Langley Hill Independent School

School pre-registration inspection report

p.1

Langley Hill Independent School Langley Hill, Kings Langley, Hertfordshire WD4 9HG

p.1

Main inspection findings

Part 1. Quality of education provided Paragraph 2(1), 2(1)(a), 2(1)(b), 2(1)(b)(i), 2(1)(b)(ii), 2(2), 2(2)(a), 2(2)(b), 2(2)(d), 2(2)(d)(i), 2(2)(d)(ii), 2(2)(e), 2(2)(e)(i), 2(2)(e)(ii), 2(2)(e)(iii), 2(2)(f), 2(2)(g), 2(2)(h), 2(2)(i)  In the first pre-registration visit in May 2019, schemes of work did not adhere closely to the school’s intention to create a curriculum in line with the principles of a Waldorf education. The school has since acted to address this. Schemes of work are now more aligned with this ethos.  In the previous inspection, there were no plans in place for two-year-old children, despite the school’s proposal to admit two-year-olds. The proprietorial body has identified that this was a mistake on the previous application. It is no longer intending to offer education to two-year-olds.  The school does not currently have an exemption from the learning and development requirements of the early years foundation stage (EYFS). Leaders have sought this

p.1

Main inspection findings

exemption but cannot apply for this until the school is registered. Although plans are of a better quality, there are still no plans for the teaching of early reading and phonics for the youngest children. Therefore, leaders’ plans are not sufficient to meet the full requirements of the EYFS.  Precise planning for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) remains underdeveloped. The SEND policy is generic and neither this nor curriculum plans add much substance about how pupils will be supported to access the school’s bespoke curriculum. The recently appointed senior teacher with responsibility for SEND has not started the role yet and was not available to talk to inspectors.  Despite improvements in the school’s plans for personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education, e-safety in Years 4, 5 and 6 is poorly planned. Current schemes are identical in these year groups. Leaders have not thought through how this curriculum

p.1

Main inspection findings

will teach pupils about how to keep themselves safe online, and how this guidance will develop as they get older.  In the previous inspection, planning for key stage 4 and 5 lacked detail and depth. Since this time, the proprietorial body has reduced the age range on their application. They are not planning to provide education for pupils over the age of 14 when they open.  Despite genuine improvements in curriculum planning since May 2019, there remain too many weaknesses in the curriculum provision for PSHE, EYFS and for pupils with SEND.  The standard is unlikely to be met. Paragraph 3, 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 3(e), 3(f), 3(g), 3(h), 3(i), 3(j) Paragraph 4  The leadership structure for the proposed school is better thought out and more precisely resourced than in the previous inspection.  The headteacher has been appointed and is working in post. The senior leader and other teachers have also been appointed, but do not start their roles on site until the

p.1

Main inspection findings

school opens. Recruitment has already started for learning support assistants.  Curriculum planning and plans about how teaching will be monitored have improved since the first pre-registration visit in May 2019.  The proprietorial body now has a detailed plan for how they will physically accommodate and prepare for the initial opening of the school. There is a shared understanding and organisation among leaders about which rooms will be used for teaching and how the teaching areas will be organised and resourced. The rooms that have been refurbished have been completed to an appropriate standard.  However, the success of much of the curriculum relies on the detailed subject knowledge of staff who will be planning lessons. There are no formal plans about how the proprietorial body will ensure that staff have sufficient subject knowledge to teach the school’s chosen curriculum, nor how training will support staff to gain this

p.2

Main inspection findings

understanding.  The headteacher is not a specialist in Waldorf-inspired education. He will initially rely on the expertise of appointed teachers, many of whom were teachers in the school that previously existed on the site. There are not sufficient plans about how leaders will ensure that teaching and the quality of education are better than that provided in the school that was previously on the school site.  The behaviour policy is of a better and more bespoke quality than previously. However, aspects of the policy, such as the use of the Hertfordshire ‘steps’ programme, have not been well planned for. This programme underpins the school’s behaviour policy, but training has not been organised or planned for teachers’ induction programmes. The system for recording behaviour is not set up.  As identified in paragraph 2, there is limited evidence about how the needs of pupils will be taken account of in the planning of lessons, most notably for pupils with SEND.

p.2

Main inspection findings

The senior teacher is not yet in post and was unavailable to talk to inspectors.  These standards are unlikely to be met. Part 2. Spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils Paragraph 5, 5(a), 5(b), 5(b)(i), 5(b)(ii), 5(b)(iii), 5(b)(iv), 5(b)(v), 5(b)(vi), 5(b)(vii), 5(c), 5(d), 5(d)(i), 5(d)(ii), 5(d)(iii)  As in May 2019, the proprietorial body has a series of appropriate policies and curriculum plans about how the school intends to support pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.  The proprietorial body’s plans show that it will be actively promoting British values, such as the rule of law, respect for public institutions, appreciation of other cultures and democracy.  This standard is likely to be met.

p.2

Main inspection findings

Part 3. Welfare, health and safety of pupils Paragraph 7, 7(a), 7(b)  There is a safeguarding policy that refers to up-to-date legal guidance. The proprietor has ensured that this is a bespoke policy relevant to this school.  The role of designated safeguarding leader has been allocated to the senior teacher. This person has already undertaken recent safeguarding training. However, although appointed, they are not yet working at the school.  The headteacher’s own initial safeguarding training had been completed the day before inspectors arrived on site. He has been booked in for further face-to-face safeguarding training in October 2019, to raise his understanding about how to create a culture of safeguarding in his school, most notably about the different roles of external agencies in the local area.  As already identified in Part 1, the PSHE curriculum does not provide sufficient guidance to pupils about how to keep themselves safe online. This is contrary to the

p.3

Main inspection findings

emphasis placed on the PSHE curriculum in the school’s e-safety and safeguarding policy.  This standard remains unlikely to be met. Paragraph 9, 9(a), 9(b), 9(c)  Unlike in May 2019, the proprietor has produced policies to support behaviour management that reference up-to-date legal guidance.  However, the Hertfordshire ‘steps’ programme underpins the school’s behaviour policy, and the implementation of this programme has not been well thought out. No one has yet been trained in this programme, and there are no plans during the formal induction programme to train staff in this programme.  The school’s system to record behaviour is not up and running. Leaders do not yet know enough about this system and its ability to meet their needs in implementing their behaviour policy.  This standard remains unlikely to be met. Paragraph 10  The proprietor has created an anti-bullying policy that lays out the school’s anti-

p.3

Main inspection findings

bullying strategy.  This standard is likely to be met. Paragraph 11 Paragraph 12  As in May 2019, a range of policies is in place to cover the required aspects of health and safety, and fire safety. Much of the work continues to be overseen by a project manager who is commissioned on a part-time basis through Avanti Foundation Ltd.  The project manager and on-site caretaker have worked diligently to improve the safety and organisation of the site, in line with leaders’ plans for the opening of the school. They have maintained a number of core checks on the quality of the premises.  However, at the time of the inspection, the fire safety order for the gym was two months out of date and leaders had failed to spot this.  Equally, electrical testing for the site had run out in early September. Leaders did not identify or seek to address this until the inspection announcement call occurred. At this point, arrangements were made to conduct these tests by the end of October.

p.4

Main inspection findings

Electrical testing would have been a month out of date, had leaders waited until this time.  There was not a trained fire marshal employed by the proprietorial body at the beginning of the inspection. The caretaker completed online fire marshal training while the inspection took place. This does not reflect a careful management of staff training needs regarding fire safety in preparation for the school’s initial proposed opening date of 2 September.  Leaders undertook both the fire safety order and the electrical testing while inspectors were on site.  These oversights reflect a lack of clarity between leaders, and those commissioned to support the school, about who has responsibility for monitoring the independent school standards, especially in relation to health and safety, and fire safety.  These standards, which were likely to be met at the previous inspection, are now not likely to be met. Paragraph 13

p.4

Main inspection findings

 At the time of this inspection, there were three first aid trained staff, including two who were paediatric first aid trained, whose training was in date.  Two additional staff have been booked on to refresher training in October 2019. They had been appointed having already undertaken this training. However, their current accreditation ran out of date very recently. Leaders had not spotted this quickly enough to ensure that these staff were booked on to new courses in a timely fashion.  There is a first aid policy, and reference to the first aid policy is in the school’s health and safety policy, and in the school’s risk assessment policy.  However, these three policies contradict each other in the information that they provide about first aid in the school. In particular, the risk assessment policy talks about first aid personnel, risk assessment and training that are clearly not related to this school.

p.4

Main inspection findings

 The proprietor has not ensured that oversight of procedures and training regarding first aid are bespoke, appropriate and well reviewed.  This standard remains unlikely to be met. Paragraph 14  This standard was unlikely to be met in May 2019. Since this time, the proprietorial body has created better clarity about how many classes, how many teachers and how many learning support assistants will be required when the proposed school first opens and, over time, as the school grows.  The project manager, who has been appointed to support the opening of the school, has a clear idea about which classrooms or areas of the school will be used when the proposed school opens. He has assured that those rooms and areas are fit for purpose for pupils, including the areas that they will access at breaktimes and lunchtimes.  This standard is likely to be met. Paragraph 15  The proprietor has ensured that there are policies for admissions and attendance to

p.5

Main inspection findings

the school that are up to date and accurate.  As in the previous inspection, the proprietor intends to use a commercial system to record admissions and attendance to the school. However, this system has not yet been implemented.  Leaders do not have enough knowledge about legal guidance around attendance and admissions to be able to check whether this system is sufficient to meet their needs.  This standard is unlikely to be met. Paragraph 16, 16(a), 16(b)  There is a written risk assessment policy in place dated July 2019. However, this policy is not fit for purpose. It refers to provision in a different school that is not relevant to this proposed school.  There are a number of suitable risk assessments linked to the general running of the site.  However, too many risks assessments do not routinely reflect the current risks or most up-to-date situation on the premises. This includes the risk assessment for the early

p.5

Main inspection findings

years allotment, the woodwork shed, the open access to a house owned by the landlords via the school field, and the reorganisation of the front of the school to support parking and access for people with disabilities.  The lease agreement makes clear that there are situations where the landlord, or anyone commissioned by the landlord, might need to gain access to the site. However, there are no risk assessments or protocols about how this is going to be managed, most notably when pupils are on site.  This standard remains unlikely to be met. Part 4. Suitability of staff, supply staff, and proprietors Paragraph 18(2), 18(2)(a), 18(2)(b), 18(2)(c), 18(2)(c)(i), 18(2)(c)(ii), 18(2)(c)(iii), 18(2)(c)(iv), 18(2)(d), 18(2)(e), 18(3) Paragraph 19(2), 19(2)(a)(i), 19(2)(a)(i)(aa), 19(2)(a)(i)(bb), 19(2)(a)(i)(cc), 19(2)(a)(i)(dd), 19(2)(a)(ii), 19(2)(b), 19(2)(c), 19(2)(d), 19(2)(d)(i), 19(2)(d)(ii), 19(3)

p.5

Main inspection findings

Paragraph 20(6), 20(6)(a), 20(6)(a)(i), 20(6)(a)(ii), 20(6)(b), 20(6)(b)(i), 20(6)(b)(ii), 20(6)(b)(iii), 20(6)(c) Paragraph 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 21(3)(a), 21(3)(a)(i), 21(3)(a)(ii), 21(3)(a)(iii), 21(3)(a)(iv), 21(3)(a)(v), 21(3)(a)(vi), 21(3)(a)(vii), 21(3)(a)(viii), 21(3)(b), 21(5), 21(5)(a), 21(5)(a)(i), 21(5)(a)(ii), 21(5)(c), 21(6)  As in May 2019, the school is employing a leader through Avanti Foundation Ltd to oversee the work related to the recruitment of staff.  The leader undertaking this work has a thorough understanding of the required pre- employment checks that need to be carried out to ensure the suitability of staff to work with children.  The leader understands the required checks on supply staff and volunteers, and that these checks need to be made before any person undertakes supply work.  The proprietorial body is also going to act as the school’s governing body. The body is

p.6

Main inspection findings

actively seeking to recruit additional trustees to the proprietorial body to enhance the educational expertise of this group.  The leader has already undertaken and recorded appropriate checks against legal guidance to check the suitability of staff that have been appointed and the proprietors.  These standards are likely to be met.

p.6

Main inspection findings

Part 5. Premises of and accommodation at schools Paragraph 23(1), 23(1)(a), 23(1)(b), 23(1)(c) Paragraph 24(1), 24(1)(a), 24(1)(b), 24(2)  As in May 2019, there are showers provided for pupils aged 11 years or over who receive physical education (PE). In the main school building, there are separate toilet and washing facilities provided for pupils. These facilities have been improved since the previous inspection, and now lock appropriately.  The medical room continues to provide appropriate washing, toileting, and first aid provision for the short-term care of sick pupils.  These standards are likely to be met. Paragraph 25  In the pre-registration inspection in May 2019, there was a complete lack of coherence in leaders’ planning about how they were preparing the site to open. Leaders have acted effectively to address many of these weaknesses.  The project manager and caretaker have liaised closely with the headteacher and the

p.6

Main inspection findings

education director to ensure that there is a mutual understanding about the planned schedule of works on site. These works link closely to how leaders are organising the running of the school, including the numbers of pupils they will educate, the rooms that they will use, and the organisation of building and grounds works.  The proprietorial body has taken the decision to close off extensive areas of the site as it currently exists. This is so they can implement a gradual planned works schedule as the school grows to full capacity. As a result, in the main school buildings, there are no rooms above the ground level that will be used when the school opens, and only the art room, toilets and science room will be in used in the main school building. These rooms have been made ready for opening.  The risks posed by the expansive outdoor space have been reduced significantly. Fencing, additional lighting and grounds work means that movement around this site

p.6

Main inspection findings

is better organised and safer.  However, as already identified in Part 3, risk assessments for areas such as the early years allotment and the woodwork shed are not well thought out or reflective of the current site.  There are a number of neighbouring properties owned by the landlord. In particular, the landlord owns a house which sits between the main school field and the kindergarten building. The proprietorial body has no rights over these premises. The proprietorial body believes that the house is due to be sold.  However, the house currently can be accessed openly via the school’s field. There are no fences or signs in place to denote that this is not the school’s premises. There are no plans, risk assessments or processes in place about how this open access is going to be managed or resolved.  On the other side of this house, the proprietorial body has placed a fence to stop access from the house directly to the kindergarten. However, they have also placed a

p.7

Main inspection findings

gate (locked) within the fence. Leaders believe that this is because they require access across the site of the house in the event of an emergency. Inspectors were not given any evidence of where this requirement existed or how this was to be managed in the event of an emergency, including if the property were no longer owned by the landlord.  The lease agreement makes clear that there are situations where the landlord, or anyone commissioned by the landlord, might need to access the site. However, there are no risk assessments or protocols about how this is going to be managed, most notably when pupils are on site.  As already identified in Part 3, the proprietorial body did not have sufficient oversight of all aspects of health and safety and fire safety on the premises at the time of the inspection.  This standard is not likely to be met. Paragraph 26 Paragraph 27, 27(a), 27(b)  Acoustic conditions, sound insulation, internal and external lighting are appropriate.

p.7

Main inspection findings

 These standards are likely to be met. Paragraph 28(1), 28(1)(a), 28(1)(b), 28(1)(c), 28(1)(d), 28(2), 28(2)(a), 28(2)(b)  There is drinking water available throughout the school buildings. This is clearly labelled as such.  There are suitable toilets in the main school building with washing facilities that supply hot and cold water.  However, in the gym, washing facilities in the toilets only have a supply of hot water. There is no cold water provided in these washing facilities.  This standard is not likely to be met. Paragraph 29(1), 29(1)(a), 29(1)(b)  The site provides ample space and lots of opportunities for pupils to play outside and to receive PE.  This standard is likely to be met.

p.7

Main inspection findings

Part 6. Provision of information Paragraph 32(1), 32(1)(a), 32(1)(b), 32(1)(c), 32(1)(d), 32(1)(f), 32(1)(g), 32(1)(h), 32(1)(i), 32(2), 32(2)(a), 32(2)(b), 32(2)(b)(ii), 32(2)(c), 32(2)(d), 32(3), 32(3)(a), 32(3)(b), 32(3)(c), 32(3)(d), 32(3)(e), 32(3)(f), 32(3)(g)  The school’s website remains live. The school has created a new section for this website that will go live once the school is registered and opens.  Leaders have a thorough understanding about what they will be required to put on to this website, as their chosen way to share information with parents and carers.  Leaders have a good understanding of the requirements under Part 6 of the independent school standards, including their responsibility to provide written reports to parents and carers on an annual basis, and requirements to provide a breakdown of income and expenditure in the event that the local authority funds any places for

p.8

Main inspection findings

pupils.  This standard remains likely to be met.

p.8

Main inspection findings

Part 7. Manner in which complaints are handled Paragraph 33, 33(a), 33(b), 33(c), 33(d), 33(e), 33(f), 33(g), 33(h), 33 (i), 33(i)(i), 33(i)(ii), 33(j), 33(j)(i), 33(j)(ii), 33(k)  There is a complaints policy in place. The policy lists appropriate procedures, timescales, the composition of a panel and steps towards resolutions for both formal and informal complaints. Unlike in May 2019, this policy is bespoke to the school.  This standard is likely to be met.

p.8

Main inspection findings

Part 8. Quality of leadership in and management of schools Paragraph 34(1), 34(1)(a), 34(1)(b), 34(1)(c)  The proprietorial body requested a second pre-registration inspection, with a view to opening on 2 September 2019. They provided the Department for Education (DfE) with a plan that outlined how they were likely to meet the independent school standards. Despite these assurances, there remain several standards that are not likely to be met.  While many of the systemic failures of the first pre-registration visit have been addressed, there is a lack of evidence about the sustainability and capacity of leadership over time.  Where standards are likely to be met more securely is directly related to where the school has a service-level agreement with Avanti Foundation Ltd. However, this agreement only lists the four services available to the school, not the precise nature of this support. Moreover, the formal date for this service-level agreement ends in April

p.8

Main inspection findings

2020, upon which the contract could be terminated by either party from thereon in.  Despite it being reported in the previous inspection report, the education director has not taken on a new role directly employed by the proprietorial body. She works on site two days per week, and her services are part of the commissioned service-level agreement that the school has with Avanti Foundation Ltd. The education director is now supporting the headteacher and the proprietorial body to prepare for opening.  The headteacher has started his role and has been actively involved in the school’s development since mid-August 2019. Despite his induction being supported by the education director, he has not had time to get to grips with the various issues, processes and policies in the school. His training is still ongoing in areas such as safeguarding, for which he is going to take a significant role in the school.

p.9

Main inspection findings

 Leaders do not provide convincing evidence that they have taken enough consideration of the precise and extensive failings of the school that was previously on the school site. For example, not all leaders have read the inspection reports or the independent enquiry for the previous school.  The trustees who were attached to the school previously on the site are still the landlords of the school site. As already identified, the proprietorial body has not considered well enough how the school is going to manage the practicalities of the lease and the house that sits on the site.  Many staff have been recruited and are currently on ‘retainers’ pending the opening of the school. Most of these roles were advertised via the school’s own website and locally. As a result, around half of the staff who have been recruited were staff in the school that previously occupied the site. Almost all the teachers who have been

p.9

Main inspection findings

appointed were teachers in the same school.  There is not convincing evidence in the staff induction programme that the proprietorial body has meaningfully considered how they are going to assure themselves that these staff are well supported and trained in the ethos and expectations of the proposed new school. Moreover, the headteacher will initially be relying on these staff to bring the expertise in Waldorf-inspired education that he does not have.  Consequently, the arrangements to safeguard the new proposed school from the entrenched failings of the previous school have not been sufficiently considered. Arrangements around aspects of the site management, how to manage the arrangements of the lease with the landlord, and for staffing recruitment and induction remain weak.  This standard is unlikely to be met. Schedule 10 of the Equality Act 2010

p.9

Main inspection findings

 There is an appropriate accessibility plan in place.  The proprietor has ensured that the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Equality Act 2010 are likely to be met.

p.10

Main inspection findings

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

p.10

Main inspection findings

 The quality of the curriculum, provision and consideration of the requirements of the EYFS have improved considerably since the inspection in May 2019.  Despite these improvements, the school does not have an exemption from meeting the learning and development requirements of the EYFS. They have attempted to do so but cannot apply for this exemption until they are a registered school. The current plans for phonics and early reading provision are not sufficient to meet the requirements of the EYFS.  The wider safeguarding issues identified in the inspection impact negatively on the safeguarding and welfare requirements of the EYFS.  The school is not likely to meet the statutory requirements of the EYFS.

p.10

Compliance with regulatory requirements

The school is unlikely to meet the requirements of the schedule to the Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014 (‘the independent school standards’) and associated requirements, as set out in the annex of this report.

p.11

Proposed school details

This inspection was carried out under section 99 of the Education and Skills Act 2008, the purpose of which is to advise the Secretary of State for Education about the school’s likely compliance with the independent school standards that are required for registration as an independent school.

p.12

Proposed school details

Proprietor Langley Hill Independent School

p.12

Proposed school details

Date of previous standard inspection Not previously inspected

p.12

recommendation

Age range of pupils N/A 3 to 14 0 Number of pupils on the school roll N/A 232 0

p.12

recommendation

Reason for inspector’s recommendations  The school is still unlikely to meet several of the independent school standards. Therefore, the inspectors’ recommendation is that the proposed school does not currently provide education for any pupils.

p.12

School’s current position School’s proposal

Gender of pupils N/A Mixed Number of full-time pupils of compulsory school age N/A 232

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Number of pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities N/A Not yet determined

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Of which, number of pupils with an education, health and care plan N/A Not yet determined

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Of which, number of pupils paid for by a local authority with an education, health and care plan N/A Not yet determined

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Number of full-time equivalent teaching staff N/A 5

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Number of part-time teaching staff N/A 8

p.13

School’s current position School’s proposal

Number of staff in the welfare provision N/A N/A

p.13

Information about this proposed school

 The proprietorial body seeks registration with the Department for Education (DfE) for an independent school to cater for pupils between the ages of three and 14 years, serving as a kindergarten, lower and upper school.  The proprietorial body consists of three members: Yuvrajsinh Rana, Kirti Butkovic and Sonal Singh.  The school proposes to provide full-time education for pupils as a day school.  The provider seeks capacity for up to 232 pupils.  The site has previously been used for a school provision, the Rudolf Steiner School Kings Langley (RSSKL). This school faced enforcement action and was removed from the independent schools register in March 2019, following serious and ongoing failings in safeguarding and leadership and management.  The trustees of RSSKL remain the owners of the land. The proposed proprietor has undertaken to lease the premises from the landlord, RSSKL.  The proposed proprietorial arrangements will be a proprietorial body. The role of

p.13

Information about this proposed school

governance when the school opens will be retained by the proprietorial body.  The proposed proprietorial body has strong links with the Avanti Schools Trust. The proprietors are commissioning services currently from the subsidiary company, Avanti Foundation Ltd, the education director, project manager and human resources director. These services are guaranteed under a service-level agreement until April 2020. After this time, either party can terminate this agreement.  The previous inspection reported that the education director was leaving Avanti Schools Trust in August 2019 and moving to work for Langley Hill Independent School (LHIS) on a part-time basis. Inspectors were informed that this was incorrect during this inspection. The education director has left Avanti Schools Trust but is working for Avanti Foundation Ltd.  The caretaker and finance administrator who previously worked for the landlord,

p.14

Information about this proposed school

RSSKL, are now working directly for the proprietorial body, LHIS.

p.14

Information about this inspection

 This is the second pre-registration inspection of the proposed school. The inspection was conducted at the request of the DfE to consider the school’s application to open an independent school registered for pupils aged three to 14 years.  In May 2019, Ofsted conducted a first pre-registration inspection of the proposed school. The inspection was conducted by Ofsted at the request of the DfE to consider the school’s application to open an independent school registered for 600 pupils aged two to 19 years.  Inspectors met with the chair of the proprietorial body and the headteacher.  Inspectors met with personnel who are employed by Avanti Foundation Ltd who have been commissioned by the proprietorial body to support the opening of the school. These personnel are the education director, the project manager and the human resources director. These staff have short-term commissioned contracts to support

p.15

Information about this inspection

the opening of the proposed school.  Inspectors toured the site with Avanti’s project manager and the caretaker, who is responsible for maintenance of the site.  Inspectors scrutinised the school’s policies, procedures, curriculum content, and the single central record of employment checks.

p.15

Inspection team

Kim Pigram, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector

p.15

Part 1. Quality of education provided

 2(1) The standard in this paragraph is met if: – 2(1)(a) the proprietor ensures that a written policy on the curriculum, supported by appropriate plans and schemes of work, which provides for the matters specified in sub-paragraph (2) is drawn up and implemented effectively; and – 2(1)(b) the written policy, plans and schemes of work: – 2(1)(b)(i) take into account the ages, aptitudes and needs of all pupils, including those pupils with an EHC plan; and – 2(2)(d) personal, social, health and economic education which: – 2(2)(d)(i) reflects the school’s aim and ethos.  3 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that the teaching at the school: – 3(c) involves well planned lessons and effective teaching methods, activities and management of class time; – 3(d) shows a good understanding of the aptitudes, needs and prior attainments of the pupils, and ensures that these are taken into account in the planning of

p.16

Part 1. Quality of education provided

lessons; – 3(e) demonstrates good knowledge and understanding of the subject matter being taught – 3(h) utilises effective strategies for managing behaviour and encouraging pupils to act responsibly.

p.16

Part 3. Welfare, health and safety of pupils

 7 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that: – 7(a) arrangements are made to safeguard and promote the welfare of pupils at the school; and – 7(b) such arrangements have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State.  9 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor promotes good behaviour amongst pupils by ensuring that: – 9(b) the policy is implemented effectively; and – 9(c) a record is kept of the sanctions imposed upon pupils for serious misbehaviour.  11 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that relevant health and safety laws are complied with by the drawing up and effective implementation of a written health and safety policy.  12 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures compliance with the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.  13 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that first aid is

p.16

Part 3. Welfare, health and safety of pupils

administered in a timely and competent manner by the drawing up and effective implementation of a written first aid policy.  15 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that an admission and attendance register is maintained in accordance with the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006.  16 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that: – 16(a) the welfare of pupils at the school is safeguarded and promoted by the drawing up and effective implementation of a written risk assessment policy; and – 16(b) appropriate action is taken to reduce risks that are identified.

p.17

Part 5. Premises of and accommodation at schools

 25 The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that the school premises and the accommodation and facilities provided therein are maintained to a standard such that, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of pupils are ensured.  28(1) The standard in this paragraph is met if the proprietor ensures that: – 28(1)(b) toilets and urinals have an adequate supply of cold water and washing facilities have an adequate supply of hot and cold water.

p.17

Part 8. Quality of leadership in and management of schools

 34(1) The standard about the quality of leadership and management is met if the proprietor ensures that persons with leadership and management responsibilities at the school: – 34(1)(a) demonstrate good skills and knowledge appropriate to their role so that the independent school standards are met consistently; – 34(1)(b) fulfil their responsibilities effectively so that the independent school standards are met consistently; and – 34(1)(c) actively promote the well-being of pupils.

p.17

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

 The proprietor must meet the statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage for learning and development contained in paragraphs 1.12.  The proprietor must meet the statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage for assessment contained in paragraphs 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10 and 2.11.  The proprietor must meet the statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage for safety and suitability of premises, environment and equipment contained in paragraphs 3.54 and 3.55. guidance ‘Raising concerns and making a complaint about Ofsted’, which is available from Ofsted’s website: www.gov.uk/government/publications/complaints-about-ofsted . If you would like Ofsted to send you a copy of the guidance, please telephone 0300 123 4234, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk .

p.17

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

Parent View You can use Parent View to give Ofsted your opinion on your child’s school. Ofsted will use the information parents and carers provide when deciding which schools to inspect and when and as part of the inspection.

p.18

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

You can also use Parent View to find out what other parents and carers think about schools in England. You can visit www.parentview.ofsted.gov.uk , or look for the link on the main Ofsted website: www.gov.uk/ofsted .

p.18

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of all ages. It regulates and inspects childcare and children’s social care, and inspects the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, further education and skills, adult and community learning, and education and training in prisons and other secure establishments. It assesses council children’s services, and inspects services for children looked after, safeguarding and child protection.

p.18

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille, please telephone 0300 123 1231, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk . You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence , write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk .

p.18

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

Interested in our work? You can subscribe to our monthly newsletter for more information and updates: http://eepurl.com/iTrDn .

p.18

Statutory requirements of the early years foundation stage

T: 0300 123 4234 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 E: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk W: www.gov.uk/ofsted

p.18