Ofsted Visit Analysis – Page 10

All the data on these pages have been produced by SESLIP analysis of information published at Ofsted’s report pages, which involves manual data transfer and is therefore subject to errors and omissions. If you spot anything that looks wrong, please contact Richard Tyndall.

A teacher sitting on the floor, playing a game with young students in an informal classroom setting

Page 10 – Focus visits by year and by grade at time of visit

ILACS Framework and Focus Visits

Focus of focus visits

The arrangements for focus visits are set out in paragraphs 106-117 of the ILACS framework

The first focus visit was in January 2018.

Authorities with an inadequate grade do not usually receive focus visits, as they already receive regular monitoring visits.

In 2020-2021, 42 (virtual) visits were made to check on covid responses; of these half, 21, were to authorities graded inadequate.

The framework sets out 7 possible areas of focus for focus visits. They are

  1. Front Door (FD)
  2. Children in need or subject to a protection plan (CIN/CPP)
  3. Vulnerable Children at Extra Familial Risk (VCEFR)
  4. Children in Care (CIC)
  5. Planning and Achieving Permanence (PAP)
  6. Care Leavers (CL)
  7. Placement decision making for older children (PDMOC)
  • And, no longer used, Covid arrangements (C-19)

Table 10.1: Focus visits by type and grade at time of visit as at 17/12/2024

Main grade at time of focus visit FD CIN/
CPP
VC
EFR
CIC PAP CL PD
MOC
C-19Total
Outstanding10522140024
Good243271282228115
Requires improvement52523151219212167
Inadequate00000002121
Not inspected (new authorities)010010013
Total869012292245442330
Outstanding42%21%8%8%4%17%0%0%100%
Good21%28%6%10%7%19%2%7%100%
Requires improvement31%31%2%9%7%11%1%7%100%
Inadequate0%0%0%0%0%0%0%100%100%
Not inspected (new authorities)0%33%0%0%33%0%0%33%100%
Total26%27%4%9%7%14%1%13%100%
Includes all published focus visit reports including to closed authorities

Notes

Most visits result in a narrative, ungraded report. Occasionally, when serious weaknesses are discovered one or more priority actions may be identified in the report. This has happened 23 times (7.0% of all focus visit reports)

Table 10.2: Last 5 reports for each type of focus visit

Most recent firstFDCIN/CPPVCEFRCICPAPCLPDMOC
1Sandwell 30/10/2024Wolverhampton 02/10/2024Kensington and Chelsea 15/06/2022Birmingham 24/09/2024Doncaster 26/06/2024Wigan 29/10/2024Barnsley 5/11/2024
2Kent 23/01/2024Stoke-on-Trent 01/10/2024Westminster 15/06/2022Shropshire 30/07/2024Stoke-on-Trent 04/10/2023North Northamptonshire 01/10/2024Sheffield 29/10/2024
3Wandsworth 23/11/2023 Kingston Upon Hull 18/09/2024Hertfordshire 21/07/2021Bracknell Forest 21/11/2023Sheffield 21/09/2022Wirral 17/09/2024Stockton-on-Tees 18/09/2024
4North Northamptonshire 18/10/2023Rotherham 14/05/2024Hounslow 14/07/2021Reading 12/09/2023Northumberland 26/07/2022Middlesbrough 31/07/2024Dudley 01/02/2024
5West Northamptonshire 18/10/2023Slough 30/04/2024Thurrock 30/06/2021Leicestershire 11/05/2023Barking and Dagenham 04/05/2022Luton 31/07/2024

Table 10.3: Focus visits by year and type

YearFDCIN/
CPP
VC
EFR
CICPAPCLPD
MOC
C-19Total
2018301832690068
2019181624730050
202026120001829
202111174925024 72
2022141226580047
202391004180032
2024211021124032
Total869012292244342330
*Counts only open authorities

Table 10.4: Focus visits – more analysis as at 17/12/2024

Number of authorities
No focus visits yet5, including 2 new authorities*
One focus visit150
Two focus visits116
Three focus visits50
Four focus visits11
Five focus visits3
excludes closed authorities

*No visit yet: Bexley; Cumberland; East Sussex; Portsmouth; Westmoreland and Furness

Grade at time of visit% of all authority days at this grade since 1/1/2018% of non-inadequate authority-days at this grade since 1/1/2018% of focus visits since 1/1/2018
Outstanding12%14%8%
Good37%45%37%
Requires Improvement32%38%54%
Inadequate16%n/an/a
Not inspected (new authorities)2%2%1%
This analysis disregards the 42 focus visits made to check on Covid-19 responses. They are recorded in tables 10.1 and 10.3 above.

All the data on these pages have been produced by SESLIP analysis of information published at Ofsted’s report pages, which involves manual data transfer and is therefore subject errors and omissions. If you spot anything that looks wrong, please contact Richard Tyndall 07880-787007