Agenda

LocationChild First, Northampton, Midlands

Date/Time14th September from 1.00pm

Number of Attendees27 - Representing 51 settings 1 childminder 1 Early Years

Local Authority person 1 OfSTED Inspector and an NDNA

Representative

Group Discussion Outcomes
/ NOTES:The settings had had, in the last 4 months, 20 Complaint Determined Inspections and 1 renewal inspection. There had been 8 appeals submitted and heard and none had changed the outcome. One setting had not been inspected for 5 years and another for 6 years.
  • We need to collect data re: CDI inspections versus cycle inspections;
  • All in attendance agreed cycle inspections are the way to go & return to what we knew previously with complaints dealt with sensibly and with common sense;
  • QA of inspections should be outsourced otherwise conflict of interest;
  • More focus on care required and not main focus on paperwork, caring words do not seem to be priority;
  • Inspectors need to talk and listen to the children in settings more;
  • Childcare industry need to get together and create our own inspection criteria/standards/kite mark;
  • We need to now collaborate on putting together a childcare forum/committee (or something similar) that can address the powers that be, including Ofsted, LA's & Government;
  • Need to address the training of Inspectors @ Tribal & Prospect;
  • All agreed complaints must be separated from cycle inspections;
  • Ofsted guidance is written by Ofsted & not Tribal or Prospect (according to an Inspector in attendance)
  • Ofsted training needs to be addressed;
  • Suggested we commence our own range of independent inspectors by employing a range of eminent childcare professionals/consultants who could carry out impartial inspections;
  • It was also suggested that these independent inspectors/consultants would inspect on our own kite mark but no grading system (one is either good enough to operate)
Further Notes:
There was one setting that had received some FOI information which highlighted the gulf between providers and OfSTED - seeking honest and clear answers and getting none.
I think the most overwhelming feeling was that the current modus operandi, and the payment of contractors by inspection had begun a real rift where we, as providers, felt undermined, undervalued and with little to no respect for the 'outcomes' offered by the current processes.
There was a shared opinion that we should be considered compliant or non compliant - and if we were, we could go about our real business and if not compliant, close us down. Inadequate is not a room for improvement - it is exactly that - inadequate.
Finally can I say that I do not believe there was one person in the room who was not totally committed to children and all expressed a sadness that process and procedure and fear and loathing had diluted if not destroyed our ability to do what we really wanted which is to focus on the learning, development and care of our children.
Tom O’Shea, Child First Day Nurseries