Now that Ofsted has inspected childcarers, the ball is in the other court. Mary Evans hears how they would rate the new regime
When Ofsted recently published a 'state of the nation' report on childcare in England, following the completion of its transitional inspections of every childminder and daycare setting, it was headline news. If the tables are turned, how does the early years sector rate Ofsted?
Now that regulation of childcare has been given to one organisation, operating to the new national standards, has it ironed out the idiosyncrasies of the former system where responsibility was shared among 150 local authorities, each with its own criteria and procedures for registration and inspection?
Yes. But it is a qualified yes.
There is a lot more consistency now, says Sue Torkington, operations director at Kidsunlimited. 'You know what the standards are and you know what the expectations are. There is less individuality in terms of regional discrepancies.'
Jackie Arthur, strategic manager at Asquith Court, the country's biggest childcare provider, says, 'They are trying very hard and are being far more consistent than when they first started.'
However, the new broom has not swept away all the anomalies. Jackie adds, 'We had not understood initially that the Ofsted regional offices would have their own structures, so departments are split slightly differently from region to region, and the jobs can carry different titles from region to region. We have asked for organisational charts for each region.'
There has been so much upheaval, with the transfer to Ofsted and subsequent training programmes for its new inspectors, that some feel it is almost too early to judge. A Pre-school Learning Alliance spokesperson says, 'To achieve consistency throughout the country is obviously a huge task and it will take time for this relatively new system to prove its worth. Once it has bedded down and become familiar to practitioners and inspectors, it can be evaluated to see how successful it has been in promoting consistently high standards for children.'
National Day Nurseries Association chief executive Rosemary Murphy adds, 'I want to reserve my judgement for at least 12 months. It is an immense undertaking to get something to work nationally, and they are still changing. Now they are introducing combined inspections and graded inspections. It might have helped if they had sat still for five minutes, but the agenda was pre-set. I think they are going to be stretched to the limit to get everything right.'
However, there is concern about the grading system introduced by Ofsted in April, under which all childcarers will be assessed as either good, satisfactory or unsatisfactory.
Providers do not believe that parents will recognise that a setting earning a 'good' evaluation has achieved the highest grade. 'Better language could have been used to identify quality and good practice,' argues Sylvia Archer, joint proprietor of the Children's House nursery in Lincolnshire. 'The language could be more explanatory. I don't think "good" will mean anything to parents. It should be clearer when a setting has achieved the top level. Maybe they should have a star system.'
The grades convey mixed messages, thinks Gill Haynes, National Childminding Association chief executive. 'We have a resolution going to our annual conference from members in the north-east of England calling for us to work with Ofsted to develop a grading system that is more reflective and makes more sense.
'We now have a regulatory system, which is about establishing minimum standards, and we support it. There is a huge consensus about the need for a regulatory system, but if you meet the minimum standards, how can you be graded as "unsatisfactory"? This is a very basic affront to common sense, so maybe the system needs looking at.
'I think there has to be a real emphasis on quality of care. That is what parents want. They want their children to be safe and happy, however you define it, and they don't necessarily want 100 per cent efficiency on every single aspect of the paperwork in order for their childcare provider to get a "good" grading.
'Anecdotally, I know some childminders are being told that they have not got a "good" grading because one element of their paperwork has not been in order. Do parents understand that? Do they understand that if the childminder has not got all the names and addresses of the children recorded in the book the morning the inspector arrives, because the childminder prefers to spend the initial half-hour settling the children and does the book later in the day, that affects the grading? Of course, records have to be right, but do we want a system which describes quality based on efficiency in terms of paperwork?'
To achieve the top grade, providers have to demonstrate an exceptional level of service. Rosemary Murphy argues this should be reflected in the descriptions of the grades. She says that despite Ofsted's denials, practitioners suspect that there is a pre-set quota of providers to achieve the premium level.
Ms Murphy also says it is unclear how the grades will sit alongside quality assurance schemes and the new Investors in Children award.
'Everybody who has quality assurance should surely be graded as "good",' she says
'Some people are saying that the better you are, the more petty the action points are. I know of a nursery that had two action points, which meant it got a "satisfactory" rather than a "good" grade. One point said there was no bin in one room, but it was a new nursery and that room was not being used.'
Two nurseries which have been graded also query the criteria. Clare King, manager of the Beanstalk nursery at Stroud College in Gloucestershire, which was judged 'satisfactory', says, 'When I was at school and got marked as satisfactory, I saw it as a bad mark. Satisfactory does not give off the right message.
'The inspector said that what we were doing was really good, but she picked us up because we had not got a visitors' book. There is a visitors' book in the main college reception but we had not got a separate book here. The other thing was that in our incident book, we had not got a blank piece of paper to cover up the facing page, so that a parent signing the book could see another person's details.'
Julie Hibberd, a director of Happy Days in Newton Abbot, Devon, which was graded 'good' says, 'We felt the grading was fair but the criteria could be better interpreted. It is such a strange grading scheme. "Good" doesn't say a lot. It doesn't sound like it is the top grade. I don't think it gets the message across to parents.'
A further problem she identifies is the loss of the rapport between the inspector and the provider. 'We felt the inspection was more stressful than the old social services inspection, because we had a relationship with the social services inspector and could discuss issues and raise any problems. The Ofsted inspector was not there in that capacity. Maybe that will come with time.'
The new regime's approach is positively welcomed by Sylvia Archer, on the other hand. 'They certainly have not gone out of their way to create a fearful situation, unlike in the past when it was almost ruled by fear,' she says. 'Now when the person inspecting you has a background in daycare, there is a greater understanding of the services you offer and the difficulties you face than when the inspector is a maintained teacher.'
One clear advantage of the new system is that Ofsted listens, says Jackie Arthur. It has responded to lobbying and has streamlined the procedure for registering a setting when it changes hands.
Gill Haynes adds, 'I believe that Ofsted is keen and interested in getting the system as right as they can, and I am confident they will be evaluating the system as it goes along. We are part of the reformed national consultative group and will have that opportunity to give feedback on issues that come through to us.'
She raises a more fundamental question as to whether the current regulation system is the right approach, or whether more emphasis should be placed on supporting, training and informing childcare providers.
As Rosemary Murphy says, 'We assume in this country that everybody needs to be regulated and inspected. When you look at some of the European models they do not have inspection. They have massive support. What happens here if somebody has a difficult inspection? Nobody comes out from the partnership to support them and help them improve their practice.'