place to prioritise adopters and children waiting to be adopted. The authority both runs its own and attends other authorities' exchange days, where specific cases are highlighted and promoted. They also organise co-called coffee mornings, where children's social workers are invited to come and meet prospective adopters, to exchange information. This is a geographically large local authority, with a considerable number of distinct teams and management structures. There are two adoption teams situated in the West and East areas of the county which provide a recruitment, preparation and assessment service to prospective adopters. There is also a Central team which takes responsibility for panel administration. Mention has been made in this report of the concurrency team. Confirmation was given that the council is committed to this team,

p.10

Organisation

and the adoption team manager is hopeful that it can be extended to cover the whole county 10 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 as there is a clear demand for its services. There is also an intercountry adoption service however this was not inspected on this occasion. Parts of the adoption service are being reviewed with a view to more clearly defining some of the roles of staff and the objectives of the service. The service operates in partnership with a number of other professionals including CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service), CAMHS, the consortium and BAAF (British agency for adoption and fostering). The local authority manager is taking a proactive approach to improving lines of communication with all partners. Staff stated that they felt that they were well managed and supervised. There is also good peer support. A number of staff supervision

p.10

Organisation

files were examined. There were some inconsistencies in the contents, and no index system to confirm what the contents should be. Having said that, supervision does happen on a regular basis, albeit not as frequently as stated in the local authority's own agreement. Supervision does reflect the role of the individual. Staff also stated that the training provision was very good, although it was difficult to find adoption specific courses. They felt that there were development opportunities within the team. There is a 2008 - 2010 training plan in place, and staff confirmed that they received an induction when they first arrived, and have had regular appraisals since. Senior managers stated that almost 100% of the social workers in the adoption team had achieved a post qualifying award. There have been a number of long term absences and staff vacancies, which have had an impact on the quality and depth of the service the team

p.11

Organisation

has been able to provide. Nevertheless staff demonstrated a clear commitment to achieving good outcomes for children. The vacancies are now being recruited to. Agency staff have been used in the past 12 months so as to ensure that assessments are carried out without undue delay, however the manager accepted that this was not ideal. Students are occasionally placed within the team, but there did not appear to be a clear system for the Human Resources department to notify the adoption manager that these individuals had been appropriately vetted. Staff considered their working environment to be satisfactory, with very good administrative support, which they felt was involved and committed. Overall, they were of the opinion that the county was a good employer. The manager is seen as proactive, committed to adoption services, and has established good lines of communication. The staff interviewed considered that there were several things which could improve the overall quality of the service

p.11

Organisation

being provided. These included the provision of a therapist for pre-adoption children; full installation of the ICS software so that they did not have to run three concurrent recording systems, the provision of laptops to staff at a designated level so that those who wanted to could occasionally work from home, the provision of more reference books with easier access to those already available, and the expansion of the concurrency team across the whole county. KISKA commented that they would like to offer staff training in the recording of sensitive and sometimes difficult data. This request, and the staff suggestions, were passed on to the adoption manager. An audit of adoption files has recently been carried out in preparation for this inspection. Some of its recommendations included reviewing and simplifying the contents of the child's adoption record, the introduction of a rolling training programme relating to

p.11

Organisation

permanence records, the need to be consistent in the use of forms and the need to hold life appreciation days for all high risk potential adoption placements. All of these recommendations are, to a greater or lesser extent, being actioned. The adoption manager produces a report which reflects on the key responsibilities of the service, its structure, staffing, revenue, service provision and service development. At present this report is produced once annually, however the manager acknowledged that good practice would suggest it should be bi-annual. A small number of adopters and children's files were selected for inspection. While these files were divided into clear sections, they were nevertheless unwieldy and difficult to navigate. Some of the running records were not wholly up to date, while the dates on panel decision reports led 11 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008

p.11

Organisation

to some confusion. The decision makers stated that their decisions are communicated in writing and in a timely manner to the relevant parties, however this could not be evidenced in the files examined. Potential adopters are asked to indicate, after attending a preparation group, whether they wish to be put forward for assessment. This request is in the form of a letter, and the response is taken as the formal application. In line with a previously made requirement, the authority has recently agreed to purchase fire proof cabinets for the safe storage of their current files in their offices. Closed files are maintained in a central archive. This warehouse is secure, and access closely monitored. Staff showed a thorough understanding of their role, the need for confidentiality, and excellent understanding of the system used to retrieve files. It was noted that there have been ongoing issues regarding the protection of files from water damage,

p.12

Organisation

as the roof of the building requires frequent repair. Staff have taken action to protect the files by using waterproof sheeting. This situation is far from satisfactory. There have been five complaints relating to the adoption service since September 2007. These related to a delayed panel; a delay in setting up a letterbox; the length the assessment process took; an adoption allowance and one anonymous complaint. The issues were appropriately dealt with, and in almost all cases the local authority's deadline for response was met.

p.12

Statutory requirements

This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person meets the Care Standards Act 2000, The Adoption Agencies Regulations 2005 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider must comply with the given timescales.

p.12

Due date Action Standard

31 October 2008 increase the number of applications from the black and minority ethnic communities so as to ensure that the wishes of the child, parents or guardian regarding the child's cultural upbringing can, as far as is possible, be met (Regulation 14, Adoption Agency Regulations 2005). 31 October 2008 ensure that staff recruitment files are in accordance with the Regulations (Regulation 11). 31 October 2008 ensure that there is a specific procedure in place for dealing with allegations of historical abuse (Regulation 10).

p.12

Recommendations

To improve the quality and standards of care further the registered person should take account of the following recommendation(s): • clarify the application process, so that the date the formal application is taken is evident (NMS 4). • clarify the role of the panel advisor in the post panel meeting with the decision maker (NMS 13). • confirm that administrative staff receive appropriate safeguarding training (NMS 19). • improve quality assurance systems with regard to files so that it can be evidenced that regular audits are carried out and any improvements are made (NMS 27). 12 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008 • take all necessary steps to ensure that the archives are protected from water damage (NMS 25). 13 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008

p.12

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• Ofsted considers the key standard to be inspected.

p.14

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

• the agency matches children with adopters (NMS 2) • the agency assesses and prepares adopters (NMS 4) • adopters 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) • the agency safeguards and promotes the welfare of its service users (NMS 32)

p.14

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) • services are tailored to meet the needs of people affected by adoption (NMS 33) Ofsted considers 6 and 33 the key standards to be inspected.

p.14

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) • Service users receive good quality services based on their needs (NMS 34) Ofsted considers 7, 8, 9 and 34 the key standards to be inspected.

p.14

The intended outcomes for these standards are:

Ofsted considers none of the above to be key standards to be inspected.

p.14

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) 14 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008

p.14

Annex A

• 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) • 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)

p.15

Annex A

• the adoption agency is financially viable (NMS 30 voluntary adoption agency only) • the adoption agency has robust financial processes (NMS 31) Ofsted considers 1, 3, 16, 21, 25 and 27 the key standards to be inspected. 15 of 15 Inspection Report: Kent County Council Adoption Service, 15 September 2008

p.15