Users moved out of '˜inadequate' Shoreham children's home

Ofsted gave the Seaside Children’s Home an ‘inadequate’ rating after a full inspection in June, then found not enough improvements had been made at a follow-up visit last week.

Children at the home have been found alternative accommodation and no new placements will be made there for the foreseeable future.

Following the inspection results West Sussex County Council carried out a review of all its other children’s homes resulting in the authority withdrawing services and temporarily suspending placements at two other homes.

The provision of respite care has been ceased at another for the foreseeable future.

Children living at these homes are being found alternative accommodation.

The county council says it is satisfied the level of care at the other homes in the county are of a good standard.

Louise Goldsmith, leader of the county council, said: “Our priority is the welfare of the children in our care and we take Ofsted’s findings very seriously. Obviously, I am disappointed by the report but we accept the findings.

“We have taken the initiative and where we haven’t been satisfied by the standards of care, we have taken the necessary and appropriate action.

“The children in West Sussex will always come first and we are now working hard to raise standards so that we have a consistently high level of care across the county.

“I am sorry for the disruption these decisions have had on the children in our care and their families.”

Residential children’s homes accommodate children with a range of complex needs including behavioural, emotional, physical and learning difficulties.

According to the report into Seaside: “There are serious and widespread failures that mean children and young people are not protected or their welfare is not promoted or safeguarded and the care and experiences of children and young people are poor and they are not making progress.”

Ofsted found:

• Problems with the admissions process. One child had moved in recently having a ‘highly negative effect on the other children’. Staff have not been able to ensure that positive relationships are maintained in the group of children.

• Managers and staff had failed to ensure children are protected from harm, with strategies weak and ineffectual. A lack of safeguarding knowledge resulted in a failure to implement basic safety measures. A deputy manager expressed the view that it could not have been anticipated two children had the potential to harm one another, despite there being significant background information to suggest otherwise.

• Arrangements for supervising children was found to be weak as managers did not take steps to ensure waking night member of staff could consistently observe children leaving their bedrooms at night until a month after there was an alleged incident.

• Managers and staff did not consistently follow agreed child protection protocols and policies.

• Leadership and management of the home was identified as weak. Pre-admission assessments did not convey the rationale for accepting a child or how the home would meet the child’s needs.

• There has been a high turnover of staff since the last full inspection in June 2017. During this period eight members of staff had left, while five had joined. At the time of the inspection there were seven staff vacancies. Agency and bank staff were frequently used to cover staff shortages, with inconsistency in staffing having a destablising effect on some children.