Exclusive: Ofsted responds to the Big Conversation

The job of teaching very young children day in, day out is profoundly important. Parents are their child's first 'teachers', and early years providers share this crucial role.

The very best providers tap into young children's natural curiosity; they show children how to do things and 'model' their expectations for children's behaviour. They provide structures and routines that help to improve a child's vocabulary, cognitive and social skills, particularly when they are not able to gain them at home. I congratulate them for their professionalism and dedication and know that, like Ofsted, they are determined that no obstacle should get in the way of making sure children are protected and helped to reach their full potential.

Many young children are getting the early education that they deserve, and which their parents want. Sadly, though, there are still too many providers who are not giving children - especially those who are poor - rich and rewarding experiences. And these providers are not paying enough attention to important aspects of safety and safeguarding. In short, they are not delivering sufficiently high standards and it is worrying that almost a third of all early years providers are still not good enough.

CATALYST FOR IMPROVEMENT

At Ofsted, we make no apology for declaring that only provision that is good or better is good enough and know that parents and many others in the sector share this view. This is why we are replacing 'satisfactory' with 'requires improvement', and giving nurseries and pre-schools a maximum of two years to get to 'good'.

Next month sees the introduction of a new inspection framework for all early years providers. From 4 November, our inspectors will be even more focused on how well early years practitioners interact with young children. They will not expect practitioners to follow a particular approach, and will not have pre-determined ideas about how much of a child's play should be led by adults. Inspectors' main focus will be on whether children are well supported to meet their potential, and whether staff are sufficiently prepared to properly safeguard and keep children safe from harm.

The changes to our inspection framework will act as a catalyst to help improve the lives of the children who are not served well enough by their settings. They will provide an opportunity for early years providers to demonstrate that they are providing a high-quality service. I want early years providers to show inspectors why they think they are good or outstanding, because after all, inspection cannot simply be about what the inspector sees on the day - it must also take into account what is known about an early years setting.

This takes me to concerns that some of you have raised about some inspections. I've been talking to the representatives of the organisations that many providers belong to, as well as those who lead national 'chains'. Ofsted also has eight regional directors who are responding to local issues, and a forum where the early years sector can discuss ideas directly with Ofsted.

I know there is some unease about inspections carried out after a concern has been raised about a provider. However, I am confident that all parents and the vast majority of early years providers will agree that Ofsted simply cannot ignore concerns which, if legitimate, mean that young and vulnerable children are at risk. Parents expect Ofsted to act robustly and firmly on their children's behalf and we will not fail to do so.

'EXTRAORDINARY MYTHS'

It is truly heartening to see how committed the sector is to working with inspectors - because after all, we all share the same ambitions for very young children. But, through my conversations with your representatives, I've been struck by the number of extraordinary myths that have arisen in the sector.

There are some 'stories' being told that are simply untrue. For example, it isn't true that a nursery that has been the subject of a complaint is unable to receive an outstanding rating.

For every concern I hear about, there are hundreds of individual providers who say how much they have gained from their inspection. We have only to look at the consistently high level of positive responses that we receive after inspections to know that this is the case.

We have published the proportion of responses we receive on our website and you can see the recent data on the Ofsted website at www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/official-statistics-early-years-and- childcare-registered-providers-inspections-and-outcomes.

A SHARED CAUSE

We always aim to inspect with rigour and with fairness, and demand the highest standards of our contractors - we have rigorous quality assurance procedures stipulated in our contracts with them. I have promised your representatives that we will look at their concerns; I have kept to my promise. When we do get things wrong, we say so - we do not seek to avoid blame. And when something goes wrong with our inspections we ensure that lessons are learnt.

All our early years inspectors have a professional background in the sector, and are thoroughly trained. If you've ever heard the chief inspector speak you'll know how keen he is to encourage more serving practitioners to be invol- ved in inspections. The expertise of skilled people is highly valued by Ofsted.

So I am pleased to report that we are already delivering on some of the issues raised through the recent 'Big Conversation' as well as dispelling some of the myths.

What is not in dispute is that we have a shared cause; between us we must ensure that young children are provided with a safe and stimulating environment in which they can all thrive, as well as peace of mind for their parents.

At Ofsted, we look forward to continued work with everyone in the early years sector in order to deliver this important goal.

Ofsted responses to the Big Converssation demands

http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1212717/ofsted-big-conversation-sector-makes-list-actions-ofsted

ITEM 1 - Ofsted's dual role of regulation and improvement

 

Call for Ofsted to be a truly independent regulator, free from Government and political influence to allow the inspectorate to be impartial.

Ofsted is a completely independent regulator free from government and political influence – this is set out in law.

Local authorities should retain their quality improvement role as providers feel they know them better.

Improvement team needs to be independent from regulation.

Inspection is a catalyst for improvement and looks beyond the minimum requirements that are required through legislation.

Ofsted should have regional points of contact that providers can go to for guidance and advice.

Ofsted has eight regional directors across England who are responding to local issues.  However, local authorities – not Ofsted – hold the statutory responsibility for giving advice to individual providers.

A practitioner forum/advisory group set up to advise, improve and innovate with Ofsted.

We regularly meet the sector through our Early Years National Consultative Forum to discuss the development of initiatives and proposals we are consulting on. We also have separate discussions with providers and their representative organisations.

Accessible communication with a central search engine. Information and guidance is impossible to find and inhibits good relationship building.

We know this is an issue for some providers and we are working to further improve our website. 

ITEM 2 - Ofsted's rationale for complaint-initiated inspections, which date back over ten years. 

Stop the complaints that are over ten years old now.

A complaint that occurred ten years ago will not prompt an inspection. However, where there is a current concern that prompts an inspection, we will take into account previous concerns to check whether they demonstrate a persistent weakness.

 
Separate complaint-initiated inspections from full inspections, revert to model of past, when complaints were investigated separately.

Every visit by our inspectors to an early years provision is an inspection.

Tribal and Prospects should change inspectors if requested by settings, particularly when there is an obvious conflict of interest, eg ex-staff-turned-inspector, inspector from setting down the road.

Our contracts stipulate that inspectors cannot undertake an inspection if there is a conflict of interest. If a concern is raised about a potential conflict we look very carefully at the circumstances. If an inspector has not declared a conflict of interest, the contractors treat this very seriously.

A points system should be created for different types of complaints, with timescales for how long different types of complaints should stay live, depending on their severity, especially in the case of a serious safeguarding issue.

We look at each case on its merits, in line with our published risk assessment process. 

If complaint is found to be without grounds then the slate should be wiped clean.

If an inspector finds no grounds to support the concern that has been raised, we will not refer to that matter in the inspection report. 

Providers spoke about malicious complaints being made, and suggested Ofsted make it a requirement that the person making the complaint provide their details and declare their link with the setting.

We have no means of knowing whether a complaint is malicious until we look into it. We do not bring forward an inspection where a complaint is anonymous, unless it is about safeguarding, in which case we cannot ignore it.

When 'necessary' complaint-triggered inspections are carried out, the inspector should concentrate on the complaint first and then carry out a normal inspection.

We believe it is important to providers and parents to set any complaint in context of the quality of the whole provision. This is why we carry out an inspection when we receive a concern.

Greater transparency needed regarding how the decision to re-inspect has been made when triggered by a previous complaint that has already been investigated and a full inspection taken place.

We have published the protocol which sets out what happens when we inspect following a concern. This is set out the Ofsted website.

ITEM 3 - Ofsted's Quality Assurance (QA) Process

QA needs to be led by qualified and skilled people and only used to cover statutory issues.

Quality assurance work at Ofsted is undertaken by appropriately qualified and skilled professionals.

A QA that overturns an inspection judgement should make the inspection null and void.

Inspection judgments must be well-supported by evidence. If the quality assurance process finds there is not enough evidence, then we then follow the flawed inspection protocol by which legal advisers will be consulted and steps will be taken to secure the evidence. 

There needs to be greater transparency, as judgements are being changed by a team who haven't even seen a setting.

The quality assurance teams check written evidence very carefully. This is an important in ensuring that the inspection has been robust. The team is skilled at doing this.

QA should be outsourced to avoid a conflict of interest.

Inspection service providers undertake quality assurance, and Ofsted quality assures a sample of their work to ensure high standards are maintained.

Ensure no perverse incentives for inspection service providers.

We don’t accept there are perverse incentives for inspectors; we hold our inspection service providers to account through our contracts with them.

ITEM 4 - Ofsted inspector training and support

Where possible, two inspectors for settings.

We will send two inspectors when necessary; for example when a provision is large. But it would not be a good use of public money for Ofsted to send two inspectors to every early years provision.

Inspectors need to have experience of the type of settings they are inspecting and recognise and respect the differences between them.

All Ofsted early years inspectors have professional experience within the sector, have undertaken training and are monitored during and after training. Many are current practitioners.

Ofsted needs to take full responsibility and not blame Tribal and Prospects, which are contracted by Ofsted, when things go awry.

When things go wrong we hold up our hands, and learn the lessons.  But it is right that we also hold the inspection service providers to account for their performance as they carry out inspections on behalf of Ofsted.

Training for Ofsted inspectors should cover people skills and customer care skills to prevent some of the perceived problems and issues that have arisen possibly due to bad communication.

Inspectors go through a comprehensive training programme which includes personal communication. When this has not been of the standard expected inspectors are monitored and, where necessary, retrained. It is important that any concerns providers have are flagged to us.

Inspectors should be monitored at random intervals to ensure consistency, with someone accompanying them on inspections.

This is already part of the quality assurance arrangements. Inspectors are shadowed by their line manager or another qualified inspector as part of their own performance monitoring.

Need an independent ombudsman or moderator to investigate inspectors when a complaint is made about a judgement.

Our complaints procedure already includes an independent adjudicator; individuals can also seek redress through the parliamentary ombudsman.

There should be a requirement for Ofsted inspectors to have a minimum number of years of experience in the sector. At one meeting, attendees suggested a minimum of ten years' experience.

Inspectors are appointed because they have expertise in the early years. This is why we encourage serving practitioners to become inspectors.

Inspectors should go back to the 'shop floor' regularly and spend time working in children's centres or nurseries. Jennie Johnson, chief executive of Kids Allowed, suggested inspectors shadow a child that bites to see if they could prevent it happening.

We strongly encourage those in the early years sector to apply to become an Ofsted inspector.

ITEM 5 - Inspector decision making and feedback

Ofsted needs to articulate and reflect a clear consistent pedagogical approach.

We do not prescribe one particular pedagogical approach.  We do, however, highlight high quality practice which leads to good outcomes for children. 

Employ inspectors trusted to collect evidence and apply their experience and common sense. The sector has little faith when inspectors are so insecure they cannot support their judgements with conviction.

Inspectors are thoroughly trained to carry out inspections and are monitored through a quality assurance process.

A seven-day cooling-off period for provider to look at the report, especially if managers were away during the inspection, followed by another seven days after the final report is received. Verbal feedback should be given at an appropriate time for childminders.

Inspectors talk to providers throughout the inspection process, and give overall feedback at the end of their visit. Providers also have an opportunity to comment on the report’s accuracy before it is published. We strongly encourage providers to make sure that they take every opportunity to talk to their inspectors about their practices.

A statement for improvement needs to be more specific. Some providers believe that the current statements are often blunt and misleading.

Our inspection reports set out why judgments have been made and, if relevant, what a provider needs to do to get to good or outstanding. Inspectors are guided to make improvement points clear at the feedback in the report.

The time an inspector spends at a setting should reflect its size.

It does, and that is why we sometimes send two inspectors to visit larger facilities, and spend less time in a small pre-school than we do in a large nursery.

An inspector's own preferences for things should not play a part.

Inspectors are guided not to prescribe a particular approach.

Ofsted inspections should be conducted by two inspectors to ensure a balanced view.

As we have indicated above, we sometimes send two inspectors, for example to visit a larger provision. But it would not be a good use of public money to send two inspectors on every inspection. However, each inspector’s report is checked and quality assured. 

Inspectors need to talk and listen to children in settings more.

Crucially, inspectors observe the interaction between practitioners and children where it is appropriate to talk to children they do see.

ITEM 6 - Significant incidents/complaints and appeals

Providers must be kept in the loop.

We tell providers why an inspection has been prompted. But more serious complaints may be promptedby the local authority or the police; in which case, they would tell Ofsted and inform the early years provider. 

Greater clarification is required around the term 'significant' as it is open to interpretation. Introduce a traffic light system.

This is set out in the Department for Education’s Early Years Foundation Stage. It prescribes some things that the provider must tell us about, but it also leaves early years professionals to decide when they think it is important to notify Ofsted of an incident.

Some providers recognised that there might be a temptation not to report a 'critical' incident if it might trigger an inspection, but it would be better to have clearer and consistent guidance about when to report incidents.

The Early Years Foundation Stage clearly sets out what matters providers must report and it is an offence not to report, in the correct timescales, something that is covered by the legal requirements.  But providers must take responsibility for deciding when a matter is serious enough to be reported; after all, they are the adults who are caring for children.

Ofsted needs to examine the legal framework of malicious complaints - if they are anonymous what comeback is there for providers, especially when this could result in the setting going out of business?

Civil action between early years providers and complainants is not a matter for Ofsted.  If we inspect and find no issues at the setting relating to the concern, then the concern will not be reported.

ITEM 7 - New inspection regime in November

Providers felt there needs to be a period of briefing and communication with the sector before the new framework is implemented.

We agree. That’s why earlier this year we consulted on the new inspection framework, received more than 2,500 responses, and announced the findings in August and why we have held regular meetings with representatives of the sector organisations. We will publish the framework before it is implemented on 4 November.

Parents need to be made more aware of the changes to Ofsted grades. For example, this could be highlighted at the top of an inspection report - to explain that 'satisfactory' has been replaced with 'requires improvement' etc.

 Ofsted has a webpage on each provider which states its most recent rating. From September 2012 inspection reports have included the overall judgment at the very beginning of each report, as well as the judgment the setting received at the last inspection. Our published guidance will make it clear what we mean by ‘requires improvement’.