What does Ofsted’s ‘Outstanding’ tell us about childcare in deprived areas?

Have you read the recent Nesta report yet? 

The findings suggest that 44% of children reside in what are termed “childcare deserts”— areas where childcare provision is sparse. 

It delves into Ofsted’s latest data on childcare providers and inspections, shedding light on the growing disparities in access to quality Early Childhood Education and Childcare (ECEC).

While the term ‘childcare deserts’ can evoke a sense of hopelessness, the reality as described in the report is concerning particularly as the gaps are mostly prevalent in deprived areas, leaving many vulnerable children without access to high-quality education and care.  

This comes at a time when the UK Government is pushing forward with plans to expand the free childcare entitlement. The use of the term childcare highlights the focus on places which will enable parents to work rather than the language of ECEC which encompasses the wider concept of education and care framed within the quality debate.  

The language of childcare is more useful to the notion of expansion of places, detracting the debate from the deeper issues of quality which depends on well trained staff and strong pedagogies. This could be sensible or cynical given the sector remains chronically underfunded, struggles with recruiting and retaining qualified staff, and is seeing rising numbers of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Added to that are the growing issues of limited support for parents who cannot access the entitlement and thus increasing child poverty. These are long-standing issues that have been discussed for over 20 years. But without a fully-funded, coherent national strategy, it is hard to see how these problems will be effectively addressed. 

But what is Nesta telling us?

Using the Ofsted judgement of ‘Outstanding’ as an indicator of high-quality, they looked at the settings with this rating; in particular, where they are situated.  Employing Ofsted data of allocating childcare providers to one of five deprivation bands, the report noted that in the 2022/23 school year 67.2% of children from deprived areas reached a good level of development compared to 76.6% of children in the least deprived areas. 

Here are the stats:  

• The total number of childcare providers rated as ‘Outstanding’ has decreased from over 9,000 (20% of providers) in 2019 to just over 5,000 (14% of providers) in 2024. 

• They found that the share of places at ‘Outstanding’ providers in the most deprived areas is 14%, compared to 20% in the least deprived areas. This is being driven primarily by disparities in childminding – which account for one in eight places on the Early Years register. 
• Only 6% of places in childminder settings in the most deprived areas received an ‘Outstanding’ rating, compared with 14% in the least deprived areas.  This declining number is due to providers subsequently being rated below ‘Outstanding’, as opposed to outstanding providers leaving the market. 

• For every 1,000 children, the number of childcare places in settings judged ‘Outstanding’ varies considerably. By local authority, Kensington and Chelsea has 104 Outstanding places for every 1,000 children – the highest number in England – whereas Rutland has none. 

The report may not say this but it begs some further discission:

1. Has the decline in ‘Outstanding’ across all provisions got more to do with the new inspection handbook which expects providers to be outstanding at every level and hit every criterion?
2. Is this approach to inspection realistic, when most thoughtful providers always want to improve and would never judge themselves outstanding in everything?
3. Is it fair to insist on such intransigent criteria in a sector trying to address the wider issues of recruitment and retention and the range of quality among new and inexperienced staff?
4. There is no comment about providers like LEYF that choose to go into inferior quality settings in disadvantaged areas because we want to increase, improve, and sustain under-funded and sometimes failing provision.  

Nesta provides a table (see below) that shows the top and bottom ten local authorities in England by the number of places available at those providers who were rated ‘Outstanding’ for every 1,000 children aged 0-5. It confirms there are very stark disparities in the availability of high-quality childcare across parts of England.  

At LEYF, where 75% of our settings are situated in areas of deprivation, 46% of our settings are judged ‘Outstanding’ and the rest are ‘Good’. I wondered if the combined strength of our LEYF pedagogy, the support given to our nurseries from the fantastic LEYF pedagogy coaches, and the quality of training at the London Institute of Early Years are our main success factors?

Maybe these areas of deprivation just need the right model, rather than be allowed to feel that it is their inability to drive ‘Outstanding’ that is the issue?  

The Nesta report highlights a number of complex issues such as to what we mean by quality, the rights of children in deprived areas to access great ECEC and whether the current plan for expansion will help do anything to change this state of affairs. 

Come to the London OBC where Sarah Cattan from Nesta will discuss this report live!