Skip to content

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Other · Ofsted report

Setting

Inspected —

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Original PDF ↗

Summary

No overall grade in this framework

Marie McGuinness

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Marie McGuinness

  • Postcode verified

    DY1 1JQ

Page 1 of 3
Page 1 of the report

Deep dive

What this report says

In plain English

Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.

Tone of the report

How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.

−45Criticalmore positive than 8% of reports of this type

Reads more critically than most reports of this type.

Praisetimelystrengthwell supportedeffectivelypromptlyconsistent
Criticismat riskharmlackinconsistentdelaydelaysvariablelimited

How the report reads, start to finish

Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.

FindingsWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings454w+14
  • What needs to improve349w−70

Strengths

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

No standout praise found.

Concerns

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

Next steps

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

What the report dwells on

Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.

Anatomy of the report

How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.

Pages
3
Words of findings
803
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Very hard
Flesch 29, typical 45
Average sentence
21 words
Next steps
8
typical 5
Hedged sentences
3%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 57%What needs to improve 43%

Full report text

Mr Mark Wyatt c/o Ms Pauline Sharratt Director of Children's Services Westox House 1 Trinity Road Dudley West Midlands DY1 1JQ

p.1

services

This letter summarises the findings of the recent unannounced inspection of contact, referral and assessment arrangements within local authority children’s services in Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council which was conducted on 15 and 16 June 2010. The inspection was carried out under section 138 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. It will contribute to the annual review of the performance of the authority’s children’s services, for which Ofsted will award a rating later in the year. I would like to thank all of the staff we met for their assistance in undertaking this inspection.

p.1

services

The inspection sampled the quality and effectiveness of contact, referral and assessment arrangements and their impact on minimising any child abuse and neglect. Inspectors considered a range of evidence, including: electronic case records; supervision files and notes; observation of social workers and senior practitioners undertaking referral and assessment duties; and other information provided by staff and managers. Inspectors also spoke to a range of staff including managers, social workers, other practitioners and administrative staff.

p.1

services

The inspection identified areas of strength, satisfactory practice and areas for development.

p.1

services

From the evidence gathered, the following features of the service were identified:

p.1

Strengths

ƒ In the cases seen by inspectors, children and young people at risk of significant harm were identified promptly, prioritised and were subject to timely child protection investigations undertaken by qualified and experienced social workers.

p.1

Strengths

ƒ Good action has been taken in the appointment of a senior practitioner social Freshford House Redcliffe Way Bristol BS1 6NL T 0300 1231231 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk Direct T 0117 9456333 Direct F 0117 9456554 Safeguarding.lookedafterchildren@ofsted.gov.uk work post to work directly with the police on domestic violence referrals. This ensures that all domestic violence referrals are screened and appropriately responded to in a timely manner.

p.1

Satisfactory practice

ƒ Team managers are readily available to offer advice and guidance with regards to case work decision making and staff feel well supported in their work.

p.2

Satisfactory practice

ƒ From the cases seen by inspectors the quality of work undertaken by social workers is of a satisfactory standard. Children and young people are routinely seen and spoken to as part of assessments.

p.2

Satisfactory practice

ƒ The emergency duty team has good links with the assessment teams through an electronic alert system. This contributes to consistency of practice for children and young people.

p.2

Satisfactory practice

ƒ The children with disabilities team consists of suitably qualified staff, including community nurses. Child protection investigations are undertaken by this team which ensures that children with disabilities receive a consistent service.

p.2

Satisfactory practice

ƒ Newly qualified social workers receive good support and training with a programme of fortnightly supervision to help their continuing professional development.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ There is considerable delay in the allocation of cases requiring an initial assessment. In the three teams visited, a substantial number of cases were found to be unallocated. Where cases have been allocated for an initial assessment, there are significant delays in completion. This has resulted in some children and families not receiving a prompt and appropriate service to meet their needs and the potential for children to be left at risk of harm.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ Information relating to performance indicators is unreliable and detailed performance management information is not routinely available to team managers. Consequently there are no robust systems in place to ensure that initial and core assessments are completed within timescales.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ Although team managers undertake case file audits at the point of transfer of cases there are no systems in place to regularly audit cases. This results in a lack of management oversight to improve social work practice and performance.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ Social workers receive regular supervision but the quality is too variable. The recording of personal and professional development and the actions needed to be undertaken to move case work on is inconsistent.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ The integrated children’s system has not as yet, developed beyond the recording of initial and core assessments. All other recording, including child protection information, is placed on an alternative system and records are not up-to-date. This adversely impacts on the capacity of social workers and managers to do their work effectively.

p.2

Areas for development

ƒ Although there has been an increase in the use of the common assessment framework, this is not embedded across partner agencies. As a result, there is limited evidence to demonstrate that multi-agency early interventions are having an impact in ensuring that children and families receive preventative services in a timely manner.

p.3

Areas for development

Any areas for development identified above will be specifically considered in any future inspection of services to safeguard children within your area.

p.3

Her Majesty’s Inspector

Copy: Mr John Polychronarkis, Chief Executive, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Ms Pauline Sharratt, Chair of Dudley Safeguarding Children Board Cllr Elizabeth Walker, Lead Member for Children’s Services, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Andrew Spencer, Department for Education

p.3

Discuss this inspection

Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.

Join the discussion