Disqualification - Dazed and Confused?

You may be aware that there has been growing discussion, debate, contradiction and general kerfuffle over what exactly are the rules regarding disqualification of a worker due to ‘Association’. This means where a worker is disqualified due to someone working or living in their household having been disqualified.

While the story seems to be grabbing increasing national coverage, the Department for Education insist that nothing has changed to regulations on Disqualification which have been in place for many years, it is revised government guidance issued in October 2014 which has highlighted the issue and has led to the current situation.

The Guardian reported that hundreds of school staff have been suspended and that Ofsted is struggling to deal with the number of applications for waivers, it’s possible that a similar as yet unreported situation is developing for play and childcare staff. http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jan/20/schools-suspend-staff-child-protection-regulations

There are concerns about asking staff and management committees (yes it applies to them too!) to disclose the disqualification status of themselves, but more particularly, that of the people in their households. Whilst this needs to be asked, the way it is asked, and how staff feel they are valued and supported through this, can make the difference between it feeling accusatory or a way of them further contributing to the safeguarding of children in their care.

BAND issued guidance before Christmas which aims to clarify the situation as far as possible at present, signposts to further guidance from DfE and Ofsted and suggests how play/childcare employers can ensure compliance with the legislation. This can be viewed on our website: http://www.bandltd.org.uk/development_and_support.html

Update on Ofsted Big Conversation

Last night saw the South West Big Conversation meeting enabling Early Years Providers and support workers and representatives from Ofsted to enter in to a dialogue.

The Ofsted panel of 4 included Bradley Simmons, the South West Regional Lead for Ofsted, they were given a set of pre prepared questions from South West providers about issues that have affected them in regard to their Ofsted registrations and inspections.

One of the first questions was about whether providers should see themselves as educators or carers in EY provisions, Ofsted responded with advice that their ‘teaching’ expectations are laid out in the new evaluation schedule on the Ofsted website (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/conducting-early-years-inspections), but that the 2 roles are intrinsically linked, and childcarers are educating through everything they do. Inspectors will look at the quality of learning through play that happens in a setting as well as the more formal ideas of learning when making their assessments and judgements. A question was raised about balancing parental expectation with good practice – the example given was a child attending with English as a second language, the parents were keen for her to be communicated with solely in English, but the setting were keen to engage with the family and learn about their culture and use language and words that are recognisable to the child to help her feel more settled and less isolated when attending – the response reiterated the EY professional’s role was to explain the EYFS and their responsibilities within that, helping the parents to understand the benefits to their child.

Another questions raised the issue of inspectors having an agenda when entering a setting for an inspection. The response advised that the phrase agenda is subjective, but that they expect every inspection to be treated as a ‘unique event’ by the inspectors, and that they enter with no preconceived ideas regarding outcomes. However, that being said, inspectors do carry out pre inspection work where they look at the history of the setting, former actions, their SEF, why the inspection is happening i.e. is it complaints driven etc and this will inform the inspection itself. This led to a discussion about why inspectors seemed to need ‘permission’ to give an Outstanding judgement? Bradley Simmons explained that Ofsted and Tribal have moved to a more robust, evidence based judgement and inspectors have to discuss their chosen outcome to ensure it is fully justified, this is at both ends of the judgement spectrum and will hopefully lead to less adjustment when outcomes go through QA processes.

In Bristol recently, a maintained sector setting was advised by an inspector they would not receive outstanding as they were not from the PVI sector, following the discussion regarding agendas this was raised directly and the advice was to follow it up with a complaint to Ofsted, as statements like this should not be made by inspectors. Another provision asked what settings can do if they are severely concerned about an inspectors conduct at an inspection visit and the advice was to call the Ofsted helpline and ask to speak to the duty inspector there and then, this has happened previously and has led to the issue being resolved on the day and negated the need to raise a formal complaint, saving both time and money for all involved.

There is a lot of work happening at the moment between Ofsted and Tribal to ensure QA is happening more regularly and therefore consistency in inspections is improving. Ofsted are taking school inspections back in house this year, this is due to the Tribal contract finishing. Tribal’s EY contract is not due to finish for another 19 months and there is potential for Ofsted to bring this back in house at this time, but it would need to be assessed.

There will be a couple of consultations happening in the near future from Ofsted and the DfE, the first will be about the regularity of inspections and whether there could be interim visits that are lighter touch, the second is looking at how paid for inspections could work in practice. There seem to be reservations on both sides regarding paid for inspections and it was confirmed Ofsted would charge the full cost of the inspection to the provider.

The changes to the DBS system were also discussed, from September 14 it is an expectation that all applicants for new registrations, on completing their DBS checks, will need to sign up to the update service, if this does not happen, then the registration will not progress. Concern was raised on the impact this will have on Childminders particularly as everyone living or working on their premises will need to sign up to the update service as well. When asked if providers holding existing DBS checks need to sign up to the update service if they are rechecked in line with good practice timescales, this was met with a degree of uncertainty, but the promise of a follow up response.

Modern Britain was also raised, it was confirmed that the DfE are looking at how this will work with regard to the new curriculum and the EYFS and will be taking a view on whether changes need to be made to the document to further embed the changes into early education.

The Ofsted panel agreed that they would still take queries and questions from the Co-chairs of the SW regional group of the Ofsted Big Conversation, and would follow up on those that they couldn’t answer through them as well. There will also be a full transcript of the meeting published, so watch this space for more info.

If you want more info on how the discussions are going nationwide, or to read about why the Ofsted Big Conversation was set up go to http://www.thebigofstedconversation.co.uk or you can follow the ‘hashtag’ #ofstedbigconversation Future meetings will also be advertised through this so you can have an opportunity to get involved and have your own ‘Big Conversation’ with Ofsted!

First Response launches its city-wide service from 16th December 2013

From 16th December 2013 First Response will be the place to call in Bristol if you are concerned about a child or young person or think they need support.

When you call, the team will ask you questions to work out the best route for helping the child or family. This may result on a referral to Early Help or directly to a Social Work Team

It has been piloted in North Bristol since March 2013.

First Response: 0117 903 6444

So change that telephone number on your child protection policy.

This poster shows more information (PDF versions available from BAND, contact your DS Worker for more info):

 

The Ofsted Big Conversation

The Ofsted Big Conversation

On the evening of Friday 13^th September, despite the awful weather, we were fortunate enough to be able attend one of the National Ofsted Big Conversations that had been encouraged to take place by June O’Sullivan from London’s Early Years Foundation.

In May 2013, June O’Sullivan started the conversation on Nursery World’s Linkedin page, due to her concerns about the new Ofsted approach to regulation and their aggressive tone. In response to this nearly 400 comments were received with practitioners contributing a whole host of stories and concerns about Ofsted. So it was decided to take action and try to engage Ofsted, get them on board, share the sector’s concerns and consider solutions.

The ‘conversations’ have been supported by Early Years practitioners, organisations, trainers and consultants. They were hoped to be a collaboration of those passionate about EY and an invitation to share experiences, support one another and vitally – engage Ofsted! A gathering place for all those interested in the fairness and quality of Ofsted inspections.

Over the weekend of the 13^th and 14^th September Ofsted Big Conversations took place across the country, an agenda was set for us all to follow with a number of questions to focus our discussions and hopefully find some ways forward and suggestion sector led solutions for the issues that seem to be of concern for the sector.

The evening in Weston Super Mare was very passionate, and it was highly apparent that childcare was not just a job for any of those present, with comments regularly coming back to the impact on the children and families, as well as other staff and management in settings. The Ofsted Big Conversation gave a welcome platform for expression of concern, but also some very positive ideas and suggested guidelines for improvement

We were part of a group of 20 practitioners from across 3 counties, the meeting took place in ‘The Campus’ (http://www.the-campus.org.uk) a community facility and children’s centre in Weston Super Mare. Childminding was well represented; there were a number of group providers as well as us from a development and support agency and even an Ofsted trainer, so we were lucky to have a breadth of knowledge and experience.

Although we knew we needed to try and answer the questions and suggest how we would like to see the inspection process change and improved, inevitably is was hard to stay focussed when listening to the vast experiences (unfortunately mainly negative) that practitioners had had with Ofsted over the last few years. It was great that people had a space to vent their frustrations as this led to discussion about how to affect change in the sector.

Prior to the meeting we looked at 10 questions, then collated these into 7 responses suggesting actions that could be taken;

1          Ofsted dual roles of regulation and improvement – Can we all agree what this should look like?

Two words during this discussion kept reoccurring - consistency and transparency. There were definite concerns about how Ofsted can regulate their own advice? And at present, providers feel they are well supported through their LAs and support agencies, who understand local and individual issues and can advise accordingly – will this more personal support that recognises our individuality in the sector be lost? Will this then have an impact on parental choice and diversity in Early Years? There was already a feeling that inspections outcomes can be influenced by inspector’s individual opinions, if the advice from one area of Ofsted is not agreed with by the inspector how will this affect the outcome?

We want to see: clearly defined roles; separate teams; differentiated training; external and independent QA of each role (with sector representation); each role to be a positive one supporting morale within the profession;, the knowledge and skills of existing LA staff is not lost; clarity of information around the level of support re quality improvement settings can expect.

2          Ofsted rationale for complaint initiated inspections which go back over 10 years – Can we agree what this should look like in the future?

We did discover that the inspectors that visit settings on the back of complaints are from a different department from those who carry out ‘normal’ inspections. Again, information and transparency about this would be useful to providers, as there were concerns that one department’s knowledge of the sector might be wider than the other. A guarantee that all inspectors come from an EY background and have an understanding of all areas of the sector including childminding and specialist nurseries such as Steiner and Montessori.  

Also, we want assurances that any inspection that is triggered for whatever the reason can result in any outcome. There is fear that an inspection triggered by a complaint can only result in a ‘satisfactory’ outcome – we want to know this is not the case and that settings can retain their grades if their practice at the inspection reflects this.

We want to see: greater transparency regarding how the decision to re inspect has been made when it is due to a previous complaint that has already been investigated and a full inspection taken place, reasons for inspections clearly presented to the provider; exact reasons for a reduction in grade; separate investigations of complaints to better support quality improvement; complaint driven inspections not being grade determined by no children present.

3          Ofsted Quality Assurance Process - Can we agree what this should look like in the future?

There was definite confusion regarding which organisation carries out the QA process on inspection reports and outcomes. Feedback suggested that providers who have followed up a change in Judgement or even the publishing of an inspection report that has taken longer than the Ofsted targets on timescales, have been told conflicting information on where their reports have been held up and who has been responsible for the QA process that has affected their outcome given in feedback at the end of an inspection visit.

We want to see: greater transparency – who is QA’ing, what is the QA process, how may are QA’d; figures relating to outcomes of QA to feed in to inspector training (see also Q4); specific reason for grade change from informal feedback to post QA; clarity if any QA process has upgraded an outcome?

4          Ofsted inspector training and support - Can we agree what this should look like in the future?

The question here really focussed on how 2 organisations (Tribal and Prospects) that act on behalf of a third (Ofsted) can retain the consistency needed across the board to ensure everyone feels they are treated in the same way at inspections, and have equality of opportunity to reach the higher outcomes.

We want to see: inspectors with specific breadth of knowledge inspecting settings e.g. Childminders, specialist nurseries and pre-schools; QA on the consistency of training; all inspectors trained by the same organisation.

5          Inspector decision making and feedback - Can we agree what this should look like in the future?

Whilst we all acknowledged, informal feedback and outcomes are not official, it is difficult to understand how an outcome can drop so significantly when the report goes through QA.(sometimes 2 grades).  Is it better that inspectors give no outcome judgement at the end of a visit, but agree the outcome will be shared formally, within agreed timescales and Ofsted stick to these timescales rigorously?

We want to see: greater transparency about the decisions re grading – why not higher, why not lower; inspectors not having to ask permission to give outstanding (this infers there are quotas and create unease within the sector); feedback to be a 2 way process.

6          Significant indicators – What constitutes a managerial judgement?

This was the point that we all realised the importance of reading the Ofsted guidance and keeping up to date with any changes – the clarification in the guidance from Ofsted re significant events is comprehensive in places, but it was felt that this could be even more explicit.

We want to see: Greater clarity around the term significant; terms such as other, significant, is likely, regular etc all to be quantified (see ‘Records, policies and notification requirements of the Early Years Register’ Ref 120412).

7          New inspection regime in November – What will this entail and how much information will we expect in the light of heavier emphasis on keeping children safe and teaching and learning?

There were concerns about the amount of publicity and information that would be given to the public about another change to the regulations, and parents not understanding that this could lead to a ‘blip’ in outcomes as we have to change our practice again. Also, a clear explanation of the change from ‘satisfactory’ to ‘need for improvement’ as a judgement. Where will the emphasis on play come from?

We want to see: Clear information to parents that inspections are taking place under a different criteria of grading – possibility of stating this at the top of the published reports; there is greater differentiation within ‘requires improvement’ for minor and major improvements; consideration given to the suggestion that outcomes should all be ‘meets requirements’ or ‘does not meet requirements’ a simple pass or fail.

Reflection and feedback on the evening from those present included "more opportunities like this with current structured questions please", and a plea of "additional opportunities to meet and discuss freely current childcare related issues across county and across sector in future". Others commented on how good it was to know that others shared their feelings and thoughts, and also how productive and positive it was to work together to suggest solutions and improvements to current systems. Overall everyone agreed that more transparency and clarity was required from Ofsted to enable improvements and trust.

Changes are coming to the sector again and Ofsted are currently consulting on what these will finally look like  -

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212684/regulation_consultation.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212685/Annex_A.pdf

From 4 November 2013;

For all early years providers:

• the satisfactory judgement will be replaced by ‘requires improvement’
• ‘inadequate’ settings are likely to be re-inspected after 6 months
• if an ‘inadequate’ setting fails to improve sufficiently and is found ‘inadequate’ again after re-inspection; Ofsted may take steps to cancel that setting’s registration.

For pre-schools and nurseries:

• there will be re-inspection within a year for those which ‘require improvement’ with the expectation that the setting will get to ‘good’ within two years
• those that fail to improve after two years are likely to be judged ‘inadequate’.

Over the coming weeks the information from all the conversations will be collated and shared via the Ofsted Big Conversation website – www.ofstedbigconversation.co.uk so check this out to see what other areas were discussing and the solutions they suggested.

The social media approach has meant that the opportunity to connect with people has been really valuable.  We have had a great connection with one another and the vibe is lively and positive. People in the sector are genuinely supportive of each other and believe that good pre-school care and education is beneficial for all children but especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds.  We want to get it right and recognise the need for a regulator which can be trusted to support this desire in a way that is fair, accountable and effective.

The original information and discussion points from June O’Sullivan can be found on linkdin www.linkedin.com/groups/What-is-happening-Ofsted-Are-4236984.S.231774450?qid=3dd72697-3b46-4138-b64d-75908a3ce0dd&trk=groups_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=%2Egmp_4236984 

And if you are a tweeter you can follow the conversations through the ‘hashtag’ #ofstedbigconversation

BAND will continue to tweet, retweet, blog and post on facebook as new info and updates become available so you can keep up to date through any of our social media platforms as well. To find these go to our website www.bandltd.org.uk and click on any of the social media buttons.

Let’s hope that through the consultation and the big conversations we have a collective voice that is listened to and acted on to ensure that Ofsted and the sector can work more cohesively and continue to improve outcomes for children.

 

Collated and written by Jenny Winfield and Ellie Frake and includes excerpts from the Ofsted Big Conversation website.