Concerns raised over safety of children in alternative provision

A report by the inspectorate found that the majority of staff looking after troubled and vulnerable children in alternative provision had no child protection training. Meanwhile only one in four settings inspected had written information on child protection.

"Alternative providers were often not well informed enough about aspects such as child protection, the use of social media by pupils and general e-safety," the report states.

"Providers frequently encountered serious safeguarding concerns that they had to refer to schools."

The watchdog inspected 165 schools and the 448 alternative providers they used to educate excluded and other vulnerable pupils, over a period of three years. It found that 92 per cent of providers had a risk assessment in place, however in half of these cases, it was insufficient.

"Risk assessment documents had usually been generated by the school or in some cases by the provider or the local authority, but there had not been any discussions between the school and provider prior to pupils’ placements about whether the assessment was accurate or appropriate for each pupil," the report states.

Six per cent of providers had no conversations with schools about potential safety risks for pupils, such as drug abuse, sexting, online grooming and sexual exploitation, mental health issues and forced marriage.

The watchdog also raised concerns that pupils can spend all, or the majority, of their week, at a placement that is not inspected because it is too small to be covered by the Department for Education’s inspection remit. Ofsted has called on the DfE to give it more powers to inspect these smaller providers.

It also found that, over the course of the three years, 14 providers were not registered when they should have been.

“This is a very worrying situation, particularly considering that the schools were sending some of their most vulnerable pupils to these placements, sometimes for five days a week,” the report states.

A quarter of schools surveyed had too narrow a curriculum, and there were “substantial gaps” in the timetables of one in 10 pupils, Ofsted found.

Some alternative providers failed to offer English and maths, although this has improved since 2011 when alternative providers were last inspected, the report states.  

It concluded that despite these weaknesses, many schools had taken a more considered approach to alternative provision than they were in 2011, and were refusing to use provision that wasn’t up to a good enough standard.

Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), said Ofsted had "missed a vital opportunity" to recommend how the future of alternative provision can be secured in the longer term.
 
“The narrow curriculum on offer, and seen in too many alternative provision settings, comes as a direct result of the DfE’s ongoing failure to address the current weaknesses in initial teacher education and the recruitment crisis.

“Special educational needs and disability (SEND) and behaviour training remain insufficient for many new teachers, and opportunities for ongoing professional development in these areas are limited for many experienced teachers.

“The recruitment crisis that mainstream schools are facing in English and Maths is particularly acute within alternative provision and yet the DfE has yet to instigate an action plan for this sector.”

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “Every setting should be delivering an excellent education while ensuring the safety and wellbeing of pupils, and we welcome Ofsted’s recognition of the progress we have made with alternative provision.

“However, we recognise there is still work to be done to make alternative provision even more rigorous, and we will be coming forward with plans in due course.”