61 entries for State Inspections

Another application was made on 19th October 1951 to the Department, by Sr Bianca, to increase the accommodation limit from 150 to 160 children. In support of this application, she stated that various improvements and additions had been made to the premises, including the acquisition of another house. The Department requested Dr McCabe to inspect the School with a view to making a recommendation in this regard. She carried out an inspection and recommended that, in view of the improvements made, an increase in the accommodation limit to 160 children could be sanctioned. The application was formally acceded to and took effect from 9th November 1951.

On 17th May 1962, the Resident Manager made another application to the Department for an increase in the accommodation limit, to 200 children. In support of her application, she stated that a new 220ft wing had been built, with a capacity to sleep up to 60 children. She accepted that the accommodation limit of 165 had been exceeded in the past year or more, and that they had at that time 193 children. The Department carried out an inspection of the premises and agreed to an increase in the accommodation limit to 185 children on 27th April 1963.

In March 1941, Dr McCabe carried out a general inspection and found that the School was ‘well kept’ and satisfactory in all areas. There is no General Inspection Report for 1942.

Dr McCabe carried out a General Inspection on 28th June 1944 and she found that the standard of cleanliness and supervision of the children had improved, but she was not completely satisfied with the conditions. All the children had not been supplied with toothbrushes, the dentist had not paid a quarterly visit, and the blankets had not been replaced. The Department made these observations known to the Resident Manager. In the Medical Inspection conducted during the same visit, Dr McCabe noted four children required treatment for ringworm.

Dr McCabe’s General Inspection Reports from 1948 until her retirement in 1963 were, without exception, very positive. Her reports during these years were not very detailed and were, in fact, quite repetitive in content. She frequently stated that the School was ‘well run’ and in some years remarked that it was ‘extremely well run’22 or ‘very well conducted’.23 She also commented in her reports that ‘many improvements had been made and continued to be made’ to the School.24 The exact nature of these improvements was not detailed in these reports. Throughout this time period, Dr McCabe singled out the Resident Manager for praise. In her General Inspection Report of January 1959 and 1960, she said ‘Sr Alida an excellent nun ... knows many things about running a good school’. Dr McCabe’s General Inspection Reports of 1963 referred to the fact that ‘Sr Venetia is now Res. Manager and is doing very well being a disciple of Sr Alida she is excellent’.

The General Inspection Reports after Dr McCabe’s retirement continued to be very favourable about the living conditions in the School. Dr Charles Lysaght, who carried out a General Inspection of the School on 21st March 1966, commented that it was ‘well run’: the premises were clean and in ‘good repair’ and the accommodation consisted mostly of modern buildings with ‘excellent dormitory accommodation’.

A Department of Education inspection conducted in 1939, for the purposes of considering whether teachers’ salaries in the internal national school should be paid by the State, queried why the children in Goldenbridge did not attend the local national school. The reasons proffered by the Resident Manager was that the local schools were already overcrowded. She was also opposed to the children being transported to other schools, on the basis that she could not be held responsible for them once they left the Industrial School. The Department accepted this explanation and proceeded to certify the internal national school and to pay the teachers’ salaries from 1941.

The next report was almost four and a half years later and dated 1943. Although this report refers to a previous inspection carried out the year before, there is no record of this inspection.

Despite the recommendation to pay the grant, the Department was reluctant to apply to the Department of Finance for the funds, and had another inspection carried out by the Schools Inspector one year later. He also recommended that the grant be paid. He recognised that the parents in the local schools would not accept the industrial school children, and that there was no alternative but to educate them within the Industrial School. However, it was deemed inappropriate to remove the boys under six years of age from the external National School, because of the financial consequences for that school, and therefore, the Industrial School was only given two-thirds of the cost of the building, as that represented the actual needs of the School.

A month later, Dr Lysaght made a surprise inspection of the premises on behalf of the Department of Education. There were 32 boys there, all aged 10 or under. He recorded eight staff members, including the Resident Manager. He found the condition of the premises in good repair, and was informed that the Congregation had spent a lot of money on improvements and was most anxious about falling numbers. The Resident Manager feared they might have to close down. Dr Lysaght toured the building and was generally pleased with what he saw. He remarked on the good table manners displayed by the boys, and felt this was down to the efforts made by the Sisters with them. He thought the boys had a well-balanced and varied diet. He carried out a medical inspection, and raised a number of concerns about the arrangements in existence for dental treatment, which were not very satisfactory. The School in general had a happy and homely atmosphere.

Later that year, a Department Inspector carried out a general inspection. It is worth noting that the previous inspection by Dr Lysaght was in 1966 – a period of six years had elapsed since the Department had carried out an inspection.

A general inspection carried out in the mid-1970s recorded that 65 children were in care. It noted that only 12 of these were formally grouped (the 12 youngest), with a full-time lay worker and a Sister on a part-time basis as their staff. The two group homes were well under construction.

In 1978, Mr Graham Granville carried out a three-day general inspection and, overall, he was satisfied with the homes. He was not happy at the lack of social work support for the children, but commented favourably on other aspects of the facility. He thought the environment in the group homes was excellent, although he did highlight the need for refurbishment in the two original houses.

Mr Granville carried out a General Inspection in the early 1980s. He noted that there had been staff problems but he did not specify what they were. He said that he had discussed them with the people concerned, and he attributed them to the inexperience of Sr Callida, the Resident Manager.

Responsibility for Cappoquin was transferred from the Department of Education to the Department of Health from 1st January 1984, but until 1991 inspections were not carried out because of lack of staff.