Child Minding

Children, Schools and Families written question – answered on 15th October 2008.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Maria Miller Maria Miller Shadow Minister (Children, Young People and Families)

To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the Answer of 4 June 2008, Official Report, column 949W, on children: day care,

(1) how many and what proportion of daycare settings in the (a) 10 per cent. most deprived, (b) 10 per cent. least deprived, (c) five per cent. most deprived and (d) five per cent. least deprived local authority area were awarded ratings of inadequate following an Ofsted inspection in (i) 2005-06, (ii) 2006-07 and (iii) 2007-08;

(2) how many and what proportion of childminders were deemed inadequate by Ofsted in the (a) 10 per cent. most deprived and (b) 10 per cent. least deprived local authority areas in each year since such inspections began;

(3) how many and what proportion of childminders were deemed inadequate by Ofsted in each region in each year since such inspections began;

(4) how many registered childminders there were in the (a) 10 per cent. most deprived and (b) 10 per cent. least deprived local authority areas in each quarter of the last three years.

Photo of Beverley Hughes Beverley Hughes Minister of State (Children, Young People and Families; Minister for the North West), Department for Children, Schools and Families, Minister of State (Department for Children, Schools and Families) (Children and Youth Justice) (and Minister for the North West)

These are matters for Ofsted. The Chief Inspector, Christine Gilbert, will write to the hon. Member and copies of her replies will be placed in the Library.

Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 23 September 2008:

Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for a response.

Our source for identifying the 5% and 10% most and least deprived local authorities is the Government's "Indices of Deprivation 2007" (an index published once every three years), as taken from the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government (www.communities.gov.uk)

I should alert you to some potential confusion with the figures. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during that period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider. This information is presented in Table A.

A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt Hon Beverley Hughes MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Table A: Inspection data for day care providers between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008
Inspections between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2006 Total inspected 2005/06 Total inspected 2005/06 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2005/06 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 4,740 1,109 86 7.8
10 per cent. most deprived 2,522 611 60 9.8
Inspections between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2007 Total inspected 2006/07 Total inspected 2006/07 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2006/07 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 4,682 1,679 101 6.0
10 per cent. most deprived 2,552 803 65 8.1
Inspections between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2008 Total inspected 2007/08 Total inspected 2007/08 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2007/08 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 4,712 1,786 109 6.1
10 per cent. most deprived 2,547 908 77 8.5
Inspections between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2004/06 Total inspected 2005/06 Total inspected 2005/06 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2005/06 (%)
5 per cent. least deprived 1,636 380 25 6.6
5 per cent. most deprived 1,078 242 22 9.1
Inspections between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2007 Total inspected 2006/07 Total inspected 2006/07 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2006/07 (%)
5 per cent. least deprived 1,593 593 35 5.9
5 per cent. most deprived 1,096 318 21 6.6
Inspections between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008.
LA deprivation level Total day care at 1 April 2008 Total inspected 2007/08 Total inspected 2007/08 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2007/08 (%)
5 per cent. least deprived 1,608 570 27 4.7
5 per cent. most deprived 1,109 381 38 10.0
Notes:

1. All inspection data taken from the Regulatory Support Application (RSA) database as it was at 1 April 2008. Active provider data taken from the RSA database as it was at 6 April 2006, 30 March 2007 and 1 April 2008 respectively. LA deprivation level based on Indices of Deprivation 2007 on the government communities website (www.communities.gov.uk).The majority of the data underpinning the Indices of Deprivation 2007 represents 2005 although some data covers a number of years, for example an average of 2003-05.

2. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during the time period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider.

Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 23 September 2008:

Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for a response.

Our source for identifying both the 10% most and least deprived local authorities is the Government's "Indices of Deprivation 2007" (an index published once every three years), as taken from the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government (www.communities.gov.uk).

Ofsted has been responsible for the inspection of childminders since September 2001. However during the first 18 months we carried out transition inspections where we made an assessment of whether registration should continue and did not give quality grades. We started to judge quality and grade this from April 2003. There are, however, issues relating to the structure of the database used to store inspection outcomes during the period 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2005. These issues make it difficult to present accurate and comprehensive data relating to this period. Furthermore, the inspection framework changed in April 2005 with the result that it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons with the period 2003-05. The inspection data in this response, therefore, relate to the current inspection framework and covers the period 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2008.

I should alert you to some potential confusion with the figures. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during that period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider. This information is presented in Table A.

A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt Hon Beverley Hughes MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Table A: Inspection data for c hildminders between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008
Inspections between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006
LA deprivation level Total childminders at 1 April 2004/06 Total inspected 2005/06 Total inspected 2005/06 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2005/06 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 11,550 2,880 74 2.6
10 per cent. most deprived 4,363 1,209 31 2.6
Inspections between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007
LA deprivation level Total childminders at 1 April 07 Total inspected 2006/07 Total inspected 2006/07 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2006/07 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 11,215 2,844 91 3.2
10 per cent. most deprived 4,464 819 46 5.6
Inspections between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008
LA deprivation level Total childminders at 1 April 2008 Total inspected 2007/08 Total inspected 2007/08 inadequate Proportion inadequate 07/08 (%)
10 per cent. least deprived 10,418 3,330 217 6.5
10 per cent. most deprived 4,114 1,216 123 10.1
Notes:

1. All inspection data taken from the Regulatory Support Application (RSA) database as it was at 1 April 2008. Active provider data taken from the RSA database as it was at 6 April 2006, 30 March 2007 and 1 April 2008 respectively. LA deprivation level based on Indices of Deprivation 2007 on the government communities website (www.communities.gov.uk).The majority of the data underpinning the Indices of Deprivation 2007 represents 2005 although some data covers a number of years, for example an average of 2003-05.

2. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during the time period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider.

Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 23 September 2008:

Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for a response.

Ofsted has been responsible for the inspection of childminders since September 2001. However, during the first 18 months we carried out transition inspections where we made an assessment of whether registration should continue and did not give quality grades. We started to judge quality and grade this from April 2003. There are, however, issues relating to the structure of the database used to store inspection outcomes during the period 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2005. These issues make it difficult to present accurate and comprehensive data relating to this period. Furthermore, the inspection framework changed in April 2005 with the result that it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons with the period 2003-05. The inspection data in this response, therefore, relate to the current inspection framework and covers the period 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2008.

I should alert you to some potential confusion with the figures. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during that period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider. This information is presented in Table A.

A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt Hon Beverley Hughes MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Table A: Inspection data for c hildminders between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008, by Government Office region (GOR)
Inspections between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006
Government office region Total childminders at 1 April 2006 Total inspected 2005/06 Total inspected 2005/06 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2005/06
North East 3,565 772 42 5.4
South West England 6,673 1,852 52 2.8
West Midlands 6,222 2,090 55 2.6
Outer London 8,179 1,855 80 4.3
East of England 8,543 2,435 77 3.2
East Midlands 5,901 1,538 53 3.4
North West England 8,320 2,103 76 3.6
South East England 13,758 3,448 74 2.1
Inner London 3,648 687 43 6.3
Yorkshire and the Humber 6,813 1,752 55 3.1
Inspections between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007
Government office region Total childminders at 1 April 2007 Total inspected 2006/07 Total inspected 2006/07 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2006/07
North East 3,474 755 48 6.4
South West England 6,387 1,786 59 3.3
West Midlands 6,154 1,698 75 4.4
Outer London 8,008 1,268 72 5.7
East of England 8,522 2,652 95 3.6
East Midlands 5,863 1,608 72 4.5
North West England 8,072 1,894 91 4.8
South East England 13,218 3,265 91 2.8
Inner London 3,693 518 41 7.9
Yorkshire and the Humber 6,534 1,599 93 5.8
Inspections between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008
Government office region Total childminders at 1 April 2008 Total inspected 2007/08 Total inspected 2007/08 inadequate Proportion inadequate 2007/08
North East 3,128 1,211 97 8.0
South West England 6,021 1,799 99 5.5
West Midlands 5,574 1,394 109 7.8
Outer London 7,440 2,562 219 8.5
East of England 7,728 2,101 167 7.9
East Midlands 5,449 1,693 150 8.9
North West England 7,350 2,624 203 7.7
South East England 12,452 3,780 183 4.8
Inner London 3,536 1,153 109 9.5
Yorkshire and the Humber 5,970 2,142 189 8.8
Notes:

1. All inspection data taken from the Regulatory Support Application (RSA) database as it was at 1 April 2008. Active provider data taken from the RSA database as it was at 6 April 2006, 30 March 2007 and 1 April 2008 respectively.

2. In order to capture all inadequate ratings following an Ofsted inspection, the data provided give the number and proportion of providers that were inadequate at any time during the time period. Since a provider may receive a re-inspection and no longer be inadequate by the end of the year, these figures do not reflect our other publications which only capture the most recent inspection of a provider.

Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 23 September 2008:

Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for a response.

The information you require is presented in Tables A and B attached.

Our source for identifying the 10% most and least deprived local authorities is the Government's "Indices of Deprivation 2007" (an index published once every three years), as taken from the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government (www.communities.oov.uk).

A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt Hon Beverley Hughes MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Table A: Number of registered childminders in the 10 per cent . most deprived local authorities
2005 2006 2007 2008
LA code LA name Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar
330 Birmingham 983 996 1004 999 1000 1033 1074 1073 1049 1024 1006 942 918
890 Blackpool 154 162 162 164 165 161 153 152 147 133 124 126 118
204 Hackney 224 227 232 240 249 247 252 264 270 265 271 273 268
206 Islington 254 251 250 257 265 269 279 284 280 273 270 269 262
810 Kingston upon Hull 208 226 234 236 242 246 249 243 235 231 211 202 191
340 Knowsley 113 125 129 128 127 130 135 134 129 126 134 129 126
341 Liverpool 232 237 237 237 234 234 228 230 236 237 232 228 230
352 Manchester 400 405 409 418 429 426 429 442 438 424 412 415 424
806 Middlesbrough 154 154 157 163 160 155 151 152 154 153 148 140 138
316 Newham 351 361 363 368 378 377 382 391 380 372 374 365 363
892 Nottingham City 272 281 281 286 283 281 293 298 292 294 301 300 286
355 Salford 253 266 267 275 272 280 284 295 296 292 299 304 297
333 Sandwell 205 206 208 209 210 216 217 221 218 211 205 197 186
861 Stoke on Trent 249 244 240 239 232 230 228 230 224 215 213 208 197
211 Tower Hamlets 119 118 121 121 117 119 124 121 116 117 119 115 110
Total 4171 4259 4294 4340 4363 4404 4478 4530 4464 4367 4319 4213 4114
Table B: Number of registered childminders in the 10 per cent. least deprived local authorities
2005 2006 2007 2008
LA code LA name Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar
800 Bath & NE Somerset 259 260 261 262 262 257 243 240 220 210 201 199 195
867 Bracknell Forest 272 271 272 276 284 290 292 301 299 307 302 296 292
825 Buckinghamshire 969 972 981 991 987 970 957 985 951 914 929 887 865
873 Cambridgeshire 930 947 967 962 952 967 957 960 954 938 893 864 836
850 Hampshire 2517 2558 2549 2559 2569 2595 2553 2575 2519 2448 2418 2360 2337
855 Leicestershire 1013 1006 1011 1004 993 988 982 999 991 973 980 958 938
931 Oxfordshire 991 1004 999 996 991 982 966 1000 965 948 952 935 899
318 Richmond upon Thames 353 346 351 355 348 354 352 344 324 320 322 307 294
857 Rutland 62 62 60 64 60 52 50 52 57 55 56 52 53
803 South Gloucestershire 390 398 390 380 372 370 363 363 343 337 328 321 311
936 Surrey 1855 1897 1883 1918 1950 1959 1935 1940 1866 1840 1854 1833 1785
869 West Berkshire (Newbury) 302 305 298 296 303 290 283 282 269 270 270 273 271
865 Wiltshire 805 811 810 808 803 802 826 844 819 786 790 778 759
868 Windsor & Maidenhead 302 303 307 306 299 290 283 286 259 252 242 237 226
872 Wokingham 353 367 375 380 377 376 378 378 379 377 379 371 357
Total 11373 11507 11514 11557 11550 11542 11420 11549 11215 10975 10916 10671 10418

Does this answer the above question?

Yes1 person thinks so

No0 people think not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.

Annotations

Jim Holder
Posted on 16 Oct 2008 11:09 am (Report this annotation)

Depends upon sampling. If the sampling technique used to undertake the inspections is based on sound demographic analysis then one can obtain a 'true' figure of adequacy/inadequacy by simply scaling up. If inspectors were just taking a 1 in 3 approach ( or one based primarily upon available resource) then the resulting figures are unreliable.