Memorandum submitted by Staffordshire
County Council
WHAT THE
PURPOSES OF
INSPECTION SHOULD
BE? (RELATING
NOT ONLY
TO SCHOOLS
BUT TO
ALL ORGANISATIONS,
SETTINGS AND
SERVICES UNDER
OFSTED'S
REMIT)
1. Ofsted currently has three main purposes of
inspection which are to:
— ensure
regulations, statutory guidance and minimum standards are adhered
too;
— provide
service users with information about the effectiveness of the
provider in order to improve public confidence;
— help
bring about improvement (such as the life chances, opportunities
and outcomes for vulnerable young people) by identifying strengths
and areas for improvement; and
— to
provide the relevant secretary of state with an independent public
account of the quality of service provision.
2. The current purposes of inspection are still
appropriate; however, it is useful to explore how the purposes
are fulfilled and how they are aligned to current government policy.
Ofsted's remit could be widened to allow for liaison with providers
and authorities to improve services; this was a valuable part
of the CSCI remit which was lost when Ofsted inherited the role
of CSCI.
3. There is a need to adopt a consistent approach
to all inspections. For example, the inspection of school 6th
forms is undertaken as part of the school inspection and is such
the provision does not receive the same level of scrutiny as inspections
of other post 16 institutions eg colleges, independent private
providers. As the inspection report informs the strategic commissioning
and performance management processes undertaken by the local authority
it is important that comparable data sources for both school 6th
forms and other post 16 providers are available.
4. Although the Ofsted inspection process does
help to bring about quality improvements, the inspectors could
be more transparent in the identification of the appropriate corrective
actions immediately after the inspection has concluded. As the
inspection team has identified the respective areas for improvement
through the inspection process, it is best placed to provide more
timely initial direction whilst in situation after the final feedback
meeting. The support role could then be picked up by the quality
improvement agency when it is in place. This practice would accelerate
the quality improvement process. This happens in some inspections
(ie safeguarding and looked after children inspections) but is
not consistent practice across all inspections Ofsted conduct.
5. The Ofsted inspection process needs to adapt
to the potential increase in consortia arrangements amongst providers.
The current inspection process does not differentiate between
single providers and consortia arrangements and consequently the
quality of provision of the subcontractor is not reported upon
to inform user choice. This situation will become more apparent
if the Skills Funding Agency increase the minimum contract levels
and consequently increase consortia working.
6. The inspection of Serious Case Reviews (SCRs)
needs to review its evaluation process to ensure consistency.
On occasions, Ofsted inspectors initially judges SCRs as inadequate
but following challenges from Local Authorities, these judgements
are often re-graded. Reviewing the judgement criteria to ensure
it is consistent and delivers the appropriate outcome may help
reduce the number of challenges Ofsted have.
7. The two-week safeguarding and looked-after
children inspection is meant to be a multi-agency assessment.
However, the reality is that the focus of the inspection was on
the children's social care team and what they do. The remit of
the inspection needs to be clearer, is it an integrated inspection
or an inspection of the local authority with a CQC inspector that
attends for part of the process.
8. The regulation of the various private providers
is an essential tool for local authorities to inform their commissioning
practices. The sharing of intelligence about providers contributes
to market growth and management.
9. Ofsted's regulatory role with Adoption, Fostering
and Children's Residential Services is key to both improving quality,
securing resources assessing compliance with the regulations and
standards ensures services are continuously improving.
THE IMPACT
OF THE
INSPECTION PROCESS
ON SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT
10. Ofsted inspection reports have had a significant
impact on the school improvement process by ensuring that urgent
action is taken when organisations are criticised. However the
simplistic judgement process can lead to successful schools not
paying sufficient regard to any criticisms beneath "Good"
and "Outstanding" judgements and people forgetting that
NTI/Failing organisations usually have strengths upon which they
can build. The inspection process should help all schools to improve
and those schools that are doing least well to improve the most.
11. The focus on post 16 within schools is often
"lost" within the whole school inspection. The challenge
to improving this phase needs to be greater, with more transparent
measures which enable effective comparison between providers of
post 16. For example, drop out rates/retention across years, fail
rates at AS and A level, and the proportion of learners who undertake
a course of study but then do not enter the exam are often figures
not reported or readily available. In FE this is captured with
the success rate calculation.
12. The inspection process has resulted in sharper
processes in many schools and does provide a quality assurance
framework across the country.
THE PERFORMANCE
OF OFSTED
IN CARRYING
OUT ITS
WORK
13. Ofsted often quotes statistics to suggest
that most organisations are happy with its performance. This may
be as much an expression of post inspection relief for most organisations
that have not failed, as genuine appreciation of its performance
in carrying out its work. Many organisations continue to be concerned
that Ofsted judgements are too closely tied to quantitative measures,
especially as it appears that organisations in more privileged
environments tend to do better than those serving more disadvantaged
communities.
14. There is a need for regular communication
meetings between Ofsted and the Local Authority in order to inform
the inspection process. The regular communication meetings would
also provide an opportunity to discuss the outcomes of recent
provider inspections and to share updates to agency policies.
It would also support an overview of provision in the area and
reporting on "themes".
15. Developing a business relations role between
the local authority and Ofsted would give a valuable opportunity
to improve the quality through working together to establish best
practice.
THE CONSISTENCY
AND QUALITY
OF INSPECTION
TEAMS IN
THE OFSTED
INSPECTION PROCESS
16. In broad terms, consistency and quality appear
to be upheld but there are still times when individual judgements
appear to be unbalanced by too much weight being accorded to particular
criteria.
17. Ofsted needs to give consistent messages
across all inspections, for examples schools are given inconsistent
messages by Ofsted on safeguarding issues around staffing and
recruitment or visitors to school. This causes problems for both
schools and local authorities in a number of areas.
18. The scheduling of inspections could be revised
to improve the consistency of inspection teams and to improve
value for money. The ratio of inspectors for small providers is
high compared to the ratio applied to a large provider (this applies
to all inspections including the safeguarding and looked after
children inspection). This may lead to inconsistencies in the
rigour of the inspection as large providers may receive fewer
observations and less documentation may be reviewed whereas smaller
providers may receive a more intense inspection.
19. A solution may lie in the scheduling of inspections.
The inspections of small and larger providers which are located
within a reasonable proximity of each other and deliver provision
in the same sector areas could be undertaken simultaneously and
sector specialist inspectors could conduct both inspections on
a staggered basis. This would provide a more efficient use of
the inspector's time and save on accommodation, transport costs
etc compared to the costs associated with an inspector conducting
two inspections on separate occasions. This approach would provide
an opportunity for Ofsted to conduct inspections of small and
large providers with a more consistent level of rigour.
20. There is variation in interpretation of aspects
of the inspection schedule (for example, safeguarding and looked
after children inspections).
21. Ofsted needs to improve the reputation, for
example, critics believe that the outcome of the inspection may
depend on the specific team allocated.
ANY COMMENTS
ABOUT THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF
THE INSPECTION
TEAM
22. There is a need to ensure that inspection
teams continue to remain diverse and have the correct background
and experience to inspect the settings they are responsible for.
THE WEIGHT
GIVEN TO
DIFFERENT FACTORS
WITHIN THE
INSPECTION PROCESS
23. The relative weighting given to different
factors appears to change after each review. The weighting should
reflect improvements in the inspection process but can also be
affected by political imperatives. The weighting Ofsted gives
to different factors can also provide a powerful incentive to
providers to focus on those areas. Therefore, alignment with key
policy priorities (such as closing the gap for disadvantaged learners)
would be helpful in steering providers' efforts.
24. For the common inspection framework for Further
Education & Skills 2009, greater weighting needs to be awarded
to the provision of good information, advice and guidance. Robust
information advice and guidance has positive affects on reducing
failure rates and early leavers and therefore needs to be considered
with an increased emphasis during the inspection process.
25. Areas where new freedoms are awarded should
also be subject to new scrutiny in order to secure accountability
and a view of the way a provider is using their freedoms eg in
admissions, in breadth of curriculum, in improving progression.
WHETHER INSPECTION
OF ALL
ORGANISATIONS, SETTINGS
AND SERVICES
TO SUPPORT
CHILDREN'S
LEARNING AND
WELFARE IS
BEST CONDUCTED
BY A
SINGLE INSPECTORATE
26. In order for the Ofsted inspection to fulfil
its purposes the inspectors need to have the appropriate skills
and experience in the respective education sectors, occupational
sectors and specific elements of the framework. Although some
of these skills and competencies are generic and can be transferred
across different educational sectors, many of them are specialist.
There is a concern that by having a single inspectorate the requisite
expertise may be lost and the inspection process will be devalued.
THE ROLE
OF OFSTED
IN PROVIDING
AN ACCOUNTABILITY
MECHANISM FOR
SCHOOLS OPERATING
WITH GREATER
AUTONOMY
27. We all agree that with greater freedom and
autonomy comes the need for greater transparency and accountability.
Readily accessible, impartial and comparable measures across providers
will be absolutely crucial both to learners and parents making
choices, to providers/commissioners seeking to secure the best
provision to meet the needs of children and young people. Ofsted
has a crucial role to play in this.
28. Publication of the review of data —
the desk based assessment that helps to inform decision to trigger
inspection — would be very helpful, especially in an accessible
format for a wider audience. Therefore, even when inspection intervals
are widely spaced (due to strong performance) there would be annual
confirmation of the underpinning performance data and trends that
inform this.
29. The purposes of inspection are equally applicable
to both local authority maintained and non-local authority maintained
schools. Differences do occur however post inspection as local
authority maintained schools will receive quality improvement
support from the SIPs whereas non local authority maintained schools
will need to commission support independently. Although schools
opting out of local authority maintained status have greater autonomy
many of them are still subject to Ofsted inspection and therefore
the role of Ofsted as an accountability mechanism has generally
not weakened.
October 2010
| 
