This is the demo portfolio. Nothing here is real, and nothing can be saved.

Portfolio

Foxglove House

Regulation 44 visit, 6 July 2026

Submitted to OfstedUnannouncedSCCIF (children's homes), April 2026Submitted 9 July 2026

Opinion

Are children effectively safeguarded?
Safeguarding records reviewed in full; concerns were escalated appropriately and in time.
Yes
Does the conduct of the home promote children's wellbeing?
Children report feeling settled and listened to; staff know them well.
Yes

The visit

Spoke with BG and with staff RE, AE. Sampled the case files of BG, KM. Reviewed 12 areas: physical intervention and restraint, missing from home episodes, complaints, sanctions and consequences, safeguarding concerns and referrals, regulation 40 notifications, children's views, individual risk assessments, medication management, staff supervision, statement of purpose, location risk assessment.

Progress against previous recommendations

  • Ensure every physical intervention record is reviewed and signed by the manager within 72 hours

    Raised 15 Dec, due 29 Dec. Owner WL.

    Records attached for review.

    Evidence offered

  • Repair the first-floor bathroom lock

    Raised 4 Jun, due 2 Jul. Owner WL.

    Accepted. Action plan agreed with the team.

    Responded

Findings

1 concern, 4 strengths. Every finding records what was looked at, what was found, and why it matters.

  • Missing from home episodes

    Concern
    Looked at
    Missing episode log; return-home interview records; police notifications.
    Found
    Pattern of episodes on Friday evenings not yet analysed by the manager.
    Why it matters
    Unanalysed patterns mean risk assessments are not reflecting real behaviour.
    Action
    Raised as a recommendation, tracked on the home’s timeline.

  • Physical intervention and restraint

    Strength
    Looked at
    All physical intervention records since the last visit; debrief forms.
    Found
    All records include a debrief with the child within 24 hours.
    Why it matters
    Supports the standard; no action required.

  • Complaints

    Strength
    Looked at
    Complaints log and responses.
    Found
    Complaints responded to within policy timescale; outcomes explained to children.
    Why it matters
    Supports the standard; no action required.

  • Medication management

    Strength
    Looked at
    MAR sheets for all children; controlled drug register; stock count.
    Found
    MAR sheets complete; stock reconciles.
    Why it matters
    Supports the standard; no action required.

  • Staff supervision

    Strength
    Looked at
    Supervision records for four staff selected at random.
    Found
    Supervision at monthly frequency for all staff sampled.
    Why it matters
    Supports the standard; no action required.