The Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) has today published an inspection report on a children’s residential centre operated by the Child and Family Agency (Tusla) south residential services.

HIQA monitors services used by some of the most vulnerable children in the State against the National Standards for Children’s Residential Services to provide assurance to the public that children are receiving a high-quality, safe service. This process also seeks to ensure that the wellbeing, welfare and safety of children is being promoted and protected. HIQA provides advice to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs and Tusla in this regard.

The report published today refers to a full, announced inspection in May 2017 of this children’s residential centre. Of the ten standards assessed, only one was fully compliant, while one was found to be substantially compliant. Seven of the standards were deemed moderately non-compliant, and one standard relating to management and staffing was judged by inspectors to be majorly non-compliant.

At the time of the inspection, a strategic review of the service was underway and the campus remained closed to new admissions. Improvements since the last inspection in December 2016 were noted; however, progress was slow in other areas. Children’s basic care and healthcare needs were being met, every child had an allocated social worker and children’s rights were being actively promoted. However, not all children’s emotional needs were consistently met and some children continued to engage in anti-social and risk-taking behaviours.

The institutional layout and feel of the service remained unchanged since the last inspection. Large numbers of people accessed the campus on the days of inspection and it was not always possible to differentiate between Tusla staff and members of the public. Furthermore, Tusla staff from another service were seen to walk in front of children’s living areas in contravention of direct orders, which impacted negatively on children’s privacy.

A number of management systems, including risk management and monitoring and oversight remained poor. Accountability arrangements were also insufficient. Tusla had committed to a plan to monitor the campus with a view to improving the service; however, the oversight group tasked with overseeing the implementation of change was ineffectual.

During the inspection, Tusla monitoring officers told inspectors that in their view, the centre was not fit for purpose.

The service has prepared an action plan to address the non-compliances identified on inspection.