Skip to content

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Other · Ofsted report

Setting

Inspected — · published 20 Mar 2012

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Original PDF ↗

Summary

No overall grade in this framework

Janet Rodgers

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Janet Rodgers

  • Postcode verified

    SR8 2QJ

Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of the report

Deep dive

What this report says

In plain English

Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.

Tone of the report

How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.

+49Positivemore positive than 49% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

Praiseexcellentvery wellcleareffectivelyimproving
Criticismlimited

How the report reads, start to finish

Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.

FindingsWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings447w+63
  • What needs to improve109w−33

Strengths

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

Concerns

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

No strong criticism found.

Next steps

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

What the report dwells on

Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.

Anatomy of the report

How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.

Pages
2
Words of findings
547
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Very hard
Flesch 26, typical 45
Average sentence
21 words
Next steps
4
typical 5
Hedged sentences
8%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 80%What needs to improve 20%

Full report text

Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 0300 123 1231 F 020 7421 6855 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk

p.1

Mr S Ward Managing Director Profound Services Limited Unit 13 Judson Road North West Industrial Estate Peterlee SR8 2QJ Dear Mr Ward

p.1

employment

This survey evaluates providers’ response to initiatives launched on 1 August 2011 to use Skills Funding Agency funds flexibly to support people on benefits.

p.1

employment

Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff and participants, during my visit on 8 and 9 February 2012 to look at your work in employability provision.

p.1

employment

The visit provided valuable information which will contribute to our national evaluation and reporting. Published reports are likely to list the names of the contributing institutions but individual institutions will not be identified in the main text without their consent.

p.1

employment

The evidence used to inform the judgements included: interviews with staff, participants, and partners; scrutiny of relevant documents; analysis of participants’ work; and observation of two learning sessions.

p.1

Key findings

 Profound Services Limited (Profound) has consulted extensively with partners and participants and devised employability programmes that meet the workforce needs of the local area very well. Participants have very clear progression routes from the employability course to vocationally specific qualifications that link well with Profound’s apprenticeships.  Tutors thoroughly discuss and review with participants their goals for improving their skills, qualifications and employment prospects. Participants complete excellent learning materials, which they use well to identify their barriers to employment honestly and critically. They develop a good awareness of how their behaviour is viewed by potential employers and apply decision-making, anti-stress and self-confidence building strategies well within their personal action plans.  In the learning sessions observed, tutors used innovative and cohesive learning activities to motivate and interest participants. They incorporated

p.1

Key findings

very current and relevant recruitment and selection tasks from local companies which increased participants’ confidence in performing well during job interviews. At the end of each learning session, participants applied their learning effectively by setting short-term actions for jobsearch activities.  Profound has good links with employers, which they use to very good effect on the taxi-driving course to guarantee participants a job interview at the end of their course. Participants on some programmes complete two weeks’ work experience but not all have the opportunity to apply their skills and knowledge with an employer.  Participants receive very good careers advice through the use of a computerised careers package, and support and guidance from partner organisations and from their tutors. Most participants are given clear initial information about what their course includes, although a small number

p.2

Key findings

were not aware that they would need to complete the employability course before starting the vocationally specific qualification.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

 increasing the clarity of information that is given to participants, before they start, about the content of the employability course and how it links to the vocationally specific qualification  incorporating work experience for all participants to help them apply their skills and support their progression to apprenticeships and employment.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

I hope that these observations are useful as you continue to develop employability provision at Profound Services Limited.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

As explained previously, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website. It may be used to inform decisions about any future inspection. A copy of this letter is also being sent to the Skills Funding Agency.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.

Join the discussion