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 19 Nov 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

Bernard Campbell

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Bernard Campbell

  • Postcode verified

    WN8 9TG

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.

+2Mixedmore positive than 25% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

Praisehappyeffectivecleareffectivelypromptly
Criticismpoorlytoo lownot effective

How the report reads, start to finish

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

FindingsAbout the inspectionSafeguarding positive critical
  • Findings182w0
  • Safeguarding337w+2

Strengths

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

No standout praise found.

Concerns

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

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
519
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 44, typical 45
Average sentence
18 words
Next steps
1
typical 5
Hedged sentences
0%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 32%Safeguarding 59%About the inspection 10%

Full report text

CfBT Inspection Services Suite 22 West Lancs Investment Centre Maple View Skelmersdale WN8 9TG T 0300 123 1231 Text Phone: 0161 618 8524 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk Direct T 01695 566932 Direct F 01695 729320 Direct email: hcarnall@cfbt.com

p.1

Wendy Adamson Park Primary School Monmouth Road Doncaster South Yorkshire DN2 4JP

p.1

Introduction

Following my visit to your school on Monday 15 October 2012, I write on behalf of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services and Skills to confirm the inspection findings.

p.1

Introduction

The visit was a monitoring inspection carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005 to evaluate aspects of safety and of the leadership and management of safeguarding.

p.1

Evidence

The inspector observed the procedures for pupil leaving Foundation 1 at the end of the day, spoke to parents and carers, scrutinised documents, toured the site with school leaders and met with the headteacher, the deputy headteacher, the Foundation Stage manager and the temporary site manager. He also spoke a representative from the local authority by telephone.

p.1

Context

On 18 September 2012, an incident took place when a child in the Early Years Foundation Stage left the school unsupervised. This event was reported in the local and national media. The incident has been investigated by the School Improvement Service in Doncaster’s Children and Young People’s Service. Ofsted considered that it was appropriate to make a visit to the school to evaluate relevant aspects of safety and the leadership and management of safeguarding.

p.1

Safety and the leadership and management of safeguarding

The investigation of the incident when the child left the school unsupervised was carried out promptly by the headteacher. The local authority carried out its own investigation three weeks later, following the press reports and enquiries from Ofsted. Following the incident, January 2012

p.1

Safety and the leadership and management of safeguarding

Page2 the headteacher and Foundation Stage manager implemented a new procedure immediately. The inspector observed this taking place safely. Parents and carers said they were happy with the new system and thought it was safer. The headteacher and the Chair of Governors have written letters of apology to the parents. The school’s response to the incident, and the measures it has put in place, are effective in dealing with the causes of this incident.

p.2

Safety and the leadership and management of safeguarding

The local authority investigation correctly identified that the fence between the Foundation one exit area and the next door car park is too low. In addition, the exit gate fasteners are within the reach of children. The school is replacing the fence and changing the gate. The monitoring inspection also identified a poorly maintained environmental area close to the Early Years Foundation Stage play area.

p.2

External support

Once made aware of the safety issues by Ofsted, the School Improvement Service carried out an immediate and appropriate investigation of the incident. The investigation report provides a clear account of the findings and recommendations. At the time of the monitoring visit, the headteacher and governing body were awaiting a copy of the investigation report.

p.2

Main Judgements

The school responded effectively to the safeguarding incident. On the day of the monitoring visit the procedures for collecting children were operating safely and to the satisfaction of parents and carers.

p.2

Main Judgements

Leaders have not been effective in assessing and dealing with the risk presented by the potential access by young children to the overgrown environmental area. Ofsted has made clear to leaders that they should ensure that steps are taken now to prevent access to that area.

p.2

Main Judgements

I am copying this letter to the chair of governors and Doncaster Children’s Services. This letter will be posted on the Ofsted website.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion