Ofsted Visit Analysis – Page 3

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.

Students sitting in a classroom with hands up for the teacher, one student is smiling at the camera

Waiting times since any inspection – all authorities and south east authorities, and type of last visit

Table 3.1: Number days since the start of last Ofsted visit with a published report of any type at 09/07/2026

SE	LA Name	Days waited	National rank of 153*
1	Portsmouth	49	14
2	Surrey	479	19
3	Southampton	416	30
4	East Sussex	344	45
5	West Berkshire	297	46
6	Brighton and Hove	269	56
7	Kent	248	62
8	Slough	232	70
9=	West Sussex	226	72=
9=	Medway	226	72=
11	Bracknell Forest	213	82
12	Wokingham	164	97
13	Oxfordshire	150	104
14	Isle of Wight	135	113
15	Hampshire	107	131
16	Reading	106	132
17	Windsor and Maidenhead	59	142
18	Milton Keynes	57	146
19	Buckinghamshire	30	153

*Does not include SW/EM/NW closed authorities, does include SW/EM/NW new authorities

National rank of 153*	LA Name	Days waited
1	St. Helens	806
2	Telford and Wrekin	801
3	Greenwich	766
4	Warrington	759
5	Southend-on-Sea	633
6=	Westminster	605
6=	North Tyneside	605
6=	Kensington and Chelsea	605
9	Kingston upon Thames	584
10	Lancashire	577
11=	Doncaster	535
11=	Bromley	535
13	North Yorkshire	521
14	Portsmouth	499
15	York	497
16	Camden	493
17=	Sheffield	486
17=	Central Bedfordshire	486
19	Surrey	479

*Does not include SW/EM/NW closed authorities, does include SW/EM/NW new authorities

Return to Ofsted Visit Analysis Page 2

Advance to Ofsted Visit Analysis Page 4

Table 3.2 Analysis of latest visits to each authority by type of visit

Our friends at LIIA, working with D2I have produced more Ofsted analysis Ofsted inspections Power BI dashboard (external link hosted by LIIA).

The dashboard has five pages and covers ILACS and SEND inspections, with all manner of filters and visualisations available.

Type of visit	No.
ILACS Long Inspection	21
ILACS Short Inspection	34
First Focus visit	2
Second Focus visit	8
Third Focus visit	17
Fourth Focus visit	10
Fifth Focus visit	5
Area SEND	27
Area SEND Monitoring	7
JTAI1&2	9
Inadequate – monitoring visit	13
Total	153*

*Does not include SW/EM/NW closed authorities, does include SW/EM/NW new authorities

Return to Ofsted Visit Analysis Page 2

Advance to Ofsted Visit Analysis Page 4

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 07880-787007

Table 1: CSC National Framework Enablers and Outcomes

	Enablers	Outcomes
1	Multi-agency working is prioritised and effective	children, young people and families stay together and get the help they need
2	Leaders drive conditions for effective practice	children and young people are safe in and outside of their homes
3	The workforce is equipped and effective	children and young people are supported by their family network
4	–	children in care and care leavers have stable, loving homes

Table 2: Seven SEND Pillars

	Pillars
1	Co-production with parents and carers and children and young people
2	Effective system leadership and governance
3	Accurate understanding of needs and experiences of children and young people through effective use of quantitative and qualitative data
4	High-quality service delivery at universal, targeted and specialist levels to promote inclusion
5	Effective partnership working across education, health and social care
6	Skilled workforce across LA, education settings, health and social care
7	Targeted and judicious use of resources including place planning, sufficiency, use of capital