Guidance

Social care common inspection framework (SCCIF): residential provision of further education colleges

Updated 5 April 2024

Applies to England

Introduction

The social care common inspection framework (SCCIF) applies to inspections of:

• children’s homes
• secure children’s homes
• independent fostering agencies
• boarding schools and residential special schools
• voluntary adoption agencies
• adoption support agencies
• residential family centres
• residential holiday schemes for disabled children
• residential provision in further education colleges

The SCCIF means that:

• we apply the same judgement structure across the range of settings listed above
• the experiences and progress of children and other service users, wherever they live or receive help, are central to inspections
• there are key areas of evidence that we usually report on at each inspection

The SCCIF is not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ framework. Where necessary, the SCCIF reflects and addresses the unique and distinct aspects of each type of setting. However, the evaluation criteria we use to make judgements and the accompanying guidance are, wherever possible, consistent across settings.

The inspection principles

Ofsted’s corporate strategy outlines how we will carry out inspection and regulation that are:

• intelligent
• responsible
• focused

Our approach is further underpinned by the following 3 principles that apply to all social care inspections.

To focus on the things that matter most to children’s lives

We have reached a general consensus with the main social care stakeholders that social care inspections should focus on the experiences and progress of children. We regularly ask children, and the adults who look after them, what matters most about children’s experiences and progress.

Using this to guide us, we focus the criteria for our judgements on the difference that providers are making to children’s lives. Adults can only support children well if they’re given the time, resources and information they need to do this, so we also take account of the quality of the support that the adults who care for children receive.

To be consistent in our expectations of providers

It’s important that professionals and members of the public can compare services that do similar things. We make this possible by being consistent in what we expect from providers.

We use the same judgement structure and the same evaluation criteria, wherever possible, irrespective of where children live or receive help.

Our inspection methods and published guidance only differ when there is a good reason. This includes taking a similar approach to deciding on the frequency of inspections.

To prioritise our work where improvement is needed most

We are committed to inspecting in a way that focuses our resources where they are needed most. If leaders and managers have shown that they can consistently deliver services for children well, we may decide to return less often or do a more proportionate inspection.

However, we always take into account the risk to children of not inspecting as frequently. We use a broad range of information to tell us whether standards are slipping. We are always able to go back to good and outstanding providers more quickly if we have concerns.

The focus of inspections

The SCCIF has a consistent and clear focus on evaluating the impact of care and support on the experiences and progress of children, largely through case tracking and sampling. This means that:

• inspectors spend less time looking at policies and procedures and more time looking at the impact of services on children’s lives
• we give the minimum notice of inspection, so that we can see settings as they are on a day-to-day basis, and so that the time providers may spend preparing for inspection is reduced as much as possible
• we have set out as clearly as possible the details of the information required by inspectors to assist their inspection; this will enable providers to produce their best evidence whenever we give notice of inspection

When applying this guidance, inspectors will take appropriate action to comply with Ofsted’s duties under the Equality Act 2010.

How inspectors make judgements under the SCCIF

Judgement structure

Our judgement structure stems from our first principle of inspection – to focus on the things that matter most to children’s lives – and places the progress and experiences of children and other people who use children’s services at the core of inspections.

All SCCIF inspections follow the 4-point scale (outstanding, good, requires improvement to be good and inadequate) to make judgements on the overall experiences and progress of children, taking into account:

• how well children are helped and protected
• the effectiveness of leaders and managers

Inspections of adoption support agencies, voluntary adoption agencies and residential family centres also look at, as appropriate, the experiences of adult service users.

The judgement about how well children are helped and protected is a limiting judgement. This means that, if inspectors judge this area to be inadequate, the ‘overall experiences and progress’ judgement will always be inadequate.

The judgement of the effectiveness of leaders and managers is a graded judgement. If inspectors judge this area to be inadequate, this is likely to lead to a judgement of inadequate, and certainly no more than requires improvement, for ‘overall experiences and progress’.

Inspectors will make the limiting and graded judgements first so that they can take these into account for the ‘overall progress and experiences’ judgement.

How inspectors use the evaluation criteria

Inspectors will use the descriptions of what ‘good’ looks like as the benchmarks against which to grade and judge performance. The judgement, however, is not derived from a checklist. It is a professional evaluation of the effectiveness and impact of the care and support provided on the experiences and progress of children. Failure to meet all of the criteria for good will not automatically lead to a judgement of requires improvement to be good.

Some criteria will have less relevance than others in some settings because of the nature of the setting and the needs of the children.

Even when all the criteria are relevant, there is always a degree of professional judgement in weighing and balancing evidence against the evaluation criteria.

The inspector judges a setting to be good if they conclude that the evidence sits most appropriately with this finding. We call this the ‘best fit’.

The evaluation criteria for SCCIF inspections are broadly consistent across different types of setting but, where necessary, they have been adapted to reflect the varying and unique nature of each type of provision.

Required evidence

Inspectors look at several areas of required evidence for each judgement. Some areas are common to all SCCIF inspections, but others are specific to the specific type of provision. The areas of required evidence are set out in the bullet points at the beginning of the evaluation criteria for each judgement.

Evaluation criteria

Inspectors use the following criteria to make judgements, including benchmarks of what good looks like.

The overall experiences and progress of young people

Areas of required evidence are:

• the quality of individual care and support
• the quality of relationships between professionals and young people
• the experience of and progress young people make in relation to health, education, and emotional, social and psychological well-being
• how well their views are understood and taken into account
• the quality of young people’s experiences on a day-to-day basis
• how well young people are prepared for their futures and how well transitions are managed

Good

The experiences and progress of children and parents are likely to be judged good if there is evidence of the following:

Young people are enabled to build trusted and secure relationships with the adults who look after them.

Residential staff know young people well, listen to them, spend time with them, protect them and promote their welfare. Young people, including those with host families or in lodgings, are able to develop an appropriate sense of belonging. They make progress and have a range of positive experiences.

Young people, including those who communicate non-verbally, are given support to make day-to-day and complex decisions about their lives. They are sensitively helped to understand when it may not be possible to act on their wishes and why other action is taken that is in their best interests. Young people have access to, and are encouraged to involve, an independent advocate and, where appropriate, an independent visitor.

Young people know how to complain. The college’s complaints policy is easy to understand and accessible. Young people understand what has happened as a result of their complaint. Their complaints are treated seriously and responded to clearly. Urgent action is taken, and practice and services improve as a result.

Young people attend their education and training sessions punctually and are well prepared. They are learning effectively and making good progress from their starting points. Staff are ambitious for young people and support them to attend and do well in their education. There is effective liaison between the residential provision, teaching staff and college leaders.

Young people enjoy a range of social, educational and recreational opportunities. They are supported to engage in faith-based activities if they wish.

Young people are supported to develop independence according to their individual needs. They are shown how to protect themselves from being in unsafe situations or with unsafe people.

Young people are in good health, or are being helped to improve their health, or to manage lifelong conditions. Their health needs (including their oral, physical, mental and sexual health needs) are identified and addressed. They have access to local health services, including dentists. Arrangements for managing medication or complex health needs are safe and effective and promote independence wherever possible. Staff develop effective relationships with all health professionals to promote good health.

Specialist help is available according to the individual needs of young people. The help is available as soon as it is needed, at the intensity required and for as long as required. If services are not available, or a young person is waiting for a long time for help, staff are proactive in challenging and escalating concerns with the placing authority or other partners.

Young people who are new, including those with host families or in lodgings, are welcomed. Newcomers are received sensitively and with careful and considered planning.

Young people are treated with dignity and respect. They experience care that is responsive to their identity and family history, including age, disability, faith or belief, sex, gender identity, language, race and sexual orientation. They are helped to develop a positive self-view. The care they receive increases their ability to form and sustain relationships, build emotional resilience and develop a sense of their own identity. It helps them overcome any previous experiences of neglect and trauma.

Staff place the well-being of individual young people at the centre of their practice. Their achievements are celebrated. Their day-to-day needs are met, such as routine, privacy, personal space and nutritious food at regular mealtimes.

Staff encourage young people to have appropriate contact (direct or indirect) with family, friends and other people important to them. There are no unnecessary restrictions in place.

There are good opportunities for young people to express their views. In addition, they’re able to take some responsibility for how their accommodation, pastoral support and social activities are run.

Requires improvement to be good

The experiences and progress of young people are likely to be judged requires improvement to be good if there is evidence of the following:

The college is not yet delivering good help and care for young people. The weaknesses identified need to be addressed to fully support their progress and experience and to mitigate risk in the medium and long term. However, there are no serious or widespread failures that result in their welfare not being safeguarded and promoted.

Inadequate

The experiences and progress of young people are likely to be judged inadequate if there is evidence of the following:

There are serious or widespread failures that mean young people are not protected, or their welfare is not promoted or safeguarded, or if their care and experiences are poor and they are not making progress.

Outstanding

The experiences and progress of young people are likely to be judged outstanding if, in addition to the requirements of good, there is evidence of the following:

Professional practice consistently exceeds the standard of good and results in sustained improvement to the lives of young people even when young people have complex or challenging needs. There are examples of excellent practice that are worthy of wider dissemination.

There is significant evidence of change and improvement for young people because of the actions of the staff working at the college. The progress of young people is exceptional taking into account their starting points.

The experience of living at the college enhances young people’s life chances. For young people with the most complex needs, staff are able to evidence the sustained benefit they have had in making a difference to the lives of young people in their care.

Research-informed practice, some of which may be innovative, continues to develop from a strong and confident base, making an exceptional difference to the lives and experiences of young people.

How well young people are helped and protected

Areas of required evidence are:

• how well risks are identified, understood and managed, and whether the support and care provided help young people be increasingly safe, taking account of their individual circumstances and previous experiences
• the provider’s actions in response to young people who may go missing or be at risk of harm, including from exploitation, neglect, abuse, self-harm, bullying and radicalisation
• how well staff manage situations and behaviour and whether clear and consistent boundaries contribute to a feeling of well-being and security for young people
• whether safeguarding arrangements to protect young people meet all statutory and other government requirements, promote their welfare and prevent radicalisation and extremism

Good

The help and protection offered to young people are likely to be judged good if there is evidence of the following:

Young people feel protected and are protected from harm, including from neglect, abuse, sexual exploitation, criminal exploitation, accidents, bullying and radicalisation. There is a strong and proactive response from all those working with young people that reduces harm or the risk of harm to them, including self-harm. That response includes regular and effective contact and planning with the young person’s family or, if relevant, their allocated social worker.

Young people can identify a trusted adult they can talk to about any concerns. They report that adults listen to them, take their concerns seriously and respond appropriately.

Any risks associated with young people offending, misusing drugs or alcohol, self-harming, going missing or being affiliated with gangs, or being sexually or criminally exploited, are known and understood by the staff who look after them. Individual up-to-date risk assessments address any known vulnerabilities for each young person effectively and set out what action staff should take to manage the risks. There are plans in place to reduce the risk of harm and there is evidence that these risks are reducing or managed well, based on young people’s individual circumstances.

Young people who go missing from the residential provision experience well-coordinated responses that reduce harm or the risk of harm to them. Risks are well understood and minimised.

Staff are aware of, and implement in full, the requirements of the statutory guidance for young people who are missing. They take appropriate steps to escalate concerns. Parents and carers are made aware of incidents where the young person has been or is missing, where this is appropriate. Staff look for young people when they are missing.

Young people are protected, and helped to keep themselves safe, from bullying, homophobic behaviour, racism, sexism, radicalisation and other forms of discrimination. Any discriminatory behaviours are challenged. Support is given to young people about how to treat others with respect.

Young people receive help and support to manage their behaviour and feelings safely. Staff looking after them respond with clear boundaries about what is safe and acceptable and seek to understand the triggers for behaviour.

Positive behaviour is promoted consistently. Staff use effective de-escalation techniques and creative alternative strategies that are specific to the needs of each young person and designed in consultation with them where possible.

Restraint or restrictive practice are used only when necessary to protect the young person and/or those around them and must be proportionate. All incidents are recorded, reviewed and monitored, and the views of the young person are sought and understood.

Conflict management is effective and includes the appropriate use of restorative practices that improve relationships, increase young people’s sense of personal responsibility and reduce the need for formal police intervention.

Proactive and effective working relationships with the police help to support and protect young people.

Staff understand the risks that using the internet may pose for young people, such as bullying, sexual and criminal exploitation or radicalisation. They have well-developed strategies in place to keep young people safe online and to support them in learning how to keep themselves safe.

Any searches of young people, their rooms and possessions are carried out sensitively by appropriately trained staff with due consideration given to their need to feel safe and to have their dignity and needs respected. All searches are appropriately recorded, including the reasons for the search, efforts to seek the young person’s consent, any risk assessment and management oversight of the decision to carry out a search.

Careful recruitment and regular monitoring of staff and volunteers prevent unsuitable people from being recruited and having the opportunity to harm young people or to place them at risk. The relevant authorities are informed of any concerns about inappropriate adults.

Staff working within the residential provision, including the designated safeguarding lead (DSL), know and follow procedures for responding to concerns about the safety of a young person. Any child protection concerns are immediately shared as required with the host or placing local authority. A record of that referral is retained.

There is evidence that staff follow up the outcome of the referral quickly and that appropriate action has been taken to protect the young person from further harm. If the college is not satisfied with the response from either its own local authority or the placing authority, it escalates its concerns appropriately, including by writing to the director of children’s services (DCS) in the local authority placing the young person (if relevant).

Investigations into allegations or suspicion of harm are shared with the appropriate agencies and are handled fairly, quickly and in accordance with statutory guidance. Young people are supported and protected. Support is given both to the person making the allegation and the person who is the subject of the allegation.

Staff have effective links with local authorities, designated officers and other safeguarding agencies. There is good communication about safeguarding issues, such as any injuries sustained during restraints or allegations against staff. Staff have good relationships with relevant local voluntary sector organisations that may be able to offer specialist support to young people in keeping themselves safe.

The physical environment for young people is safe and secure and protects them from harm or the risk of harm. Risk assessments for the physical environment are regularly reviewed and staff understand and implement strategies to keep young people safe.

Requires improvement to be good

The help and protection offered to young people are likely to be judged requires improvement to be good if there is evidence of the following:

Young people are not yet receiving good help and protection, but there are no serious failures that leave them either being harmed or at risk of harm.

Inadequate

The help and protection offered to young people are likely to be judged inadequate if there is evidence of the following:

There are serious or widespread failures that mean young people are not protected, or their welfare is not promoted or safeguarded, or if their care, support and experiences are poor and they are not making progress.

Outstanding

The help and protection offered to young people are likely to be judged outstanding if, in addition to the requirements of good, there is evidence of the following:

Highly effective planning manages and minimises risks inside and outside of the college.

Proactive and creative safeguarding practice means that all young people, including the most vulnerable, have a strong sense of safety and well-being and they are unlikely to be missing from the college on a regular basis.

Young people are involved in creating ways to de-escalate situations and finding creative alternative strategies that are effective.

Research-informed practice, some of which may be innovative, continues to develop from a strong and confident base, making an exceptional difference to the lives and experiences of young people.

The effectiveness of leaders and managers, including governors

Areas of required evidence are:

• whether leaders and managers show an ambitious vision, have high expectations for what all young people can achieve and ensure high standards of individualised care
• the extent to which leaders and managers have a clear understanding of the progress that young people are making and take effective action when necessary
• whether leaders and managers provide the right supportive environment for staff through effective supervision and appraisal and high-quality induction and training programmes, tailored to the specific needs of the young people
• how well leaders and managers understand the provision’s strengths and weaknesses, prevent shortfalls, identify weaknesses and take effective action
• whether the provision is achieving its stated aims and objectives
• the quality of professional relationships to ensure the best possible all-round support to young people in all areas of their development
• whether leaders and managers actively challenge when the responses from other services are not effective
• the extent to which leaders and managers actively promote tolerance, equality and diversity

Good

The effectiveness of leaders and managers is likely to be judged good if there is evidence of the following:

The residential provision is properly staffed and resourced to meet the needs of the young people in residence. The staff team is suitably skilled and experienced and is able to deliver high-quality services to young people. Arrangements for recruitment and appraisals are robust.

Leaders and managers regularly monitor the quality of help and support. They use learning from practice and feedback to improve the experiences and progress of young people. This includes, for example, direct testimony from young people, parents, residential staff, teaching staff, host families and others.

They learn from complaints, staff feedback, placement successes and breakdowns, and any serious events. They identify strengths and areas for improvement and implement clear development plans that improve the experiences and progress of young people.

Action is taken to address all issues of concern, including concerns or complaints from young people, parents, and local residents. Proper investigations are carried out. Local authorities are engaged as necessary. Effective action has been taken to address all recommendations from previous inspections.

Leaders and managers ensure that plans for individual young people comprehensively address their needs. Leaders and staff work proactively and positively with other agencies and professionals.

Leaders and managers seek to build effective working relationships with parents and social workers from placing authorities and with the local authority where they are located to secure positive outcomes for young people.

If young people are not settling into the residential provision, leaders and managers take effective action.

Leaders and managers monitor the progress that each young person makes and can demonstrate the positive impact that the residential provision has had on their progress and life opportunities.

Managers and staff receive regular and effective supervision that is focused on young people’s experiences, needs, plans and feedback.

Staff and leaders receive effective support and challenge, including through team and management meetings, to ensure that their professional development results in the right environment for good practice to thrive. The emotional impact of the work on staff is recognised and managed well by leaders and managers.

Training, development and induction activities are focused on ensuring that the college can meet the specific needs of the young people. Activities are evaluated to ensure they lead to effective practice. Leaders, managers and staff are up to date with current practice in their specialist area.

Staff work collaboratively to provide consistency and stability. There are clear responsibilities and accountabilities and staff have a sense of shared ownership about its practice. Staff report that they are well led and managed and there is other evidence to support this.

Leaders and managers ensure the physical environment is maintained to a high standard, meets the needs of young people, and feels and looks like a welcoming home. Any damage or wear and tear is quickly and regularly repaired.

Volunteers who work with young people in residence are trained, supervised and supported to carry out their roles and provide a high-quality service that enhances the experiences of young people.

The college ensures that information about significant events relating to welfare and protection is shared with the appropriate authorities and individuals. Leaders and managers take the necessary action following the incident to ensure that young people’s needs are met and that they are safe and protected.

The ethos and objectives of the residential provision is characterised by high expectations and aspirations for all young people. This is demonstrated in practice.

Leaders and managers regularly review and act on any known risks to young people, taking advice and guidance from local partners and agencies.

Requires improvement to be good

The effectiveness of leaders and managers is likely to be judged requires improvement to be good if there is evidence of the following:

The characteristics of good leadership and management are not in place. Where there are weaknesses in practice, leaders and managers have identified the issues. They have plans in place to address them, or they are less serious and there is capacity to take the necessary action.

Inadequate

The effectiveness of leaders and managers will be judged inadequate if there is evidence of the following:

The experiences, progress or protection of young people are inadequate, and leaders and managers do not know the strengths and weaknesses of the home. They have been ineffective in prioritising, challenging and making improvements.

The college fails to work effectively in partnership with others in the best interests of young people.

Outstanding

The effectiveness of leaders and managers is likely to be judged outstanding if, in addition to the requirements of a good judgement, there is evidence of the following:

Leaders and managers are inspirational, confident and ambitious for young people and influential in changing the lives of those in their care.

Leaders and managers create a culture of aspiration and positivity and have high expectations of their staff to change and improve the lives of the young people they are responsible for.

Leaders and managers lead by example, innovate and generate creative ideas to sustain the highest quality care for young people.

Leaders and managers know their strengths and weaknesses well and can provide evidence of improvement over a sustained period.

Leaders and managers develop and maintain professional relationships between the agency and partner agencies that ensure the best possible care, experiences and futures for young people.

Legal context

Under the Education and Inspections Act 2006, Ofsted carries out its work in ways that encourage the services it inspects and regulates to:

• improve
• be user-focused
• be efficient and effective in the use of resources

Section 87 of the Children Act 1989 and the National Care Standards Commission (Inspection of Schools and Colleges) Regulations 2002 set out the legal basis for the inspection of residential provision in further education colleges.

The relevant residential provision of any independent specialist college is also subject to inspection by Ofsted in accordance with additional functions assigned by the Secretary of State in June 2017 and its Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) grant agreement, provided it is not registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as a care home. Inspection will be carried out in accordance with the SCCIF as set out throughout this guidance.

When inspecting the residential provision, Ofsted takes into account the knowledge and understanding gained from previous inspections, and the:

• Children Act 1989
• national minimum standards (NMS) for the accommodation of students under 18 by further education colleges

The NMS apply to further education colleges as defined in section 91 of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 and 16 to 19 academies.

This also applies to the relevant residential provision of any independent specialist college that is not registered with the CQC as a care home in accordance with its ESFA grant agreement.

Ofsted does not regulate residential provision in further education colleges. This means that, unlike some other types of social care or welfare provision, Ofsted does not inspect residential provision in colleges against a set of regulations or raise actions when these regulations are not met.

If a college is registered as a care home, the CQC inspects the residential provision.

If an inspector identifies that a college is providing residential accommodation for young people aged 16 to 18 years, and this was not previously known to Ofsted, the inspector should email socialcare@ofsted.gov.uk; the social care policy team will then notify the ESFA. If, during the course of the inspection, the inspector finds evidence of an unregistered children’s home or any other unregistered provision being operated elsewhere, they should record the details, including the provider’s name, the address and any other evidence that indicates there is an unregistered service operating. The inspector should inform the provider/manager that they have recorded this information and will pass this on to their regional team to investigate. The inspector should make it clear that any information they gather on unregistered provision being operated elsewhere will not form any part in determining the outcome of the inspection or inspection judgement.

Notice of inspection

Further education colleges are notified of an inspection of their residential provision by a telephone call at 9am from the lead inspector to the college’s nominated contact. This occurs up to 4 hours before the inspector(s) arrive on site for the first day of the inspection.

During the initial telephone call, the lead inspector speaks to the head of college or, if this is not possible, the member of staff in charge of the residential provision. The telephone call informs the college of:

• the start and end dates of the inspection
• the names of the lead inspector, and other inspectors if applicable
• brief information about the inspection process, how to obtain documents from our website and links to the NMS and Ofsted’s complaints procedure

We ask colleges to provide access to premises and records, as well as space for the inspector to work. Inspectors may need some help to navigate the system if records are electronic. Hard copies of files do not need to be provided unless already used by the college, although inspectors may ask for specific reports or documents to be printed.

Immediately following the phone call, we email to the provider the letter of notice, which confirms the above details mentioned during the phone call. Together with the notice letter, the college is sent a form requesting for information for the inspection.

Request for information at an inspection

When the lead inspector notifies the college of an inspection, they will send a form for the college to complete that gives information to support the inspection.

Inspectors also request:

• details of meetings that will occur during the inspection that the inspector may be able to attend
• information about the young people who are resident at the college, so the inspector can choose which records and cases to track and sample in order to review the progress and experience of the young people staying at the college

The college can update any data previously given to Ofsted. Inspectors accept any evaluation the college has made of its provision, in whatever form they wish to present it. This does not need to be sent to Ofsted before the announcement of the inspection.

The inspector will also provide a letter, which is for the college to send to all staff who work in the residential provision at the college. It provides contact details of the inspector(s) should staff wish to contact them during the inspection.

Some of the information is stored by Ofsted for data analysis purposes. No personal data will be stored.

Scheduling and the inspection team

Frequency of inspection

Ofsted usually carries out an inspection of the residential provision of further education colleges at least once every 3 years.

If provision has previously been judged either inadequate or requires improvement to be good, we usually carry out a monitoring visit and reinspect within 2 years.

Ofsted reserves the right to carry out unannounced inspections or monitoring visits without notifying in advance.

The frequency of inspections of residential provision in colleges is not prescribed by law. This is a matter of policy for Ofsted.

Scheduling

The scheduling of inspections takes into account:

• previous inspection findings
• complaints and concerns about the service
• questionnaire responses from young people, parents, social workers and other stakeholders
• information given, or concerns raised, by a funding body, employers, parents, carers or learners
• monitoring visits
• published data

Where possible, the same inspectors will not inspect the residential provision of a college for more than 3 consecutive inspection cycles. However, in certain instances, for example, if Ofsted is carrying out monitoring inspections, it may be important for continuity purposes to retain the same inspectors until the monitoring inspections have ceased.

If a college has merged with one or more other colleges since its last full inspection, we will take into account the dates of the previous inspections of residential provision for all the colleges involved so that the overall inspection window does not exceed 3 years. If concerns emerge, we may return earlier to inspect.

Length of inspection

For a full inspection of a further education college’s residential provision, up to 2 inspectors usually spend a total of 2 days on site, spread over 3 days.

The lead inspector and the regulatory inspection manager (RIM) should decide how best to allocate resources for inspections. If necessary, the RIM can agree to:

• the inspector spending additional days on site
• more inspectors being brought on the inspection
• fewer inspectors being brought on the inspection, particularly if there are fewer than 10 students living on site

Inspectors should determine whether:

• the amount of time on site should be reduced for inspections of provision with a very small number of young people resident at the college
• additional resources, for example more inspectors, or more time, should be arranged for larger residential colleges, colleges with a wide geographical spread or when there are specific issues such as a serious incident to consider

Deferrals

While it is important that we carry out our planned inspections wherever possible, we understand that sometimes there may be reasons that this is not possible. A provider may request a deferral of an inspection during the initial notification phone call. We will decide whether to grant a deferral in line with our deferral policy. We make these decisions on a case-by-case basis.

Timeframe

Day	Full inspection activity
1	Preparation
2	Notice – site visit
3	Site visit
4	Site visit
5 to 9	Report writing – inspection evidence and report submitted for quality assurance
22	Draft report sent to the college within 18 working days from the end of the inspection. The college then has up to 5 working days to send in comments on the draft report or submit a formal complaint
27	College returns the report with comments or submits a formal complaint within 5 working days
34	Final report sent to the college within 30 working days of the end of the inspection (longer if there has been a complaint)
39	The final report will be published on the Ofsted reports website 5 days after it is sent to the college

Figure 1: Ofsted’s post-inspection and complaints procedure

View this information in an accessible format.

Preparing for an inspection

Analysis and planning

Inspectors are allocated a full day to prepare for an inspection of the residential provision of further education colleges. They should use this time to review the information Ofsted holds, and to ensure that the fieldwork is focused and used to best effect in collecting first-hand evidence.

Inspectors will look at the information that Ofsted already holds about the college, including:

• previous inspection reports
• any concerns and complaints received
• the lead inspector’s pre-inspection analysis of evidence – this may include, but is not restricted to, any self-assessment report (or equivalent evaluation report) and development/quality improvement plan submitted by the college
• where available, published performance data for the previous 3 years such as recruitment data, achievement rates, any value-added data, destination data and employment rates
• completed questionnaires from young people and other stakeholders
• the college’s own website, which may contain relevant policies and procedures and the college’s statement of principles (or equivalent)
• outcomes of any monitoring visits
• information from the local authority’s designated officer about any child protection enquiries or concerns that are ongoing or that have occurred at the college
• any additional background information about the local economic and social context relevant to the college

The inspector should familiarise themselves with relevant background and context information, such as the most recent inspection of the local authority where the college is situated and the most recent college (education provision) inspection carried out by Ofsted or any other relevant body.

The inspector analyses the available evidence and information and must record their planning notes on the inspection database.

The plan for the inspection should identify:

• lines of enquiry
• areas of apparent weakness or significant strength
• areas where further evidence needs to be gathered

The focus of the inspection may change during its course as further evidence emerges.

Questionnaires

Each year, Ofsted uses online questionnaires to gather a range of views about different types of setting. Where relevant, this includes the views of:

• young people
• parents and carers
• staff
• foster carers
• adopters
• adult service users
• other interested parties, such as placing social workers and independent reviewing officers

We send links to the questionnaires annually to each college by email and ask them to distribute those links on our behalf. The responses are submitted directly to Ofsted.

The responses are shared with the inspector for the service or setting and are used to inform the planning and scheduling of inspections.

If there are no responses, this also forms a line of enquiry for the inspection.

The on-site inspection

The start of the inspection

At the heart of our inspections is a constructive, respectful and empathetic dialogue between inspectors and providers.

At the start of all inspections, the inspectors confirm their identity by producing their Ofsted inspector identification. They do not need to carry paper copies of Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks.

The lead inspector always meets with the principal of the college, their nominee or the member of staff in charge of residential provision at the beginning to:

• outline the plan for the inspection, including any meetings or events during the inspection that inspectors may wish to attend or observe
• outline any lines of enquiry for the inspection
• give the college a chance to share information or personal issues relating to any young people or members of staff that inspectors need to know during the inspection
• ensure that Ofsted holds the correct details on the inspection database, including email address and contact telephone numbers for the provision
• arrange the approximate time that verbal feedback will be given and to whom; feedback will normally be given to the head of college or the member of staff in charge of residential provision; additional senior staff linked to the college may attend at the discretion of the lead inspector, if agreed in advance
• check the head of college’s welfare, and whether any steps need to be taken to ensure their well-being. The inspector should ascertain how to contact whoever is responsible for the head of college’s welfare on a day-to-day basis, so that they can pass on well-being concerns when appropriate and necessary
• provide the opportunity to raise any issues or concerns, or to seek clarification about the inspection, and explain how the college can raise any matters during the inspection itself
• provide an opportunity for the head of college to discuss and/or give us information on potential equalities duties, including reasonable adjustments for individuals

Inspectors will agree a process for keeping the college’s leaders/managers informed of progress throughout the inspection. This will normally mean regular meetings with managers to enable them to raise concerns or seek clarification. Inspectors will inform the college’s leaders if there is evidence that the service may be judged inadequate. They will emphasise that final judgements are not made until the feedback meeting at the end of the inspection.

Case tracking and sampling

Evaluating the experiences and progress of young people resident at the college is a core inspection activity. This is largely based on evidence from case tracking and sampling.

For tracked cases, inspectors take an in-depth look at the quality of the help, care and protection that individual young people have experienced. For sampled cases, inspectors look at elements of practice within individual cases, usually to follow lines of enquiry.

We will take into account individuals’ starting points and circumstances during inspections. We recognise that even slight progress in a particular aspect of a young person’s life may represent a significant improvement.

Young people’s overall experiences and progress are partly a result of how well they are helped and protected, and the effectiveness of leaders and managers. Inspectors consider the ‘help and protection’ and ‘leadership and management’ judgements first so they can take these into account when reaching the ‘overall experiences and progress’ judgement.

Inspectors track the experiences and progress of at least 4 young people. If there are fewer than 4 young people resident, inspectors track the experiences and progress of all young people who are resident at the college.

Inspectors also sample elements of other cases to follow specific lines of enquiry.

The size of the provision and the nature of any lines of enquiry determine how many cases are sampled.

Tracked and sampled cases should be selected by the inspector from the case list they request when they notify the college of the inspection. Tracked cases should be representative of the current group of resident young people and may include:

• students from both year groups
• a student who lives in lodgings, where applicable
• a student who has complex disabilities or health needs
• a student who has gone missing from the college
• a student of a particular gender, where there is a minority of one or the other gender
• a student who is also a looked-after child or subject to a child protection or child in need plan

Inspectors may look at evidence from students who have recently turned 18 years old, particularly if the number of students aged 16 to 18 is low, in order to gain sufficient evidence that young people make progress at the college.

Inspections also usually assess the management of a recent serious incident (where relevant), so that they can understand:

• how the staff team responds to complex and difficult circumstances
• whether the actions of leaders, managers and staff are focused on promoting and safeguarding the welfare of young people

Written records are only one aspect of tracking the young person’s journey. Inspectors increase their understanding of the young person’s experience through evidence from other sources, such as:

• observing college activities
• the young person
• the staff
• the young person’s birth family, where appropriate
• other practitioners, for example tutors and mentors, involved in their care

When tracking the case of a looked-after young person, the inspector must always consult the independent reviewing officer and the placing social worker.

Inspectors examine, discuss and evaluate cases in line with the evaluation criteria. They look for evidence that the residential provision has had a positive impact on the experiences and progress of young people and that managers and staff know they are making a difference to young people’s lives.

The detail of activities carried out and discussions held varies depending on the lines of enquiry for each individual inspection.

Inspectors must record the initials of young people, professionals or carers who have been tracked, sampled and/or interviewed as part of an inspection within the evidence base.

Listening and talking to young people

The views of young people who are resident at the college provide important evidence of their experiences and progress.

Inspectors assess how well the college consults with resident young people. Young people’s views that have been gathered by the college are taken into account as part of the inspection evidence.

Inspectors must meet with young people during the inspection. Inspectors may make alternative arrangements to speak to young people, such as telephone calls at a pre-arranged time. Sometimes, inspectors will spend time observing activities and situations where young people are present rather than engaging in direct communication with them. This is to limit any stress caused to young people. These approaches will be discussed throughout the inspection as necessary.

Many experiences take place after the normal college day and it is essential that inspectors are present at this time.

Inspectors should involve young people in inspection activity wherever they can. Opportunities to gather the views and experiences of young people may include:

• asking young people to show inspectors around some of the residential provision or lodgings
• meeting groups of young people
• spending mealtimes with young people
• spending time observing and talking informally to young people in the residential provision
• observing or participating in recreational activities that the young people take part in after the end of the college day

Young people, including those with limited or no verbal communication, may wish to share their views in a letter to the inspector.

Communication methods

Inspectors should bear in mind the limits of verbal consultation with some young people, particularly those who are disabled or have complex health care needs, and they should take this into account in their evaluation. In these cases, they would expect to see appropriate alternative means of gathering young people’s views and providing them with feedback about the impact of their consultation.

Inspectors take into account the specific communication needs of individuals. For some young people, inspectors may request the assistance of staff, or an independent person who knows and understands the young person’s preferred means of communication, particularly if this is unique to the young person. In other instances, it may be appropriate for inspectors to spend time observing young people and how they interact with staff and respond to their environment.

Inspectors can request the services of an interpreter to join the inspection. This is helpful when young people or staff are fluent in British Sign Language. Inspectors request this service through the inspection support team and give 2 weeks’ notice where possible.

Practice when gathering the views of young people

Inspectors demonstrate safe and sensitive practice by:

• telling staff when and where conversations with young people are taking place and who is involved
• being sensitive to the fact that some young people may not want to be involved in the inspection
• explaining to young people that they will not include comments that will identify them in the inspection report or in feedback to staff without their permission
• ensuring that staff are aware of any arranged meetings with young people and that young people may leave the meeting at any time
• where appropriate, explaining to young people that information suggesting that they are at risk of harm will be passed by the inspector to someone able to take the right action

Observing activities

Inspectors can use the college’s scheduled activities as opportunities for observing and following lines of enquiry. These activities could include:

• staff meetings
• leisure activities
• mealtimes

If catering is provided, inspectors are likely to join young people during mealtimes. This gives inspectors evidence of the catering provision and arrangements. It is an opportunity to observe general behaviour and to speak informally to young people in a communal setting.

Inspectors evaluate how individual dietary needs are met. Inspectors speak to the catering manager and ask to see a sample of menus if this is a specific line of enquiry. If students self-cater or stay in lodgings or with host families, inspectors talk to students and staff and relevant adults about the quality of the arrangements.

Inspectors respect the privacy and confidentiality of personal information at all times. They always involve the college in any decisions about the involvement of young people in the inspection.

Inspectors always try to strike a balance between the time it takes to observe an activity with the significance of the likely evidence to be gained.

Inspecting the accommodation

Inspectors evaluate the suitability of the college’s premises and residential accommodation. If possible, they will visit all the residential units, but the amount of time spent in each may vary. Inspectors may ask to be accompanied by young people and may speak to staff or other young people they meet while touring the premises.

Inspectors may see a number of extra-curricular or leisure activities and spend time talking to residential learners about their experiences, including what happens at weekends. Inspectors establish the quality of study or recreation areas and how these support learning and development.

If the college arranges for young people to live in lodgings (also known as ‘home stay arrangements’) during term-time instead of on-site accommodation, the suitability of this accommodation and the welfare of young people in it are assessed during the course of the inspection.

Inspectors may consider a sample of the recruitment checks carried out for the host families to establish that appropriate procedures have been followed as set out in statutory guidance. This includes the application for a DBS enhanced certificate for the designated carers and that checks were carried out before any child was placed. For other family members aged over 18, it may only be possible to apply for a standard DBS check.

Inspectors may also consider if other appropriate checks are made before placing the student. This may include:

• references (character reference from employer and/or volunteer groups) for those living in the home over 18
• interviews with those over 18 living in the home
• risk assessment of the home before placement of the student
• agreement between the college and main carer concerning expectations in terms of safeguarding, for example ensuring the designated carer does not leave the student in the care of lodger or older child

Inspectors may also:

• spend time with the college’s member of staff responsible for lodging
• examine the college’s written guidance to host families
• sample written agreements between the college and adults providing lodgings
• discuss with the college its arrangements for monitoring its lodgings
• look at any records of monitoring and training of host families
• talk to a lodging provider

Inspectors only visit lodgings if this is a specific line of enquiry.

Gathering views of other professionals

Inspectors consult with professionals to inform their findings. This is usually done by phone and may not happen on site. These professionals may include:

• social workers (where relevant)
• parents/carers
• college staff

Inspectors ask colleges for the relevant contact details.

Inspectors should always take account of privacy and confidentiality when on the phone during the inspection.

Discussions with managers and staff

Discussion with the head of residential accommodation or those responsible for the residential accommodation.

The interview will usually include discussions about: 

• the progress made towards meeting the recommendations from the previous inspection 

• any issues that have arisen from pre-inspection information/early lines of enquiry 

• how the statement of residential principles and practice works in practice and any specific lines of enquiry arising from this 

• evidence on the experiences and progress of the young people living at the college and those who have recently left; this includes how the college works with individual young people to meet their needs and the help on offer to support them

• the needs of any specific young people who require additional support from outside the school, for example child and adolescent mental health services, counselling or regular GP services  

• how the college establishes regular routines for young people around mealtimes, college attendance and weekend activities, and how young people access activities away from the college and in the community 

• the strengths and weaknesses of the residential accommodation and plans for future development and how senior staff lead the team effectively and promote a culture of continuous improvement 

• the arrangements for staff to reflect on their practice and professional development

• the arrangements for young people placed in lodgings (where applicable)     

• any further evidence that the college may wish to highlight to the inspector 

Discussion with the designated safeguarding lead

The inspector will discuss with the DSL, or their nominated deputy(s): 

• how they meet their responsibilities as set out in ‘Keeping children safe in education’

• the arrangements for safeguarding training, including training for governors or their equivalent

• how staff, young people and parents report concerns 

• the arrangements for whistle-blowing, recording low-level concerns about staff, and online safety, including arrangements for filtering and monitoring systems to detect and prevent students from accessing inappropriate websites

The inspector, together with the DSL, will review all or a sample of the safeguarding concerns reported since the last inspection. This will include concerns where the college considered that it did not need to take any further action. 

Discussion with members of the governing body or equivalent  

If the college has a governing body or equivalent, the inspector will usually meet or talk to representatives. This could be by telephone or video call. It will include, where possible, the chair and the governor responsible for safeguarding.

Inspectors will want to know:

• how the governors monitor residential/boarding provision

• about governors’ strategic oversight to ensure that young people are safe and their welfare is promoted

The inspectors will also read any reports sent to the governing body about the residential provision. They will want to know what action, if any, governors have taken.

Health provision 

The inspector will usually speak to the person responsible for the health and well- being of young people staying at the college.

The inspector will want to know what arrangements are in place to promote young people’s health and well-being. Depending on the needs of the young people, this can include healthcare plans, welfare plans and arrangements for the administration of medication, by the college or by the young people themselves.

Interviews with staff

The number of staff interviewed depends on the size of the residential provision but will include a sample of permanent and agency staff working at the college during inspection.

Emerging findings about strengths and weaknesses are shared with the most appropriate person at the end of the first day. The inspector is likely to set out any issues they intend to consider later in the inspection, so they can prepare or direct inspectors to any specific information needed.

To help leaders and managers understand how the inspection is progressing, and to continue the constructive professional dialogue where meetings are held to keep them informed of emerging findings, the leader or manager can be accompanied by a colleague, where appropriate. This will allow them to raise any issues or concerns or to seek clarification, including related to the conduct of the inspection.

Inspectors will agree a process with the senior staff responsible for keeping other people informed of progress throughout the inspection.

Shortfalls that could have an immediate impact on the safety of staff or young people are brought to the attention of the manager as soon as the inspector has identified the problem.

Inspectors want to establish that the college’s monitoring systems are robust enough for managers to identify strengths and weaknesses in practice.

Inspectors do not spend time routinely counting medication or petty cash, carrying out vehicle checks, checking water temperatures or contents of fridges, freezers and food storage areas unless these are specific lines of enquiry.

Inspectors should be prepared to alter interview arrangements if staff have to attend to the needs of young people.

In most cases inspectors will want to have confidential conversations with staff and will usually ask to speak to them alone so that staff members can express their views freely. However, individuals may ask to have a colleague present to support them if they prefer.

If inspectors see that a staff member is upset or distressed at any point during the inspection, inspectors will respond sensitively. Where appropriate, inspectors will consider suitable adjustments to enable the staff member to continue. Where appropriate, inspectors will inform those responsible for the person’s well-being. The inspector will also contact their manager/regional duty manager to take advice.

There may be exceptional occasions when we need to consider pausing an inspection. We will consider these on a case-by-case basis according to our published guidance on pausing inspections.

Examining records, policies and procedures

Inspectors do not routinely examine all policies and procedures. Documents such as young people’s records or staff recruitment records are examined when they are part of case tracking or sampling or a line of enquiry for that individual inspection.

Inspectors focus on how documents such as risk assessments work in practice, rather than on the format. What matters is that they are fit for purpose and provide enough information so that all the relevant people can care for young people. When paper or electronic personnel records are maintained at the college, the inspector may ask to see those records, if they are included within the lines of enquiry.

If the college uses the DBS update service, it should be able to demonstrate how it manages and records details of any check it carries out. If any lines of enquiry need additional information, the inspector may ask for a small sample of full personnel records to be available at the inspection visit.

Where members of staff are subject to transfer of undertakings (protection of employment) (TUPE) arrangements, we recognise that the new employer relies on the previous employer for all recruitment records relating to those staff. Therefore, in some instances, we recognise that the provider may not have all the information, including documents required by the regulations. If this is the case, we still expect the new employer to hold enough information to know that staff are suitable, including DBS checks or vetting records, and reference to employment records such as appraisals.

Implications of the Equality Act

The Equality Act 2010 came into effect on 1 October 2010. The Act makes it unlawful for an employer to ask a potential employee questions about their health or disability before they are offered employment, whether on a conditional or unconditional basis.

Social care providers must comply with both the Equality Act and the remit-specific regulations that require them to employ people who are fit, both physically and mentally, for the work.

To comply with both laws, providers may give conditional offers of employment to potential employees after the recruitment process, subject to appropriate medical and health checks.

There are a number of exemptions to the provisions in the Act. If a provider believes that an exemption applies to its recruitment of staff, it should take its own legal advice.

Inspectors will assess whether providers have a rigorous recruitment and vetting process in place, including ensuring that their employees are mentally and physically fit before they begin work as part of their inspection.

How inspectors record the evidence

Inspectors must analyse the information they gather on inspection and use their professional judgement to assess the impact on the experiences and progress of young people and other service users.

Inspectors’ evidence should be clear, evaluative and sufficient to support the judgements.

The evidence should tell the story of the experiences and progress of young people and other service users, as appropriate. Evidence should not include information that could identify individuals unless it is necessary to protect a young person or to support further action. In these instances, inspectors can use individuals’ initials.

Inspectors can record direct quotes from young people, adult service users and other interested parties in evidence to support judgements.

The record should clearly indicate the source of the evidence (for example, whether the evidence is from observation, a written record or a face-to-face interview). If evidence comes from an interview, the record must indicate the time of the interview and the interviewee’s job title or relationship to the young person.

Throughout the inspection, inspectors maintain a record of their evidence. Electronic evidence is recorded in the inspection database. Summarised evidence must be sufficient to support the judgements and any recommendations or requirements. Inspectors must make sure the college understands the evidence the judgements are based on and any requirements that stem from the judgements.

After the summarised evidence has been placed in the inspection database, inspectors should not destroy any duplicate handwritten evidence until after the inspection report is published. In some circumstances, inspectors will be required to keep any handwritten notes they have made during the inspection for longer. This may be necessary, for example, when legal action or a complaint about the judgement is being considered.

All handwritten evidence should be legible and dated. Handwritten evidence that has not been summarised forms part of the inspection evidence base and should therefore be scanned and added into the inspection database within five working days of the end of the on-site visit.

Evidence may be scrutinised for quality assurance and will be considered in the event of any complaint.

End of inspection and feedback

The inspector will give verbal feedback of the main findings and provisional judgements. This feedback will usually be given to the head of the college and or head of accommodation as appropriate. Additional senior staff from the college may also attend, if agreed in advance with the inspector.

If the feedback is likely to be challenging or is likely to raise sensitive issues, the inspector will be sympathetic to the implications of this feedback. The inspector will discuss with the head of college which other people should attend to ensure the necessary support is given. Attendance at the feedback meeting is voluntary and any attendee may leave at any time.

In some circumstances, an inspector may need extra time after the inspection fieldwork to take advice before giving feedback. The day of feedback is counted as the last day of the inspection.

The inspector should:

• cover the main findings of the inspection, including both strengths and weaknesses
• clearly communicate the likely judgements
• indicate likely recommendations, with clear reference to the relevant national minimum standard or quality standard, providing a clear direction for improvement
• use the grade descriptors and the evidence to clearly indicate how the judgements have been reached
• ensure that the provider has the opportunity to raise any issues or concerns, or to seek clarification about the inspection, and can contact Ofsted on the working day after the end of the inspection, if necessary
• confirm when the report will be sent to the manager for comments

Inspectors will not provide a written summary of the inspection or written feedback in advance of the inspection report being sent. Providers may choose to take their own notes at feedback.

The college may share the provisional inspection outcome and findings with whoever it deems appropriate, though it may need to be cautious/sensitive to the risk of provisional outcomes that may be subject to change potentially being shared with young people when this could create uncertainty for them. Provisional inspection outcomes may also be shared, in confidence, with others who are not involved with the college. This may include the head of college’s colleagues, family members, medical advisers and/or their wider support group. However, the information should not be made public.

Feedback to young people

Inspectors should give feedback to young people, as appropriate to their age and understanding. Inspectors will make efforts to address matters raised by young people.

Making recommendations

Inspectors make recommendations to improve practice.

In making a recommendation, inspectors should refer to the NMS for the Accommodation of students under eighteen by further education colleges.

They should always give enough detail so the manager in charge is clear what to do. Inspectors should summarise the relevant part of NMS, and may also make recommendations in relation to other relevant statutory guidance such as:

• Working together to safeguard children
• Statutory guidance for children who run away or go missing from home or care

If, during an inspection, the head of accommodation rectifies a minor administrative error that has minimal impact on the quality of assessment, care and support of young people, an inspector may not need to make a recommendation about it. However, they may refer to this in the leadership and management section of the report.

If a college has breached an NMS, then the inspector should send an email to socialcare@ofsted.gov.uk so that the social care policy team can notify the ESFA.

Inspectors may identify points for improvement.

Inspectors may also identify points for improvement when an NMS has been met but an aspect of practice could be improved. The report must link any points for improvement to the relevant NMS.

Inadequate judgements: next steps

When provision has been judged as inadequate or requiring improvement, we usually carry out a monitoring visit within 6 months to report on the college’s progress against the areas for improvement identified in the inspection report. The exact timing and nature of subsequent inspection and monitoring visits, however, is determined on a case-by-case basis.

A judgement of inadequate for the overall experiences and progress of young people will lead to a post-inspection debrief between the lead inspector and the RIM as soon as possible, followed by a case review. The post-inspection debrief provides an opportunity for them to discuss the inspection and the quality of the evidence, and to consider a recommendation for further action to take to the case review. The timing of the case review should be proportionate to the risk and certainly no later than 5 working days following the inspection. The placing authority in this context is the authority funding the placement.

The case review must record:

• actions to be taken
• that the DCS of the authority where the college is based must be notified
• that the ESFA has been notified (the inspector should email socialcare@ofsted.gov.uk – the social care policy team will then notify ESFA)
• that Ofsted has alerted the local authorities that have funded placements, to the concerns that have been identified – if a large number of placing authorities fund placements, the case review should discuss arrangements for obtaining the identities of the placing authorities from the college, and plans for Ofsted to make contact with each one
• that the DCS of the host authority, and of any placing local authorities, will be emailed about the provisional outcome of the inspection, including the concerns, in line with the feedback given to the college

The indicative judgement and inspection feedback should be sent to the DCS by the end of the working day following the case review. The college must be sent a copy of the email sent to the DCS of the relevant local authorities, so that it is aware of the information shared. As this judgement is still provisional, the DCS and ESFA must be instructed to use the information sensitively and share with others based on their assessment of who needs to know.

Details of the emails must be recorded on the inspection database for future reference.

Parents are responsible for identifying and funding some placements. This may include placements for young people who have been placed from other countries. In this situation, there is no need to inform the local authority where the young person would normally live as it is unlikely it will be aware of the arrangements.

If young people have been placed by parents, the case review decides whether Ofsted needs to contact the parents immediately or whether it is appropriate to delay until the report has been finalised. Ofsted asks the college to confirm the date that it has sent the inspection report to all parents within its post-inspection action plan.

The inspection report

The report should be succinct and evaluative. Inspectors’ analysis must include clear evidence for their professional judgements.

In most instances, each inspection judgement section of the report should be no more than 6 to 8 short paragraphs, each usually only 2 or 3 sentences long. Reports for colleges that have several weaknesses or that have been judged outstanding may require more detailed explanations for the judgements but should still focus on the main issues only. Inspectors should ensure that the reports are long enough to say what needs to be said and no longer.

Content of the SCCIF report

Section of report	Details
Information about this service	Brief contextual information about the service
Date and judgement of last inspection	The date and overall judgement of the last inspection
Enforcement action since the last inspection (registered providers only)	A brief summary of any enforcement activity we have taken since the last inspection
Inspection judgements	The judgements made and accompanying text
Areas for improvement	Any recommendations and statutory requirements (where relevant)
Information about this inspection	What we have looked at and information about the legal basis for the inspection
Service details	Information on the provider running the service

Quality assurance and arrangements for publishing the report

The inspector is responsible for the quality of the report. The inspector will check the completed draft report carefully before submitting to their manager for pre-publication quality checks before it is shared with college.

Any proposed change of judgement from the provisional judgement given at verbal feedback during the inspection will be discussed by the appropriate managers within Ofsted. On these rare occasions, the inspector must inform the provider of the revised judgements and provide reasons for the changes before the provider receives the draft report.

We will send the draft inspection report to the college within 18 working days of the end of the inspection.

The college will have 5 working days to comment on the draft report, process and findings.

We will consider all comments and we will respond to the comments when we share the final report with the college. This will be within a maximum of 30 working days after the inspection.

We expect the college to share the inspection outcome and findings with whoever it deems appropriate.

Following the inspection, we will ask providers for feedback about the inspection through a post-inspection survey. This is sent to the provider when it receives the final inspection report. We will use feedback from providers to improve the quality of inspections.

Conduct during inspections

Ofsted’s code of conduct sets out the expectations for both inspectors and providers. At the start of the inspection (usually during the preparatory conversations) the lead inspector will explain these expectations and will ask providers to read the code. Inspectors will work constructively with providers and staff, demonstrating professionalism, courtesy, empathy and respect at all times.

Concerns or complaints about an inspection

Concerns

Most of Ofsted’s work is carried out smoothly and without incident. If concerns do arise during an inspection, they should be raised with the inspector as soon as possible during the inspection visit. This provides an opportunity to resolve the matter before the inspection is completed. Any concerns raised, and actions taken, will be recorded in the inspection evidence.

If, during the inspection, the provider is unable to resolve the matter with the inspector, they should contact the inspector’s RIM for further discussion.

If an issue remains unresolved, the provider can contact Ofsted on the working day after the end of the inspection. This will be an opportunity for the provider to raise informal concerns about the inspection process or outcomes, ask about next steps or highlight information that they feel was not fully considered during the inspection. This will be directed to a RIM who is independent of the inspection to discuss and to resolve, where appropriate, at the earliest opportunity.

Providers also have another opportunity to raise concerns about the draft inspection report, process and findings when they receive the draft report.

Complaints

If it is not possible to resolve concerns during the inspection, shortly after the inspection or through submitting comments in response to the draft report, the provider may wish to lodge a formal complaint when it receives the final report. The inspector will ensure that the provider is informed that it is able to make a formal complaint, and that information about how to complain is available on GOV.UK.

Monitoring visits

Monitoring visits are carried out according to the general principles of the SCCIF.

Timing and frequency

We carry out a monitoring visit if the residential provision has been judged as requires improvement to be good or as inadequate. The visit assesses the college’s progress against the areas for improvement identified in the inspection report. It usually takes place within 6 months of the inspection.

Residential provision in further education colleges is usually inspected at least once in a 3-year inspection cycle. If it has been judged as requires improvement to be good or inadequate following an inspection, the next inspection usually takes place within 2 years.

The monitoring visit helps to determine when the college should be re-inspected based on the risks assessed.

Arranging monitoring visits

The inspector gives 24 hours’ notice that they intend to carry out a monitoring visit. During the initial call, the inspector and appropriate leader at the college will agree the parameters of the monitoring visit and how it will be carried out.

Preparing for the monitoring visit

When preparing for a monitoring visit, inspectors take into account:

• the last inspection report
• recommendations set at the last inspection report
• letters from previous monitoring visits
• any action plan provided by the college
• any information recorded on the inspection database, including information from other sources, such as the police, designated officers and any complaints or whistle-blowing

How inspectors carry out monitoring visits

The monitoring visit should:

• determine the impact of any completed recommendations on the welfare and outcomes for young people
• identify whether any additional concerns exist
• determine the capacity of the head of college/head of boarding to sustain the changes required
• consider any further action that may need to be taken

The inspector must notify either the head of college or head of accommodation when they arrive on site.

The inspector should judge how effective the improvement is and how, by tackling the recommendations or issues, the college has improved the experiences and progress of young people.

To demonstrate the necessary improvement, the college needs to show that its actions have had a significant impact in achieving clear and sustainable progress. Good intentions and an aspirational outlook, or a recent change of leader following a period of poor leadership, do not in themselves provide sufficient proof of the ability of the college to sustain improvement.

Finding further concerns during monitoring visits

If it becomes clear that there are new or further issues of concern, or that in tackling the actions from the last inspection the college has let other aspects slip so that young people are at risk of harm or are not making sufficient progress, then the inspector should consider what further action needs to be taken. This includes considering new recommendations or notification to the ESFA.

If the inspector is concerned or unsure about any aspect of the visit, they can contact their manager or a social care compliance inspector.

How inspectors gather evidence in a monitoring visit

The inspectors will question how effective the college’s actions are in:

• meeting the recommendations set at the last inspection
• improving the experiences and progress of the young people

Evidence should be recorded in the inspection database.

The evidence should reflect the areas for improvement that were identified in the inspection report. This section should include evidence of the most significant strengths and weaknesses and any new areas of improvement or breaches of NMS that need to be taken forward. The inspector must decide whether the college has let other aspects slip so that there is now cause for concern in different areas.

Inspectors must decide whether the college demonstrates its capacity to sustain any improvements it has made. Inspectors should also decide whether the improvements are having a marked and sustained impact on all areas of weakness.

Feedback at the end of the monitoring visit

The inspector provides verbal feedback to the college at the end of the visit. The inspector must:

• make clear any new issues to take forward
• ensure that the college is clear about the outcome of the visit and what the next steps will be, especially if a new issue has arisen or improvement is inadequate
• be clear with the college when the next steps will be confirmed if the inspector requires further advice
• explain that the outcome of a monitoring visit is usually published in the form of a report on the Ofsted reports site alongside the last report
• make clear that the text of the report may differ slightly from the oral feedback, but that the substance of the issues will not change
• ensure that the college understands that the overall judgement of inadequate has not changed (where relevant), although progress and improvements may have been made

Monitoring reports

We will usually publish all monitoring reports on our reports website, although regional directors can decide not to publish monitoring reports in exceptional circumstances.

Monitoring reports should outline any significant developments and evidence of progress that has occurred since the last visit. They should clearly explain the action the college has taken to address the previous recommendations and the impact of any improvement on the experiences and progress of young people.

The report must:

• set out the reason for the visit
• evaluate where progress has been made and where progress has not been made
• clearly state the impact of continued concerns on young people, alongside any action that Ofsted will be taking to notify placing local authorities (if relevant) to protect young people
• set out clearly where and what further action is needed

Inspectors must use clear language to indicate the level of concern, for example, ‘this visit has raised serious concerns about care and practice in the [college]’.

Inspectors can clearly state that the college is likely to be subject to further action when this is the case.

If the inspector carrying out the monitoring visit judges that the college is not making sufficient progress, for instance with respect to safeguarding matters, relevant authorities, including funding bodies may be notified and the reinspection may be brought forward.

Review of the monitoring report and evidence base

The monitoring visit report and evidence base will be reviewed by the inspector’s manager before the draft report is sent to the college for comment. This is to ensure that they accurately reflect the improvements made and that the evidence base supports any further action we may wish to take.

The draft monitoring report is shared with the college and finalised using the same process and timescales as a standard inspection report (see the ‘Quality assurance and arrangements for publishing the report’ section).

Other monitoring visits

We may also carry out a monitoring visit when we have a cause for concern. If this is the case, the monitoring visit may be unannounced.

Incomplete inspections

We will apply Ofsted’s policy on incomplete inspections where appropriate.

Safeguarding and child protection concerns

If serious issues of concern arise during the inspection, such as a failure to follow child protection procedures or if a young person is discovered to be at immediate risk of harm, the inspector must notify the responsible individual (where relevant) or the person in charge as soon as possible. If that may compromise a young person or adult’s safety, the inspector must ensure that the appropriate authorities are notified immediately.

Inspectors should always follow Ofsted’s safeguarding policy.

Inspectors should contact their manager or regional social care compliance inspector if they need advice. The inspector ensures that the referral is made to the relevant local authority children’s services and the child’s allocated social worker and/or the relevant local authority adults’ services and, where appropriate, the vulnerable adult’s allocated social worker. You can find further guidance in Safeguarding concerns: guidance for inspectors. If the concerns relate to allegations against staff, they are referred to the designated officer.

Inspectors must ensure that concerns about the safety and welfare of a young person are communicated immediately to the DCS for the responsible placing local authority, where this is relevant. A record that this has been done must be kept. The regional Senior HMI should follow up the action that has been taken by the local authority.

Closed cultures

The Care Quality Commission developed the concept of closed cultures. Its project Closed Cultures explains how some services have inherent risks that need to be mitigated if those living there are to be safe. This work is relevant to some places where children live away from home.

Not all settings with inherent risks develop a closed culture. Some may develop a closed culture over time. In effective settings, leaders and managers recognise the risks and take appropriate steps to mitigate them.

Closed cultures are more likely to develop in services where:

• the children live a long way from home

• the children are vulnerable and have no or very limited verbal communication 

• the children stay at the setting for long periods of time, without going home or taking part in community activities

• there is weak leadership

• staff lack the right skills, training or experience to support and care for children well

• there is a lack of positive and open engagement between managers, staff, children and their families and professionals

• the setting is geographically isolated

• all services are delivered in-house and there is no oversight from external professional bodies 

• staff are drawn from a small pool of possible employees; they are often related to each other or are close friends, and so cliques develop, which makes it very difficult for staff or children to complain or raise concerns safely   

• leaders and managers are not part of external professional networks

It is important that providers and inspectors understand the risks in closed cultures.  We expect inspectors to use their professional curiosity to explore with leaders and managers the actions they take where inherent risks exist. If an inspector has any doubts or concerns, they should discuss these with their manager during the inspection.

The ‘Prevent’ duty

Extremism is unlikely to be a routine line of enquiry during SCCIF inspections. Inspectors should, however, be alert to signs of risks of extremism, such as literature, posters, videos or DVDs, or regular visitors to the setting when the purpose of their visit is not clear. Initial enquiries about the possibility of extremism must be directed to the manager or person in charge.

Inspectors should note the detail of any relevant concerns or referrals made by the responsible individual and how effective the multi-agency response has been. The DfE has published advice for schools and childcare providers on the ‘Prevent’ duty, and inspectors should note where this applies to the type of setting inspected.

Inspectors can contact their RIM, who may seek specialist advice. If inspectors are unable to contact their RIM and remain concerned, they should follow Ofsted’s safeguarding policy.

Female genital mutilation: the duty to notify police

Since 31 October 2015, when section 74 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 inserted new section 5B into the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, specified regulated professionals (including social workers) must report to the police any cases of female genital mutilation in girls under 18 that they come across in their work.

The duty applies when the professional either:

• is informed by the girl that an act of female genital mutilation has been carried out on her
• observes physical signs that appear to show an act of female genital mutilation has carried out and has no reason to believe that the act was necessary for the girl’s physical or mental health or for purposes connected with labour or birth

If a child or young person discloses information regarding female genital mutilation to an inspector, the inspector should follow Ofsted’s guidance for inspectors on safeguarding concerns.

Reporting concerns about the administration and management of controlled drugs

Providers must report incidents related to controlled drugs (including loss or theft) to their local NHS controlled drugs accountable officer at NHS England. They should also report incidents to the police, if necessary.

Use of personal data

As part of our inspection activities under the SCCIF, we may gather personal data that is necessary to help us evaluate children’s social care services.

Our personal information charter sets out the standards you can expect from Ofsted when we collect, hold or use personal information, and that we will follow all applicable data protection legislation in how we treat personal information.

Our privacy notice for social care sets out in more detail what data we collect and our powers to do so, what we do with it, how long we keep it for and people’s rights under data protection legislation.

Annex for figures 

Ofsted’s post-inspection and complaints procedure

Steps	Description
Step 1	The provider should raise any concerns during an inspection with the lead inspector in the first instance
Step 2	If an issue remains unresolved, the provider can ring Ofsted during the inspection or on the working day after
Step 3	We will normally send a draft report to the provider within 18 working days of the end of the inspection
Step 4	Within 5 working days of us sending a draft report, the provider can raise minor points about the report or submit a formal complaint
Step 5a	We will consider minor points of clarity or factual accuracy quickly so that the report can be published promptly
Step 5b	We will respond to any formal complaint before we finalise and send the report to the provider
Step 6	We will normally send the final report to the provider within 30 working days of the end of the inspection (longer if there has been a complaint). The report will be published on our website 5 working days later

See Figure 1.