Ofsted’s approach to safeguarding in inspections Nick Gadfield HMI National Advisor Cross Ofsted Safeguarding ALP conference, 24 March 2010

 We are to promote improvement in the public services we inspect or regulate  We are to ensure services are focused on users  We are to see that services are efficient and effective Education and Inspections Act 2006 Ofsted’s key duties

 The CES forms the basis of all Ofsted’s inspection and regulation judgements  It prescribes a common grading system for all inspections  It introduces some use of minimum acceptable levels  And it introduces the concept of limiting grades – including for Safeguarding Common evaluation schedule

What is Safeguarding Defined in the Children Act 2004 – broadly:  protecting children and young people from maltreatment  preventing impairment of children and young people’s health or development  ensuring that children and young people are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care  undertaking that role so as to enable those children and young people to have optimum life chances and to enter adulthood successfully.

 How safe do learners feel? o What we observe (safe practices) o What they tell us (feel safe)  How effectively does the provider promote the safeguarding of learners? o learners are safeguarded and protected o staff take action to identify and respond appropriately to users’ welfare concerns o safeguarding is prioritised o providers work together with agencies and professionals effectively to safeguard learners Safeguarding judgements in the CIF

 How safe do learners feel? o What we observe (safe practices) o What they tell us (feel safe)  How effectively does the provider promote the safeguarding of learners? o learners are safeguarded and protected o staff take action to identify and respond appropriately to users’ welfare concerns o safeguarding is prioritised o providers work together with agencies and professionals effectively to safeguard learners Safeguarding judgements in the CIF

Grading High expectations for “Satisfactory”  Learners feel safe, act safely in all settings, know how to recognise and act on unsafe or abusive treatment by others  Provider meets all government (safeguarding) requirements  Risk assesses where most vulnerable learners are and protects them  At least basic safeguarding training for all staff  Governors/supervisory bodies and senior managers take close interest in safeguarding – regular reports  Cooperation with LSCB where relevant  Use of learners’ views about safety

Early inspection outcomes (Sept – Feb) Encouraging overall picture (based on 103 published inspections)  7% L&S providers graded outstanding for Safeguarding in inspections since September (3 in WBL, 4 in colleges)  35% graded good  52% satisfactory  6% inadequate (1 ACL and 5 WBL providers)

What does outstanding safeguarding look like in practice (case study 1) A work-based learning provider (Engineering)  clear strategy for safeguarding the most vulnerable learners  Frequent management checks on implementation of strategy  good liaison with learners’ employers and workplace supervisors  safe use of information and communication technology agreement (signed by learners during induction)  training advisers and assessors have a thorough understanding of their role in safeguarding  Accidents, incidents and ‘near misses’ are carefully recorded  thorough introduction on anti-bullying/harassment  LSCB training for staff  Thorough arrangements for ISA in 2010

What does outstanding safeguarding look like in practice (case study 2) A work-based learning provider (HSC and childcare)  Particularly rigorous safeguarding arrangements for learners  Clear staff understanding of their role in safeguarding  Preventative and proactive approach to risk management  Good training – knowledgeable staff responsive to learners’ needs  Learners well informed about wide range of child protection matters during theory sessions  Some learners have reported safeguarding-related instances using correct procedures  Good relationships with employers used to promote safety awareness and safe working environments

What does outstanding safeguarding look like in practice (case study 3) A work-based learning provider (offering activity holidays to children)  Comprehensive H&S arrangements with risk assessment of all activities  CRB checks of all staff and apprentices working with the children  Designated safeguarding officer and deputy in every centre  Thorough briefings for apprentices on safeguarding, covering drug/alcohol abuse, sexual behaviour, e-safety  Safeguards to minimise risk of false allegations against apprentices

Weaknesses leading to a grade 4 Procedural weaknesses -  Some risk assessments are incomplete  contact with the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board and Children’s Services is not yet established  not undertaken a risk assessment  no checks on staff  no mention of safeguarding in the subcontractor contract  not checked that its subcontractors have adequate safeguarding arrangements

Weaknesses leading to a grade 4 Training weaknesses  staff training not complete or planned for the future  training on the new safeguarding policy not completed  staff do not have an adequate understanding of safeguarding

Weaknesses leading to a grade 4 Specific (operational) weaknesses  reinforcement of PPE requirements is weak  no clear arrangements to ensure that apprentices under 18 years of age do not share accommodation with adults

Self assessment Basic questions to address in the SAR  How good is your provision and how do you know and now  How safe are your learners, and how do you know o Learners feel safe and know what this means – how do you know? Any examples of improvements made? o Use safe working practices – how do you know? (OTL records?) o Risk assessed where the most vulnerable are – how can you show this? o Working with the LSCB – again, how can you show this and what impact has it had? o Safeguarding is prioritised – in business plans? Staff training?

Changing landscape:  Drawing the line (Sir Roger Singleton)  DCSF consultation on proposed new arrangements from April  Key dates – October 2009, April 2010, July 2010, November 2010

But, new edition is due out soon

Activities Definitions for discussion Self assessment topics – where is your evidence Examples of safeguarding paragraphs for discussion