Residential Care and Education: Improving Practice in Residential Special Schools and Secure Care Accommodation Services in Scotland: page 8

Residential Care and Education: Improving Practice in Residential Special Schools and Secure Care Accommodation Services in Scotland

Case Studies which help to clarify ‘triangulation’

Managers and practitioners in residential special schools and secure care accommodation services will evaluate aspects of their service because of a range of issues that might include:

following up on very good practice in a particular area so that it can be shared;
the perceived lack of positive quality of life outcomes for a number of children and young people; this may include the youngest of children, those perceived as being victims of bullying and others with sexually challenging behaviour;
the wish of a small group of practitioners, for example the team of forensic psychologists or a group of therapists, to find ways to improve what they are doing in order to have a more positive impact on young people;
issues such as poor attendance at evening activities or lack of interest of most young people in participating in the school council;
an issue arising from a national priority or new statutory or legislative requirement; for example a very small number of children and young people with a coordinated support plan (CSP) being admitted to the service;
issues arising from a survey of the views of the children or young people, their families or placing authorities These might include a perception that one residential unit offers more weekend outings than others or a teacher who does not engage well with children and young people;
low staff morale;
complaints from the local community;
lack of positive exit outcomes for young people;
an inspection, complaint or inquiry; and
research findings or a new document which has implications for the quality of the service and the possibility of achieving better outcomes for children.

The case studies which follow show how to ensure that evaluation of practice is reliable. It is as important to recognise good practice as it is to identify areas for improvement.

Case study 1: Impact on learners: learners’ experiences
Teachers and classroom support staff in a school for children with complex additional support needs are reporting that a particular group of children are more settled in class. Some previous behaviour such as persistent screaming by one child and regular self harming by another are happening much less frequently. One child who had even refused to go to the swimming pool is still fearful, but now willing to dip his toe in the water! None of the children had sufficient communication skills which allowed them to explain why they had changed.

How do senior managers find out why these positive outcomes for children had been so effective? Is it by chance or are there underlying processes, inputs by staff or managers or parents which have made a positive impact on the experiences of these children?

Senior managers decided to check the underlying processes in an attempt to understand why they were making such a difference to the behaviour of these children.

They ensured that relevant staff:
– observed the children in their class and residences and recorded the activity of relevant behaviours;
– examined their files, particularly behaviour charts, which clarified the reductions in previously challenging behaviour;
– spoke to staff in classrooms, at the swimming pool and in residences;
– attended key team meetings and examined the shared target-setting process in which all key staff carefully discussed worrying behaviours and, along with the behaviour support coordinator and, in one case, the child, identified problem-solving strategies to reduce or overcome them;
– listened to staff discussing how they would use praise or reward children to achieve their targets;
– examined the brief note sent by staff to parents which shared with them their concerns and strategies for improvement;
– read the letter to a parent which invited her to the school, in advance of the scheduled home visit, so that they could work with her to encourage her child to scream less;
– discussed in supervision how individual members of staff viewed the strategies to be working and how effective they believed this collaborative approach to be;
– checked that relevant policies such as the management of challenging behaviour referred to the importance of collaborative working; checked that policies on working with parents included helping them to support their children; and
– ensured that the training programme included opportunities for dissemination of good practice.

Case study 2: Impact on learners: learners’ experiences
In a residential school for children and young people with challenging behaviour, care and education staff were very concerned about the behaviour and attitude of certain young people when they returned to school after the weekend break. The performance in classrooms of these young people, particularly on Monday mornings, had recently deteriorated and some who had previously been keen to attend after-school activities no longer seemed motivated to do so. They was concern that some of the young people involved had access to drugs and alcohol when on home leave. However, they were not convinced that all the young people displaying this inappropriate behaviour on Mondays were in this situation.

How do senior managers and other staff find out why so many young people are adversely affected and what do they do about it?

Senior managers checked the underlying processes in an attempt to understand why learners’ experiences were not sufficiently effective.

They ensured that relevant staff:
– observed the young people returning from home leave and spoke with them about their weekend activities; (It was clear that a few young people had easy access to drug and alcohol whilst at home. For these particular young people and, on the basis of individual risk assessment of the home situation, key workers contacted local social workers to arrange review meetings to agree how to ensure maximum protection for each young person. Transport arrangements were made, where necessary, to ensure that parents could attend.)

For the other young people, they:
– travelled with the young people who were transported from the station in a minibus and taxi;
– spoke with the drivers and members of relief support staff in the minibus about how they monitored interactions among the young people;
– observed young people as they arrived in the unit;
– observed how staff engaged with young people when they arrived;
– observed and spoke with the young people during different situations on Monday;
– spoke with the school or LAC nurse about the concerns and possible strategies that might be used to support children and young people involved in substance misuse;
– spoke with staff from relevant external agencies;
– spoke with key workers and teachers to clarify their specific observations such as poor concentration and outbursts of anger;
– attended the daily communication meeting where care and education staff exchanged important information about individual children and young people;
– attended key meetings to check that the concerns of all staff were shared and discussed with the child or young person;
– during supervision of relief, care staff and unit staff discussed the importance of being alert to and reporting on the early signs of substance misuse;
– checked that key workers shared their concerns with parents;
– checked with the teacher of personal and social education that both the service programme and input from specialist agencies were effective in terms of informing children and young people about the dangers attached to substance misuse; and
– checked the service policies on substance misuse.

The outcome of this exercise and the action which ensued were identified as follows:
– a clear need for senior managers to re-state to all staff, including relief staff, parents and carers and the children and young people themselves the service’s position on substance misuse;
– a more robust approach to supervision in transport and a need to carry out a more thorough risk assessment of the mix of children and young people in shared transport;
– clarity for unit staff on how to recognise changing behaviour in children and young people;
– an emphasis on the importance of the key team meeting to enable care and education staff to share their concerns and to discuss them with young people;
– re-statement of the importance of good relationships so that children and young people feel able to voice concerns and anxieties;
– an updating of the information in the child’s or young person’s handbook about the service’s response to substance misuse;
– a focus on the importance of involving the school or LAC nurse in discussions about children and young people;
– the need to work in close partnership with parents and carers; and
– the need for all staff to have high expectations of children and young people and to respond to situations when they are not achieving their potential.

Improving services

Whatever the planning structure(s) for taking forward improvement, it will help if the service selects a manageable number of priorities for which they can identify specific, achievable, measurable and time-bound targets. Even where the service can see how improvements might be made across a number of areas, senior managers will focus on those of greatest concern. It will have a more positive impact on services if a manageable number of priorities can be taken forward to ensure that a meaningful impact on the outcomes and experiences of children and young people is achieved. In some cases, small changes in practice identified by a group of practitioners in one area can have a significant and positive impact.

Using the six-point scale

The national quality indicators are used to help practitioners and others to form a view on the level of effectiveness in a particular aspect of practice using a six-point scale. Awarding levels of effectiveness is a professional skill rather than a technical process and there are many ways in which provision can merit a particular evaluation. Whilst at the time of writing this guide NCSs are not evaluated on the six-point scale, practitioners will still, through robust approaches to evaluation, have a sound professional view of the quality of care. Appendix 2 provides information about the six-point scale as it applies to residential special schools and secure care accommodation services. The paragraphs which illustrate how residential special schools and secure accommodation services seek to achieve excellence and reference to the illustrations in HGIOS? (third edition) will help to ensure evaluations are accurate.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]