Inspections Clinic: Registering homes and managers

Moves to enable more flexibility in the management of children’s homes have sparked controversy within the sector.

Until recently, Ofsted guidance made it clear applications for one manager to manage more than one children’s home would only be considered in “exceptional” circumstances.

However, updated guidance now states the regulator may consider registering a manager to manage two homes if “satisfied that the manager has the experience, qualifications and skills to manage each home and the care of children effectively and on a daily basis”.

According to Ofsted, 288 managers currently manage more than one children’s home.

Last month, the regulator published new guidance on the registration of so-called “multi-building” children’s homes, allowing providers to accommodate up to six children in four buildings under a single registration (see box).

Opponents view the changes as a worrying development that could put the welfare of vulnerable children at risk and place added burdens on children’s home staff.

Supporters see them as a practical solution at a time when managers are scarce and ahead of a ban on placing children aged under 16 in unregulated accommodation likely to exacerbate a shortage in provision.

Here are some of the arguments for and against.

MULTI-BUILDING HOMES ARE ‘ALARMING DEVELOPMENT’

For Jonathan Stanley, manager of the National Centre for Excellence in Residential Child Care, the concept of multi-building children’s homes is “an alarming development that needs to be withdrawn”.

“This idea has been developed without public consultation and contribution and the implications have not been thought through,” he says.

More generally he fears abandoning the over-arching principle of one manger one home is a retrograde step that risks re-institutionalising the sector.

He admits he was shocked to discover that more than 280 managers – roughly 10 per cent – now manage more than one home.

“It was a revelation because it was agreed the word ‘exceptional’ would be used and we all understood exceptional meant rare,” he says.

“Rare might be one per cent but by no stretch of the imagination can it be 10 per cent.”

He says Ofsted’s revised stance on managing more than one home amounts to a change in regulation that should be subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny.

“Many of us see it as a change in regulation, which requires a change in legislation,” he says.

Good leadership and management in children’s homes are integral to the quality of care children receive.

“The manager needs to have their finger on the pulse of the home,” says Stanley. “They are active in determining culture and practice and are the embodiment of the home.”

He accepts that in some cases having one manager for more than one setting makes sense, such as in the case of residential special schools where there are several houses for children on the same site.

But he is adamant it should be the exception rather than the rule.

The fear is managers who oversee more than one home will be unable to give each setting the “clear, firm, consistent leadership” staff and children need, he explains.

“Inconsistent or absent parenting is a sure way things go wrong for children,” says Stanley. “What we’re worried about is replicating dysfunctional families for children who have already experienced unfortunate circumstances.”

He argues moving away from the principle that there should ideally be one manager for one home is not the solution to pressures in the sector including shortages of qualified staff and children’s home places.

“There may be a temptation for government or others to think extending one manager to multiple homes is a solution,” he says. “In fact, it leads away from the solution because it will overburden managers and requires some staff to act up as quasi-managers.”

While one manager for more than one home costs less – a key consideration for cash-strapped providers and local authorities – he believes any savings will be “fairly minimal” if you factor in the added professional development required and ensure those who take on extra responsibilities are paid fairly.

Managers are key figures – not just for staff but children as well, he adds.

“Children have real relationships with their key workers but they also have relationships with their managers,” says Stanley. “While their key workers are the people looking after them, they recognise their managers have authority and responsibility and rely on them to advocate their views.”

He says it is vital the views of young people and professionals who work in the sector are taken into account.

“It appears to be being redefined as an administrative and technical role and it isn’t – it’s a professional and personal role,” he concludes.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT CREATING ‘SUPER MANAGERS’

The idea that one person can manage more than one children’s home is not new, says Ofsted’s national director for regulation and social care Yvette Stanley.

“This isn’t a new development, it isn’t a change of policy and it is permissible within the current legislation,” she says. “Managers have been able to oversee more than one home for a number of years now.”

She says the guidance was updated to reflect the way children’s homes are delivered. Circumstances where managers manage two homes often involve “solo homes” that only look after one child and are close to one another.

Other circumstances include where there are two buildings on one site providing slightly different types of care such as a children’s home providing long-term care that sits alongside a short break service.

“We always consider applications very carefully and the circumstances have to be right,” says Stanley. “It’s not a case of any manager and any two homes being suitable. Each case has to be judged on its merits and we have to be convinced that the proposed arrangement meets the standards we would expect in any home.”

She says the change was a response to “widespread concerns about sufficiency”. “But this isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to solve the problem of an insufficient number of managers,” she adds. “This a model that might work for some providers and for some managers, reflecting the changing landscape.”

She accepts managers have a vital role in shaping the quality of care. “We absolutely agree that the most important figure in the home is a strong manager – but we’re not aware of any research that says a skilled and experienced manager cannot take on a wider brief and be responsible for more than one home,” she says. “The opportunity to manage more than one home can also be a career pathway for the best registered managers.”

She maintains the revised guidance was discussed with “representatives from all our key stakeholders first, who were supportive”.

“This isn’t about relaxing safeguards or deregulating by the back door,” she stresses. “Any manager wanting to manage more than one home would still have to clearly demonstrate that they had the right knowledge, skills and experience to take on two homes safely and well.”

She says the role and key responsibilities will not change.

“We would still expect managers to comply with what the regulations tell them to do and for them to demonstrate that to inspectors,” she says.

“They must still have that day-to-day oversight of practice and be responsible for standards of care and children’s experiences in any home they are registered for. This isn’t about creating ‘super managers’.”

Meanwhile, Stanley says the concept of multi-building children’s homes is a practical solution to a lack of placements for children and a way of easing the strain on provision.

“The average children’s home can look after three or four children. These changes allow for a slightly larger arrangement, bringing more capacity, but keeping numbers within sensible limits to make sure there can still be effective internal leadership, management, and oversight,” she says.

“We will continue to test out these arrangements through our regulatory tools. We think this strikes the right balance between creating more flexibility and keeping children safe.”

MULTI-BUILDING HOMES: WHAT THE GUIDANCE SAYS

• Providers can accommodate up to six children in up to four buildings with a single registration.

• Existing children’s homes can be transferred to a multi-building registration but providers must make a new application and cancel existing registrations.

• Multi-building children’s homes must provide children with stability and certainty. It should always be clear to the child and the local authority placing that child which building he or she will live in. Children should not move between buildings without good reason.

• Not all buildings need to be in use all the time but providers must satisfy Ofsted there are appropriate plans in place to staff buildings fully.

• In the application, managers must demonstrate how they will manage the home effectively given the geographical spread of the buildings.

• The registered manager must demonstrate they have the experience, qualifications and skills to run a multi-building home. “This will include explaining how they will effectively use monitoring systems, set up deputising arrangements, manage admissions and be able to respond to emergency admissions,” states the guidance.

• When considering the application, inspectors will visit each building to assess suitability and look at the distance between buildings.

• Inspections of multi-building children’s homes will see inspectors visit each building and talk to children and staff. Shortfalls in care for children in one building will affect the overall findings and may affect the inspection rating for the home.

Source: Registering a Multi-Building Children’s Home, Ofsted, Oct 2021

INSPECTIONS SHORTS

SOCIAL CARE
Restraint can harm children’s mental health, stresses updated guidance for inspectors on the use of physical interventions and deprivation of liberty in social care settings and schools. The revised guidance highlights the importance of promoting and protecting children’s rights and the need to understand children’s behaviour, identify triggers and take steps to defuse difficult situations.

YOUTH JUSTICE
Inspectors will look at steps taken to re-introduce a full range of education and personal development activities for young people in prison as inspections by Ofsted and HM Inspectorate of Prisons get under way again. The approach to inspections post-Covid is set out in an updated handbook for the inspection of education, skills and work activities in young offender institutions and prisons. The handbook came back into force on 25 October when full inspections resumed.

SOCIAL CARE
The average time it takes to register a children’s home is currently more than four months, according to Ofsted, which has published a series of tips to help providers avoid delays. On average the registration process takes 17 weeks from the point an application is accepted with some taking much longer. Common reasons for delays include changes in management, premises not being ready for children to live in and incomplete paperwork.

YOUTH JUSTICE
The latest report on Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre reveals multiple failings in the care and support provided to children. The setting near Rugby, run by private contractor MTC, is now rated “inadequate” after inspectors from Ofsted, HM Inspectorate of Prisons and the Care Quality Commission identified serious safety and welfare concerns. The report describes a “volatile culture” where children carry weapons “just in case”. It found inadequate staffing levels placed staff in an “impossible position”. The centre remains open but there are currently no children living there after the Ministry of Justice ordered their removal in June.

HEALTH
Maternity services at Queen’s Hospital in Romford, Essex, have been downgraded from “good” to “requires improvement” following an inspection by the Care Quality Commission. Inspectors raised concerns about the quality of services and the culture in the department with staff reporting they did not feel supported or listened to by senior leaders. Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs the hospital, promised urgent action to improve patient safety and staff welfare.