Childminder inspection report. Afzal, Naseem Akhtar Glasgow

Transcription

1 Afzal, Naseem Akhtar Glasgow Inspection completed on 14 April 2016

2 Service provided by: Afzal, Naseem Akhtar Service provider number: SP Care service number: CS Inspection Type: Unannounced Care services in Scotland, including childminders, cannot operate unless they are registered with the Care Inspectorate. We inspect, award grades and set out improvements that must be made. We also investigate complaints about care services and take action when things aren't good enough. Please get in touch with us if you would like more information or have any concerns about a care service. Contact Us Care Inspectorate Compass House 11 Riverside Drive Dundee DD1 4NY enquiries@careinspectorate.com page 2 of 12

3 1 Introduction Naseem Akthar Afzal is registered to provide a care service to a maximum of six children at any one time under the age of 16, of whom no more than three are not yet attending primary school and no more than one is under 12 months. Numbers are inclusive of children of the childminder's family. There were four children aged between 12 months and six years registered with the childminder. The children had various patterns of attendance over the week. We observed and spoke with one child aged 18 months during the inspection visit. We were satisfied that the childminder adhered to the conditions of her registration. The service operates from a well maintained detached house with an enclosed rear garden located in the Mosspark area of Glasgow. Minded children had access to the living room/playroom, kitchen, shower room and toilet all at ground level. The service is close to schools, nurseries and parks with access to public transport and shops locally. The childminders aims and objectives include the following statement: "To provide a safe, stimulating, caring and happy environment for children attending". What we did during our inspection We wrote this report following an unannounced inspection. This inspection took place on Thursday 14 April 2016 between the hours of 9.10am and 11.40am. We gave feedback to the childminder at the end of the inspection. As requested by us, the childminder had completed and submitted an annual return and a self assessment document. We looked at the information contained within these documents prior to the inspection. During the inspection we spoke to: - the childminder - one minded child. page 3 of 12

4 Throughout the inspection, we gathered information from various sources. This included observation of interactions between the childminder and the minded child, discussions about general routines and practices and viewing samples of relevant documentation. This included: - the Registration Certificate - the public liability insurance certificate - risk assessments - the premises, indoors and outdoors - three children's personal plans - questionnaires issued by the Care Inspectorate - infection prevention and control practices - medication procedures - training accessed and planned - parent evaluations of the service issued by childminder. Views of people using the service One minded child, aged two, was present during the inspection. It was clear the child was happy and content in the care of the childminder. The child was responsive to the childminder's interactions when playing with soft play items and toy cars as well as while being fed. We received two completed questionnaires from the parents of the children who attended the service. Both contained written comments. We have included some comments and some 'ticked' responses to the questions asked within the questionnaire within the relevant sections of this report. We also took account of written feedback from parents contained in evaluations of the service issued by the childminder. Self assessment Every year all care services complete a 'self assessment' telling us how their service is performing. We check to make sure this is accurate. We received a fully completed self assessment document from the childminder before the inspection. We were satisfied with the way this was completed and with the relevant information under each of the themes that we grade services under. The childminder identified what she thought the service did well, some areas for improvement and any changes she had planned. She told us how page 4 of 12

5 people using the service had been involved and how their views and suggestions were sought and respected. What the service did well It was clear the childminder had built close relationships with the children and families who used her service. We observed the childminder to be caring and nurturing towards the young child present, creating a warm, homely atmosphere. Children had lots of opportunities to develop their own play outdoors and to actively explore nature in planting and growing activities. The childminder had gathered parents ' views on specific areas of her service and used these to inform her work with the children, for example, providing solid food in line with a child's weaning preferences. Feedback from the families confirmed they value the service. What the service could do better The childminder should look at gaining parents views on other areas of her service not currently included in her questionnaires such as the settling in process. She should consider the positive impact that advanced scheduling of meetings for some parents might have on shaping the future quality of the provision she makes for children. She should be proactive in registering as a food business with the local authority environmental health services and review nappy changing procedures. 2 The grades we awarded We grade the quality of care and support, the quality of the environment and the quality of management and leadership. If the childminder employs an assistant, we also grade the quality of staffing. In each case, we award a grade on a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 is unsatisfactory and 6 is excellent. Quality of care and support Quality of environment Quality of staffing Quality of management and leadership 5 - Very Good not assessed 5 - Very Good page 5 of 12

6 3 Quality of care and support Findings from the inspection The childminder was caring and supportive, which promoted children's selfesteem, confidence and emotional wellbeing. She and the parents shared key information about the child such as contact details, medical information, routines and food preferences which helped inform the personal plan and 'all about me' record as well as ensure she was responsive and encouraging to the individual needs of the child. One parent commented: "Naseem is professional and friendly. She cares very well for my son. He started going there when he was nine months old. It took him only a day to settle in. He is always delighted when I drop him, always smiles away for Naseem and wants to get to her. I totally trust her". Children's personal plans had been improved by using wellbeing indicators from Getting It Right For Every Child (GIRFEC) to demonstrate how the service was supporting children in terms of being nurtured, active, responsible and respected. Through discussion the childminder demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of how to meet children's all-round needs. We evidenced photographs of children participating in a good range of play activities; she recorded children's comments and dated these in individual profiles. Information within children's personal plans was reviewed and signed by parents every six months. This enabled her to take account of children's interests when planning and supported the next steps in children's development. The childminder had a sound knowledge of nutrition and provided snacks and occasional meals for children that promoted healthy eating. Through discussion, we were satisfied that the she was vigilant about any allergies that children might have. She respected parent and children's religious views in relation to menu preparation, for example by providing halal meat. She had attended food hygiene training and begun a registration process for registering as a food business. We discussed the need for her to pursue this proactively and she agreed to complete the registration with Environmental Health Services at Glasgow City Council. These measures helped to ensure that children were safe, nurtured and healthy. Through discussion the childminder demonstrated an awareness of her roles and responsibilities in relation to child protection. She had attended SCMA child page 6 of 12

7 protection and GIRFEC training in This learning helped her to develop policies to support best practice and resulted in the children being cared for in a safe environment. We discussed the value and importance of continuing to update her knowledge and skills in relation to child protection. The childminder discussed how she safely administered medication and made sure that parents completed appropriate consent forms before this was given. The childminder demonstrated a clear knowledge and understanding of the procedure to be followed, if a child spits out, or refuses medication. We found the childminder's practice to be in line with national guidance from the Care Inspectorate : The Management of Medication in Daycare and Childminding. Grade The quality of care and support is graded 5 - Very Good Requirements Number of requirements - 0 Recommendations Number of recommendations Quality of environment Findings from the inspection We found and parents agreed the childminder's home was secure, safe, hygienic, smoke free, bright and clean. The childminder had an awareness of risk and took steps to minimise them in and outside the home, for example by using safety gates where required and completing risk assessments. A flexible weekly plan was in place that included regular visits to mother and toddler groups and many activities took place outdoors, either in the garden or local parks. These experiences gave children opportunities to be active, socialise and be included. In our questionnaire the parents 'strongly agreed' that their childminder made good use of resources in the community. We observed the childminder promoting positive behaviour choices through praise and encouragement. She had agreed rules for behaviour through page 7 of 12

8 discussion with older children. She had attended Triple P - Positive Parenting Program training and we discussed how she had used this to set boundaries for children and reward positive behaviours. This helped children to feel secure and confident in the environment. She confirmed that toys and equipment were regularly cleaned and/or soaked in appropriate cleaning solutions. The childminder described how she used personal protection clothing when changing the children's nappies. We discussed Health Protection Scotland guidance that disposable of gloves are changed twice during this process (Infection Prevention and Control in Childcare Settings (Day Care and Childminding Settings) to minimise spread of infection risk. In line with the detail of this guidance, we recommended that the childminder update her nappy changing risk assessments, policy and practice. Whilst we were advised no accidents or incidents had taken place, the childminder's knowledge gained through fist aid training and the recording systems in place would help ensure appropriate action is taken, including keeping parents informed, should either happen in future. The childminder had accessed Public Liability Insurance through the SCMA. Grade The quality of environment is graded Requirements Number of requirements - 0 Recommendations Number of recommendations Quality of staffing We only assess this where the childminder employs an assistant. page 8 of 12

9 6 Quality of management and leadership Findings from the inspection The childminder kept up to date with good practice in a number of different ways. Some examples of this included through the quarterly magazines and website for the Scottish Childminding Association (SCMA) and the Care Inspectorate magazine Care News. The childminder was also a member of a local childminder network where good practice, ideas and suggestions were shared. We discussed the information and links to best practice that were available through the Care Inspectorate Hub. This ensured that she was that her service was able to provide children with stimulating and challenging experiences in line with national innovations in childminding practice. Parents input was valued and respected in many ways, informal and formal and used to improve the service. This included through sharing and having input into the policies and procedures and questionnaires on relevant topics such as the quality of children's play experiences; responsiveness to individual children's care needs and behaviour support. The childminder demonstrated a commitment to updating her knowledge through attending training. Higher National Certificate (HNC) in Childcare and Education and had undertaken a range of relevant training courses run by recognised providers beyond those already listed in this report including: Childsmile oral heath training; cot death risk reduction; meningitis and related illnesses; parental involvement; promoting children's independence and selfesteem. This evidenced a professional commitment to extending her knowledge and developing her service. Since the last inspection the childminder had not received any complaints about her service and parents were aware of how to complain through the complaints procedure. Grade The quality of management and leadership is graded 5 - Very Good Requirements Number of requirements - 0 page 9 of 12

10 Recommendations Number of recommendations What the service has done to meet any recommendations or requirements we made at our last inspection Previous requirements There are no outstanding requirements. Previous recommendations 1. The childminder should continue to review risk assessments at least every six months or as and when required, once reviewed they should be signed and dated. National Care Standard 2: A Safe Environment. This recommendation was made on 29 June 2012 The childminder had revised her risk assessment recording practices in line additional guidance she sought from the Scottish Childminding Association. Risk assessments of the service are carried out as well as signed and dated regularly. The recommendation has been met. 8 Complaints There have been no complaints upheld since the last inspection. Details of any older upheld complaints are published at page 10 of 12

11 9 Enforcements No enforcement action has been taken against this care service since the last inspection 10 Other issues N/A 11 Inspection and grading history Date Type Gradings 29 Jun 2012 Announced (Short Notice) Care and support Environment Staffing Management and Leadership Not Assessed 3 May 2011 Announced (Short Notice) Care and support Environment Staffing Management and Leadership Not Assessed Not Assessed 30 Sep 2010 Announced Care and support 5 - Very Good Environment Staffing Not Assessed Management and Leadership Not Assessed page 11 of 12

12 To find out more This inspection report is published by the Care Inspectorate. You can download this report and others from our website. You can also read more about our work online. Contact Us Care Inspectorate Compass House 11 Riverside Drive Dundee DD1 4NY Other languages and formats This report is available in other languages and formats on request. Tha am foillseachadh seo ri fhaighinn ann an cruthannan is c?nain eile ma nithear iarrtas. page 12 of 12