Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted)

5. Mrs R, the manager of a preschool, complains about the way an Ofsted inspector conducted their inspection of the nursery. Specifically, she complains the inspector was dismissive towards staff well-being.

6. Mrs R also complains about how Ofsted handled her complaint about the inspection. Specifically, the inspector failed to consider staff witness statements as evidence and therefore produced a biased report.

7. As a result, Mrs R says staff were left demoralised. She told us she and her staff no longer trust in Ofsted’s inspection process.

8. By bringing her complaint to us, Mrs R would like an apology and if failings are found, service improvements in Ofsted following its own policy.

9. In February 2025, an Ofsted inspector called Mrs R, the manager of the nursery, to inform the setting it was going to be inspected the following day. Mrs R says during the phone call they discussed the importance of staff wellbeing and it was understood staff would be nervous. Mrs R told us she explained to the inspector there is one member of staff who particularly struggles with her anxiety. Mrs R says the inspector assured her the importance Ofsted inspectors place on making staff feel at ease.

10. On the day of the inspection, Mrs R says she greeted the inspector. She says the inspector again mentioned the importance of staff wellbeing. The inspector explained it was the nursery’s inspection, and they would work with Mrs R on how she planned the timings of the day.

11. The inspector asked to see the Single Central Record (record of recruitment and vetting checks for all staff and volunteers). Mrs R says at this time the inspector gave her the number to contact Ofsted on if she became concerned during the inspection. Mrs R says the inspector did not make her feel at ease about using the number whilst the inspection was happening.

12. Mrs R says the inspector met with parents and then returned to her office where she explained she wanted to speak with the newest member of the team. Mrs R told the inspector this was the staff member who struggles with her anxiety. She says the inspector said she could tell the staff member the inspector would like to speak with her.

13. At 9.30am Mrs R told the staff member the inspector would be asking her three questions about her induction. At 12.30pm, Mrs R says the inspector told her they no longer wanted to speak with that staff member. Instead, she says the inspector pointed at another staff member and said they wanted to speak with them as all they had seen was the staff member put cups away. Mrs R said this was said in front of the team and made the staff member cry. Mrs R says the inspector asked her, ‘what’s up with her?’ Mrs R says she was shocked at the inspectors conduct towards her staff.

14. Mrs R says during the learning walk, the inspector did not stick to the timings of the day which she had discussed with the inspector when they first arrived. Mrs R says her staff were upset the inspector only witnessed the end of them facilitating activities yet commenting on the engagement of particular children.

15. Another member of staff says she was given feedback about her not being consistent in her teaching in front of her colleague. She says this did not feel supportive or professional.

16. Mrs R says she raised her complaint with Ofsted three days after the inspection day. She said the inspector’s conduct was not professional and did not consider her staff members’ wellbeing.

17. In its response to Mrs R’s complaint, Ofsted said it did not uphold the complaint. It said it had reviewed the inspector’s evidence of the visit and was satisfied that the inspection had been carried out in accordance with relevant guidance.

18. Mrs R escalated her complaint to the Independent Complaints Adjudication Service for Ofsted (ICASO), the final stage of Ofsted’s complaint process. She understands ICASO could not overturn the inspection judgement but wanted to take issue with the way Ofsted had handled the complaint. She said Ofsted had produced a biased report only taking into account the inspector’s evidence.

The inspector was dismissive towards staff wellbeing

21. Mrs R complains about the conduct of the inspector. She says they were dismissive and caused upset to some staff members. Mrs R says this was not supportive of staff wellbeing.

22. Mrs R says on the phone call the day before the inspection the inspector said staff wellbeing was important and inspectors have regular training to help put staff at ease. Mrs R says the inspector again raised the importance of staff wellbeing on the morning of the inspection. She tells us this did not reflect the inspector’s actions and conduct throughout the inspection.

23. To support her position, she provided six witness statements from staff. The evidence Mrs R submitted shows these statements were made on 8 February 2025. Having read the statements, they mention the following:

• the inspector often compared their setting to the nursery • the inspector did not seem to listen or fully engage when staff replied to her questions • the inspector’s conduct was unprofessional and rude • they felt nervous and on edge throughout the inspection.

24. Ofsted, in its response to Mrs R’s complaint, states all inspectors are highly skilled and experienced. It states it discussed the issues of conduct with the EYRI (Early Years Regulatory Inspectors). The EYRI supports the inspector as part of contract management agreements and have reviewed the inspection evidence from the inspection.

25. As part of its investigation, Ofsted also spoke with the inspector in question and states they did not have the same recollection of the situation as Mrs R and her staff.

26. Ofsted’s response concludes there is no evidence to suggest the inspector acted unprofessionally. Ofsted explained to us that complaints likes these are notoriously difficult to investigate, as it is difficult to obtain fair evidence to reach a fair conclusion. However, it highlighted that where it identifies a trend in complaints about an inspector it will identify this and look into the matter in greater detail.

27. Mrs R took her complaint to the ICASO. The ICASO states it is not in its remit to consider the evidence but is limited to consider whether Ofsted complied with its complaints process by adequately considering and responding to the complainant. It says it is satisfied Ofsted considered Mrs R’s concerns, reviewed all the evidence (including the statements Mrs R provided) and provided a clear response.

28. We would expect inspectors to comply with Ofsted’s EYIH (Early Years Inspection Handbook) and OCOC (Ofsted's Code of Conduct) guidance, and for Ofsted to ensure it has complied. In considering the concerns raised, we agree with Ofsted these issues are very difficult for PHSO and Ofsted to investigate. This is because these are actions that are left to interpretation and there is little objective evidence available. As we were not there during the inspection, and there is no independent evidence we can use, it is difficult for us to reach an objective conclusion of what happened.

29. We note Mrs R has provided staff witness statements, but unfortunately, these recollections, whenever submitted, are often subjective and based on perception, which makes the situation difficult for us to make a clear judgement on.

30. It is clear that Mrs R, and her staff, found their interactions with the inspector challenging but we cannot say with enough certainty that this was the result of maladministration. For this reason, we are declining to take this part of the complaint further.

Complaint handling: Ofsted did not speak with other members of staff.

31. Mrs R complaints Ofsted did not speak with other staff members about the complaint. Mrs R feels it was never going to be a fair investigation as it was Ofsted investigating its own organisation. Mrs R tells us she was not informed other members of staff could be present for the scoping call at the start of the investigation.

32. In its response on 16 May 2025, Ofsted says the ‘Complain about Ofsted’ (2025) guidance states an investigating officer will contact a complainant to explore the scope of the complaint. It states it is not standard practice to enter into a dialogue with the complainant once the scoping conversation has taken place. However, it states Mrs R could have had other staff members present during the scoping call.

33. As part of our work, we asked Ofsted how Mrs R would have been made aware of this prior to her call.

34. Ofsted told us when arranging scoping telephone calls its communications provide complainants with the opportunity to raise any queries about the process or request reasonable adjustments if they have any, such as requesting if additional staff members can sit in on the call. Ofsted further explains it does not state scoping calls can only be taken by the complainant. It told us if Mrs R had asked for staff to be on the call with her, it would have accepted this.

35. The UK Central Government Complaint Standards say organisations should provide clear information to complainants about what they can and cannot expect from the complaints process. The standards say organisations should ensure each stage of the process is responsive to the complainants needs and ensure complainants know how to get advice and support when they make a complaint.

36. In reviewing the emails sent to Mrs R, we consider Ofsted could have gone further in making it clear to Mrs R she could have had staff members present on the call. We recognise this may have given Mrs R more reassurance that her staff members had been heard.

37. We consider this was a shortcoming in the process, rather than a service failure. This is because it is not a requirement of the ‘Complain about Ofsted’ guidance for the Investigating Officer to speak to other members of staff or to enter into further dialogue once the initial scoping conversation has taken place. Additionally, we are aware that the staff were able to submit their witness statements to be considered as part of Ofsted’s investigation and Ofsted did consider these. This means their accounts of the inspection were heard and considered during the investigation process.

38. Overall, we consider that there are indications the Investigating Officer acted in line with Ofsted’s complaints procedure, even though they did not speak to other members of staff.

39. We are therefore not able to take this part of the complaint further as we have seen no indications Ofsted handled Mrs R’s complaint unfairly or outside of its guidance. We appreciate this is not the outcome Mrs R was hoping for, and we are sorry for any further upset this may cause her and her staff.

Complaint handling: Ofsted produced a biased report

40. Mrs R complains Ofsted produced a biased report, favouring the Inspector’s account. She says it was Ofsted investigating itself and so was always going to be biased in its outcome. We are sorry to hear Mrs R and her staff felt the investigation was biased and left them feeling demoralised.

41. In response to this aspect of the complaint, Ofsted says it does not favour the inspector’s evidence over the complainants. It says it considers all information submitted during a complaint investigation and provides its decision based on the available evidence.

42. We have considered whether Ofsted handled the complaint fairly and impartially in line with the UK Central Government Complaint Standards.

43. The UK Central Government Complaint Standards say organisations should take a thorough, proportionate and balanced look into the issues raised in a complaint. Where possible, a colleague who has not been involved in the issues complaint about should look at the complaint. The Standards also say organisations should take everyone’s comments into account. In this case, this means considering the account of Mrs R and her staff and the inspector.

44. We consider there are indications the complaint was investigated in a fair and balanced way, as Ofsted thoroughly considered all parties versions of events before reaching a view. We also note a senior Ofsted staff member who was not involved in the events complained about conducted the formal investigation.

45. We will therefore not be taking this part of the complaint further as we consider there are indications Ofsted acted in line with its complaint guidance and the UK Central Government Complaint Standards.

Conclusion

46. In conclusion, we have decided not to take further action on Mrs R’s complaint for the reasons identified in this report. We recognise Mrs R feels strongly about her concerns and we acknowledge the outcome may be disappointing for her. We thank her for her time and effort in bringing her complaint to us and we wish her, her staff and the nursery all the best for the future.

1. We are sorry to hear about the impact Mrs R and her colleagues at the nursery experienced as a result of Ofsted’s inspection. We can appreciate it was disappointing to feel the inspection did not prioritise staff wellbeing, and to feel that the complaint was not handled appropriately.

2. Having looked at Mrs R’s case, we have decided to not consider it further. This is because we are unable to conclude that the inspector was dismissive towards staff well-being. We also have not seen any indications Ofsted carried out its investigation into her complaint unfairly or without following its guidance.

3. We appreciate why this complaint is important to Ms R, and we recognise this decision may be disappointing for her. We also appreciate the time and effort Mrs R has taken to bring this complaint to us. It is important to note what whilst we will not be investigating the matter further, our decision does not diminish the impact these events had on Mrs R and her staff.

4. We will explain our decision in more detail below. We hope our explanation provides Mrs R with reassurance about how carefully we have considered her complaint before reaching our decision.