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First, balance has been replaced by clarity.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:
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:
Cross-Cutting Themes from the First Reports
Across the reports, inspectors consistently considered achievement from learners’ starting points, rather than headline success rates alone.
Where providers demonstrated:
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.
A defining feature of this week’s reports is the way inclusion cuts across multiple judgements.
Inspectors looked closely at:
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.
Attendance featured prominently across the reports, but notably not as a behavioural issue.
Inspectors examined:
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.
Across the 19 reports, inspectors spent considerable time evaluating the confidence and clarity of curriculum leaders.
Strong practice was evident where curriculum leads could:
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.
Quality assurance processes were present in almost all reports. However, inspectors were explicit about the difference between:
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:
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.
Where leadership was judged as needing attention, inspectors pointed to:
This reinforces that governance is now judged on educational insight and challenge, not oversight alone.
Inclusion related concerns typically reflected:
Inspectors were not questioning intent, but consistency, capability and evaluation.
Where achievement was judged as needing attention, this was driven by:
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:
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:
1. Stress testing self-evaluation against each toolkit evaluation area.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.