Agenda item

Report to follow.

Discussion:

The report provided an update to the Committee detailing actions taken as part of the planned improvements to address safety and security issues following temporary closure in August 2025 as a result of findings of an Ofsted monitoring visit. Representatives of Oasis Restore were present to answer questions of the Committee.

Accountability - The Committee expressed concern regarding the Ofsted judgement of “inadequate” for leadership and management and sought clarification on the specific steps taken to address these findings. In response, representatives acknowledged the shortcomings identified by Ofsted, particularly a loss of confidence in leadership during the early operational phase. It was explained that some leaders had been unable to meet the demands of a challenging environment, and this had been recognised and addressed. There was now a new registered manager, a position which had been vacant and additional measures included targeted leadership training, particularly for middle managers, and strengthened oversight within the residential team where concerns had been most pronounced.

Members expressed significant concern regarding accountability, delays in rectifying faults, and the financial implications of the closure period. It was explained that capital works and procurement had been managed by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and that subsequent delays had been linked to central government processes. There was concern expressed about the MoJ’s role and the failure in the procurement of the wrong type of doors and the failure to procure new doors more speedily.

Further discussion addressed lessons learned from the initial closure of the site. It was confirmed that Ofsted had undertaken a monitoring visit during early operation and, at that stage, had considered the environment safe for a reduced number of children. However, the accumulation of issues, particularly relating to the physical infrastructure, had ultimately led to the decision to close. It was pointed out that Oasis Restore had chosen to close the site and had not been made to close. Ofsted, as regulator, had been aware of the decision and had been supportive of the rationale.

Ethnicity data - Members sought clarification regarding the presentation of ethnicity data within the report. It was explained that the categories used reflected those required for reporting to the MoJ and Youth Custody Service and were system-generated. Representatives undertook to consider improvements to the presentation when reporting to this Committee whilst continuing to meet other reporting requirements.

Staff - Concerns were raised regarding staff conduct, specifically issues of overfamiliarity and maintaining appropriate professional boundaries. This had been recognised as an issue and in response, a series of measures had been implemented, including enhanced staff training, clearer guidance on professional boundaries, and revised approaches to consequences to ensure consistency. It was noted that inconsistency between staff responses had undermined children’s experience of boundaries, and work would therefore be focused on ensuring a more coherent and structured approach while still tailoring care to individual needs.

The Committee also raised questions regarding staff safety, training, and support. It was outlined that a number of measures had been introduced during the closure period, including revised training programmes, updated restraint techniques, strengthened medication management processes, and enhanced mechanisms for staff feedback, including union representation and direct engagement with trustees.

Model viability - In light of everything experienced so far, the overall viability of the model was queried. In response, it was acknowledged that whilst there had been issues, a more therapeutic, child-focused approach was still the way forward. There was concern that leadership had not been replaced, however it was advised that it was not the same leadership team as there was a mix of new and old.

In response to concerns regarding safeguarding, behaviour management, and risks such as weapon-making and assaults, it was stated that many issues had been exacerbated by failures in the physical infrastructure, particularly the damaged doors. With these issues addressed, along with improved training and clearer operational frameworks, it was anticipated that risks would be significantly reduced.

MYC representatives provided additional challenge, particularly regarding the timeliness of improvements and the impact on young people. It was confirmed that performance would be subject to continuous internal monitoring, alongside independent Ofsted inspections conducted at least twice yearly, and that progress would be actively reviewed on an ongoing basis, rather than just solely at inspection points.

The Committee welcomed the invitation to visit the premises and hoped this would happen as it had not previously. The item had led to lengthy discussion and the Chairperson requested that any further questions be sent to Democratic Services.

Decision:

a)             The Committee noted progress made to date as detailed in the presentation at Appendix 1 to the report.

b)             The Committee requested that in future reporting further information be provided on ethnicity data and medication management.

c)             The Committee agreed to the Chairperson writing on their behalf to the Ministry of Justice and local Members of Parliament regarding the matters discussed.