Skip to content

Help us get it right

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

Early years · Early years complaint outcome

Khan, Mariam

Inspected 14 Oct 2026 · published 15 Oct 2026 · URN 2857917

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

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspection datesingle source

    14 Oct 2026

  • URN verified

    2857917

Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of the report with the evidence highlighted

Deep dive

What this report says

In plain English

critical

Ofsted found a childminder failed to notify a significant event and has since put matters right; still registered.

Ofsted received concerns about safeguarding, children's safety and suitable people, and carried out a regulatory visit. Inspectors found the childminder had not notified Ofsted of a significant event, which is a requirement of registration, and some requirements were not being met. The childminder has since informed all relevant agencies of an allegation against an adult and remains registered.

Going well

  • The childminder has taken action to put the identified failings right.
  • The childminder has informed all relevant agencies of an allegation against an adult.

To improve

  • Notify Ofsted of significant events, as required by registration.
  • Meet the legal requirements of the early years foundation stage framework.

What parents should know

  • The childminder remains registered, but Ofsted found requirements were not being met at the visit.
  • Ask how the childminder handles safeguarding concerns and notifies Ofsted and other agencies of significant events.

What other providers can learn

  • Notify Ofsted promptly of any significant event, as registration requires.
  • Check safeguarding policies and procedures are up to date and applied in practice.

Summary written by AI (claude-haiku-5-5) from the report text. It can miss nuance: the report itself is the record.

Tone of the report

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

−78Very criticalmore positive than 8% of reports of this type

Reads more critically than most reports of this type.

Criticismconcernsfailed

How the report reads, start to finish

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

Findings positive critical

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
1
Words of findings
205
shorter than usual (typical 282)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 37, typical 42
Average sentence
19 words
Next steps
1
typical 1
Hedged sentences
9%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 100%

Full report text

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion