Ofsted Round-Up: First Report Cards and What it Means for FE & Skills Providers

Introduction

This week marks a pivotal moment for inspection in FE & Skills. The first release of the new style report cards covers 19 FE & Skills providers; 17 of these are independent learning providers, 1 employer provider, and 1 adult and community learning provider. The majority of these are small providers, with inspections being carried out only by HMIs.

Drawing on the 19 reports published this week, this blog explores the emerging themes, what feels different under the new reporting model, and what providers should be doing now to prepare.

What the First Report Cards are Signalling

Three messages are already clear.

First, balance has been replaced by clarity. Strengths are no longer used to soften weaknesses. Where improvement is required, it is stated plainly and sits visibly alongside areas of effectiveness.

Second, consistency matters more than ever. Variability between learner groups, curriculum areas or delivery models is far more visible when performance is broken down across multiple evaluation areas.

Third, impact has overtaken intent. Providers are increasingly judged on what has changed for learners and not just on the presence of strategies, policies or plans.

How the New Grades Work - a Reminder

Ofsted has been clear that there is no direct alignment from previous inspection grades. As we already know, there are now five grades and not four – exceptional standard, strong standard, expected standard, needs attention, and urgent improvement.

Under the new framework:

• Exceptional standard does not replace ‘Outstanding’
• Expected standard does not simply mean ‘Good’
• Needs attention is not the same as ‘Requires Improvement’, but indicates expected standard is not yet securely met

Shift from Best Fit to Secure Fit

The move from a ‘best fit’ model to a secure fit approach is a significant change. Ofsted describes expected standard as a high bar, and a positive outcome for providers. This is the starting point for inspectors; they will assume provision meets expected standard and then check whether this is secure across all aspects. If one area is not met, then expected standard cannot be awarded. If all expected standards are met, then inspectors will look at strong standard.

Evaluation Overview across the 19 Reports

Across this initial cohort:

• Eight providers received at least one evaluation at strong standard, indicating that Ofsted is prepared to recognise distinctive strengths clearly.
• Six providers were judged as needs attention in at least one evaluation area - these included leadership & governance, inclusion, and development of maths, English and essential skills - more on this later in the blog. This reinforces that weaknesses are no longer softened by overall effectiveness.
• One provider received an exceptional judgement, awarded for achievement only, not overall provision.
• No providers were judged as requiring urgent improvement.
• Safeguarding was met in all cases.

Cross-Cutting Themes from the First Reports

1. Achievement Judged in Context

Across the reports, inspectors consistently considered achievement from learners’ starting points, rather than headline success rates alone.

Where providers demonstrated:

• accurate baseline assessment
• curriculum sequencing that built knowledge over time
• targeted intervention for learners falling behind

achievement was viewed positively, even where outcomes were still improving.

Where outcomes were weaker, inspectors were clear when leaders could not yet evidence impact, particularly for specific learner groups.

Under report cards, this contextualised view of achievement will be more visible and harder to gloss over.

2. Inclusion Across all Areas

A defining feature of this week’s reports is the way inclusion cuts across multiple judgements.

Inspectors looked closely at:

• how learners with additional needs are identified early
• how attendance is monitored and responded to
• whether curriculum design supports access and participation
• how leaders evaluate outcomes for disadvantaged learners

Where inclusion was embedded into curriculum delivery and quality processes, this was reflected positively. Where it relied too heavily on specialist teams without consistent curriculum ownership, weaknesses were highlighted clearly.

This aligns directly with the Inclusion (whole-provider) evaluation area in the FE & Skills Inspection Toolkit and will be highly visible in report card formats.

3. Attendance Interpreted as Risk, not Behaviour

Attendance featured prominently across the reports, but notably not as a behavioural issue.

Inspectors examined:

• how leaders identify learners at risk of disengagement
• whether absence triggers support or escalation
• how attendance links to safeguarding and wellbeing systems

Providers that treated attendance as a leading indicator of vulnerability demonstrated stronger oversight and responsiveness. Where attendance processes were inconsistent or reactive, inspectors raised concerns about leadership strategies.

Under report cards, attendance-related risk will increasingly sit in plain view alongside safeguarding and inclusion findings.

4. Curriculum Leadership under Greater Scrutiny

Across the 19 reports, inspectors spent considerable time evaluating the confidence and clarity of curriculum leaders.

Strong practice was evident where curriculum leads could:

• articulate curriculum intent clearly
• explain sequencing and assessment choices
• use data to identify priorities
• describe recent improvements and remaining gaps

Where leaders relied on generic language or deferred to central teams, inspection confidence reduced, even where senior leadership narratives were strong.

This reinforces a key implication of the report card approach: inspection credibility now rests heavily at middle-leader level.

5. Quality Assurance is Expected to Demonstrate Impact

Quality assurance processes were present in almost all reports. However, inspectors were explicit about the difference between:

• monitoring activity
• and evaluating impact

Providers that could evidence how observations, reviews and learner feedback led to measurable improvement were viewed positively. Where QA focused on compliance or completion, inspectors were less assured.

In a report card model, this distinction will become even more visible to external audiences.

Exceptional: Rare, Targeted and Impact Led

Only one provider achieved an exceptional judgement, and this was confined to achievement.

Inspectors highlighted:

• extensive progress from learners’ starting points, including for adults retraining or at risk of unemployment
• clear and sustained employment outcomes
• learners demonstrating high levels of confidence, competence and occupational readiness

This indicates that “exceptional” is being reserved for transformational impact, not simply consistently strong delivery.

Needs Attention: Clear Patterns Emerging

Among the six providers receiving at least one needs attention judgement, clear patterns emerge.

1. Leadership and governance impact

Where leadership was judged as needing attention, inspectors pointed to:

• limited understanding of curriculum quality at board level
• weak diagnostic use of performance data
• quality assurance activity that did not demonstrably lead to improvement

This reinforces that governance is now judged on educational insight and challenge, not oversight alone.

2. Inclusion not yet operating as a system

Inclusion related concerns typically reflected:

• strategies that were still embedding rather than fully operational
• reliance on historic assessments without consistent review
• support plans that were rarely reviewed and updated
• uneven staff expertise to support diverse learner needs

Inspectors were not questioning intent, but consistency, capability and evaluation.

3. English, maths and essential skills achievement

Where achievement was judged as needing attention, this was driven by:

• slow progress in English and maths for learners required to complete them
• inconsistent support models
• limited evidence that learners were catching up effectively

Even where vocational outcomes were positive, weaknesses in essential skills reduced overall inspection confidence.

Aligning to Achieve, Belong and Thrive

Viewed through an FE & Skills lens, the new report card approach reinforces a simple but demanding expectation:

• learners achieve meaningful outcomes from their starting points
• learners belong in safe, inclusive environments where barriers are addressed early
• learners thrive, developing confidence, aspiration and clear progression routes

This week’s reports show that strength in one area does not compensate for weakness in another - all three are visible, and all three matter.

What FE & Skills Providers Should Do Now

In response to this first release, providers should prioritise:

It is no longer about “What grade might we receive?" It is “What would our report card clearly show and where?”

2. Reviewing performance and experience by learner group, not just overall.

3. Building curriculum leader confidence in explaining impact and moving from employer “engagement” to employer influence in curriculum relevance and OTJ alignment.

4. Ensuring governance oversight reflects the same level of nuance as inspection findings - boards should receive and interrogate quality and learner impact intelligence, not just performance summaries or compliance updates.

5. Focusing quality improvement planning on evidencing impact, not future intent. What has changed as a result.

6. Rebuilding inclusion as a closed-loop system (assess → plan → review → adapt). Ensure needs are identified early, support plans are current, reviews happen routinely, and changes are recorded with impact.

7. Starting English/maths/functional skills (where needed) earlier and track momentum, ensure consistent teaching/support, and monitor progress to avoid last minute completion risk.

Final Thoughts

The first Ofsted report cards confirm a decisive shift towards clarity, transparency and impact led evaluation. For FE & Skills providers, this week’s reports offer both an early warning and an opportunity. Those with strong alignment between curriculum, inclusion, leadership and outcomes will benefit from greater credibility. Those relying on intent over impact will find the new approach far less forgiving. The era of visible strengths, visible gaps and visible leadership impact has begun.

Follow AiVII for weekly Ofsted insight briefings, toolkit interpretation and practical guidance for FE & Skills leaders.