The first results are out – and the outcomes of Ofsted’s inspections under the new education inspection framework look encouraging.
After last year’s extensive consultations, there’s an argument that all’s well that ends well. But employers and providers need to be confident that inspections will still be conducted fairly throughout 2026 and beyond.
The Fellowship of Inspection Nominees (FIN) has supported providers scrutinised under the new regime, although not enough yet to flag up definitively what our members believe is good or bad about the experience. However, we can offer pointers for those preparing for inspection in the coming months.
A key observation is inspectors are closely following the toolkit when making visits, even using it as a checklist, so providers should use the document as the template for preparation.
But following this simple recommendation won’t on its own guarantee a positive outcome. As FIN called out last year, the toolkit contains some frustrating ambiguities: What is meant by “typically”, and how often is “regularly” – every month or every six months?
Providers, and hopefully inspectors, should apply common sense in interpreting what is required to secure an expected or strong standard.
“Embedded” and “transformational” practice were seen in recent inspections as evidence of being strong across the board. At this stage though, it is not clear whether being consistently strong with no improvements required merits the awarding of “exceptional”. It will be interesting to see how many independent training providers achieve the highest standard compared with, say, sixth-form colleges.
Providers must be ready to showcase evidence and push for the award of a strong standard if they feel it’s deserved. Our members report that to meet an expected standard, perhaps even more evidence is required than under previous frameworks.
In terms of process, not every lead inspector wants to watch a presentation from the nominee at the start of a visit. Providers may instead be given a template to follow by Ofsted as an opening brief.
As expected, inclusion is a major feature of the new framework, whether it’s part of a monitoring visit or a full inspection. Providers should know the barriers to be overcome by every learner and be prepared to present evidence on how overcoming them is being achieved, and the distance travelled.
Furthermore, the provider should proactively identify the barriers rather than waiting for the learner to declare any. Again, in this respect, Ofsted is referring to all learners, not just the ones with special or additional needs.
Safeguarding is another area for particular focus. Inspectors will expect leaders to have undergone safeguarding training. One inspector wanted to see the name and phone number of the provider’s safeguarding officer in the safeguarding policy document, even though names can often change.
In a visit before Christmas, a nominee felt that repeated questions from the inspectors on inclusion and safeguarding were a means of establishing whether a strong standard had been achieved.
FIN keeps emphasising to members of all provider types, including employer providers, the importance of maintaining strong governance, and the recent inspections have underlined this requirement. With our support, members are preparing presentations to inspectors on this.
One aspect that hasn’t changed is Ofsted wishing to see evidence of good careers guidance. It’s advisable for each provider to have a strategy document for CIAG and to show it to the inspection team. Inspectors are less likely to dig further if the approach seems sound.
During the consultation period last year, we wanted Ofsted to recognise it must understand the context in which each individual provider operates. The early inspections indicate that providers should ensure the Ofsted teams are on top of this because our members feel they aren’t. For example, do inspectors appreciate that where apprenticeship standards incorporate a professional qualification, apprentices might not be interested in completing the programme once the qualification has been achieved?
It’s too early to confirm that FIN was justifiably concerned about whether inspectors would be consistent in their judgements under the scorecard system. But based on recent inspections, we hope to see much greater recognition of individual leaners’ distance travelled than inspectors’ reliance on achievement data.
Your thoughts