REGULATION 33 VISITS
Report for Corporate Parent Panel 5th July 2007
Introduction
Regulation 33 refers to Regulation 33 of the Children’s Homes Regulations 2001.
Regulation 33 (2), (3) and (4) state: -
(2) Where the registered provider is an organisation or a partnership, the home shall be visited in accordance with this regulation by –
(a)the responsible individual or one or the partners, as the case may be;
(b)another of the directors or other persons responsible for the management of the organisation or partnership; or
(c)an employee of the organisation or partnership who is not directly concerned with the conduct of the home.
(3) Visits shall take place at least once a month and may be unannounced.
(4) The person carrying out the visit shall –
(a)interview, with their consent and in private, such of the children accommodated there, their parents, relatives and persons working at the home as appears necessary in order to form an opinion of the standard of care provided in the home;
(b)inspect the premises of the children’s home, its daily log of events and records of any complaints; and
(c)prepare a written report on the conduct of the home.
In Manchester, Regulation 33 visits have been undertaken by members and, more recently, by officers from other Council Departments and the Health Service. This practice emphasises the Corporate Parent responsibilities of members and officers. It has provided constructive challenge to staff within the Residential Service and has also given recognition and support to good practice.
Performance
While many visitors visit and provide reports on a regular and consistent basis, overall there has been some inconsistency in the requirement to visit monthly and to provide a report on the visit. In the period January to May 2007, 70% of monthly visits were done. Further, there can be delays in receiving the report of the visit, which in turn delays the distribution of an action plan / response, which is prepared following receipt of each report.
The office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (OFSTED), who took over the inspection of children’s homes from the Commission for Social Care (CSCI), in April of this year have commented on this inconsistency and have made it a requirement that we address this issue.
Number of Visitors
The pool of Regulation 33 visitors has reduced over the past year. Currently, there are five members, eleven Council officers and two Health Service employees actively involved in visits.
A series of briefings is taking place on 9th July in the Town Hall. Members who have expressed an interest in becoming Reg 33 visitors have been invited to attend. It is hoped that this will increase the pool of available visitors and support the achievement of full compliance with the requirement to undertake monthly visits.
Themes from Regulation 33 Visitors Reports
Analysis of themes of Regulation 33 reports indicates the following reported strengths and concerns which are grouped according to each of the “Every Child Matters” outcomes with an additional “management” category.
1) Being Healthy
Strengths
•Links with the Child Therapeutic Service For Looked after Children (CTLAC)
•Links with Looked After Children Nurses
Concerns
•Delay in accessing Children Adolescent Mental Health Services (CHAMS)
•Substance abuse by young people
2) Staying Safe
Strengths
•Management of difficult behaviour
•Management of ‘Missing From Home’
•Management of bullying behaviour
Concerns
•Relationships with older boyfriends / Child Sexual Exploitation
•Missing From Home
3) Enjoying & Achieving
Strengths
•Good education support from staff
•Good links with schools
•Expectation of school attendance
•Involvement in positive activities
•Good co-working with Leisure / Connexions, etc
Concerns
•Personal Education Plans (PEPs) incomplete or out of date
•Links with schools
•Lack of alternative provision / funding for young people with additional educational needs
4) Making a Positive Contribution
Strengths
•Good use of individual Residential Care Plan
•Good relationships with young people
Concerns
•Delay in allocation of Leaving Care Worker
5) Achieving Economic Well-Being
Strengths
•Good material standards in the home
Concerns
•Grounds maintenance (one home)
•Delay in completing building work
•Quality control of building work
6) Management
Strengths
•Strong leadership from home manager
Concerns
•Staffing issues / staff dynamics (one home)
While this list is not exhaustive, it indicates the main and recurring themes raised by visitors. Issues are not the same in all homes. An area of strength in one home may be an area of concern in another.
The support and challenge provided by this independent scrutiny contributes to improved practice and outcomes for young people, both on an individual level where individual issues are highlighted and on a more general basis when wider issues are reported. Up to April 2007, both the visitors’ report and corresponding action plan/response were copied to CSCI. From April 2007, OFSTED have advised that they do not wish to receive a copy of visitors’ reports. It is likely, however, that they will look at these reports in the home as part of the inspection process.
Conclusions
- Manchester’s approach to Regulation 33 visiting is successful in that it provides independent scrutiny, support and challenge that promotes best outcomes for young people. The approach emphasises the Corporate Parent responsibilities of the whole council.
- There has been a drop in numbers of visitors and also some inconsistency in visiting monthly and providing reports. The recruitment of new visitors underway should improve this situation. Our performance in this respect is under scrutiny from OFSTED.
If improvement does not occur, we would need to consider alternative solutions such as back up visits from within the service or other independent persons.
U:\Temp\notesA63E55\Reg 33 Visits Background Paper CYPOS 17July07.doc\ow