Staff training programmes by early years providers are not a case of all present and correct, say the inspectors. Mary Evans looks at how they are getting into shape
Nurseries are increasingly setting up their own training provision to combat the sector's staff recruitment and retention crisis. But the conclusion of the first batch of reports from the new training inspection body is that they 'could do better'.
While the Dorset-based Tops Day Nursery is hailed in the Adult Learning Inspectorate's (ALI) first annual report as a 'world-class' training provider, others have been found wanting.
Childcare is included in the health, social care and public services area of learning, and of the 91 inspections conducted in this category in ALI's first year, only 55 per cent were graded as satisfactory or better, compared with 58 per cent for all other areas of learning.
The ALI, which started work last April, was established by the Learning and Skills Act 2000 to place inspection of adult learning and work-based training within the remit of one body.
A Common Inspection Framework ensures that inspectors make fair and comparable assessments. It requires inspectors to form an overall judgement on how effective and efficient the provision of education and training is for meeting learners' needs, and why.
Early years providers whose training has been assessed say the new regime is ten times tougher than an Ofsted inspection.
Margaret Swift, a full-time ALI inspector who specialises in early years, says inspectors only work to the criteria laid down in the Common Inspection Framework.
'There is a wide variation between providers. I was lead inspector on Tops and it was outstanding, but the message for the sector is that we have to do better. We found that of the on-the-job training sessions we inspected, 54 per cent were good or better and 9 per cent were less than satisfactory. But for the off-the-job or classroom sessions, the training was only cited as a strength in 15 per cent of inspections.'
Ms Swift says providers are failing to ensure learners develop an understanding of the theory upon which their practical training is based, training in key skills is poor, some classroom sessions are poorly planned and sometimes learners are prevented from even attending classroom sessions because of work commitments.
Generally, all providers are scoring lower grades under the new system, a fact acknowledged in the ALI's annual report.
One training manager explains, 'The Adult Learning Inspectorate examines how learners learn and achieve and the support that is in place. The old training and skills council inspections looked at the processes in place to ensure that learners achieve. This is why some re-inspections by ALI have been awarded lower grades than those from the TSC.'
Another training manager adds, 'They are trying to drive up standards. Inspections are tough, but that is only right and proper. We must be sure that public money is being spent well and that young people are receiving a good training and the childcare sector is being presented with people who can meet the recruitment crisis and do their jobs effectively.'
Each provider is to be inspected every four years. Provision that is judged as less than satisfactory will be re-inspected - normally within the year. Providers are generally given six to 12 weeks' notice of an inspection. Inspections are carried out by full-time inspectors and part-time associate inspectors with knowledge and experience of early years. Providers are invited to nominate a senior member of staff to take part in the team.
Most inspections involve two to ten inspectors and take place over a week. Inspectors' judgements are based on evidence including observations of learning, interviews with learners and providers' staff and documentary evidence relating to training, assessment, verification and awards. They also pinpoint examples of good and poor practice.
ALI spokeswoman Gill Davison says that variations in what the different qualification awarding bodies demand do not make it difficult to assess a provider's quality. 'Our inspectors are occupational specialists who are fully aware of the different requirements of the awarding bodies. The differences are not that great anyway,' she says. 'The awarding bodies specify the competencies required, but not how they are achieved. The quality of the training delivered is, therefore, the responsibility of the provider.'
Ms Swift says the lynchpin to the process is the annual self-assessment exercise that providers have to conduct. But she explains, 'Self-assessment is a skill and we find a wide range in the quality of self-assessment reports.'
She adds that inspection advice and support is readily available, for example via ALI's website, conferences, pre-inspection meetings and ALI link inspectors attached to Learning and Skills Councils.
While the quality of work-based training at Tops is described as outstanding, other providers score well. Work-based learning, management and leadership at Aston Training Centre, a division of the Happy Child chain in west London, are described as 'satisfactory', while its 'quality of the provision is adequate to meet the reasonable needs of those receiving it.
'Staff are set clear performance targets. People from minority ethnic groups are well represented among staff and apprentices, and the training provision is effectively monitored for equality of opportunity.
'Feedback from employers and apprentices is collected using a well-established system. Information gained is used to good effect. However, not all quality assured systems are carried out consistently.'
Fawley Nursery Training Centre near Southampton was found to have 'particularly good' retention rates for modern apprenticeships and national vocational qualification (NVQ) training and 'good' on-the-job training.
The report also notes, 'Assessors make good use of learners' experiences to help them develop their understanding. Written evidence is used extensively, but insufficient use is made of other methods such as oral questioning and witness testimonies.
It also notes 'flexible arrangements which allow learners to train at their own convenience' and 'good or satisfactory' training sessions.
The report on Kindercare, which was recently bought by Busy Bees, highlights as key weaknesses poor awareness of equal opportunities, lack of quality assurance procedures and insufficiently thorough NVQ processes. It praised the chain's clear plans for the recruitment of modern apprentices, good retention rates and progression within the company and good work placements.
Sarah Carr, former chairman of the Kindercare chain, says, 'It was the first inspection of our training and they were very, very picky. I suppose they were only doing their job. It was ten times more onerous than an Ofsted inspection. We have made everything much more formal now.'
The chain thought it was operating an effective equal opportunities policy. But Mrs Carr says, 'We found you need evidence to prove you have every angle covered. It was not good enough to appeal to Asian girls by saying in our posters "We are an equal opportunities employer". They said we should show positive images. We had to prove we were pro-active in our delivery of equal opportunities, and it was not just by accident we had three male trainees.' The overall judgement on the work-based training, management and leadership of Inglewood House nursery near Reading said it was 'satisfactory, although quality assurance is unsatisfactory. The quality of the provision is adequate to meet the reasonable needs of those receiving it.'
Sue Pumffrey, NVQ training manager for Inglewood House, one of the largest day nurseries in the country, says, 'We had highlighted the weaknesses ourselves in our self-assessment report and were already in the process of addressing them before the inspection, but that was not enough for the inspectors. Since then we have made changes and rewritten our quality assurance policy and put different policies and procedures into place.
'It was our first inspection as a training provider and it was ten times worse than an Ofsted inspection. We were praised for the way we celebrate cultural diversity but criticised over equal opportunities. We do advertise, but it is difficult if we cannot find the girls from ethnic minorities to come and train with us.
'We were sent a draft of their report and there were things in it we felt were inaccurate. We felt we had been unfairly judged and were upgraded.'
The report of the Kinderquest chain says in summary, 'The quality of provision is not adequate to meet the reasonable needs of those receiving it. More than one third of the work-based training is unsatisfactory and Kinderquest's leadership and management are unsatisfactory.'
A Kinderquest spokeswoman says that the company had been aware of its weaknesses and had addressed some of them. She stresses, however, that the inspection relates only to training delivered internally by Kinderquest.
'It does not reflect, in any way, Kinderquest's or Kinderquest Support Services' performance as a provider of workshop training and external NVQs on behalf of Early Years Development and Childcare Partnerships and childcare providers.'
