Ofsted confirms changes to inspection framework

Ofsted has now published details of its new approach to the inspection of schools and other education providers, having carried out a full public consultation on its proposals earlier this year. 

Ofsted’s consultation outcome has been published alongside an updated education inspection framework, new inspection toolkits and operating guides for inspectors, with the changes due to take effect from 10 November 2025. 

The new approach to inspection

The consultation outcome confirms the removal of single-phrase judgements for overall effectiveness, while retaining grades for individual evaluation areas. The new approach introduces a five-point grading scale from ‘exceptional’ through to ‘urgent improvement’, which will apply across six core evaluation areas for all schools:

• Inclusion.
• Curriculum and teaching.
• Achievement.
• Attendance and behaviour.
• Personal development and well-being.
• Leadership and governance. 
• (Plus additional judgements for early years and post-16 where relevant).

Safeguarding will continue to be evaluated separately, with schools receiving a ‘met’ or ‘not met’ grade for this area.

In terms of reporting, Ofsted has prioritised parental needs. The new ‘report cards’ will set out the grade for each evaluation area along with narrative findings and contextual data about the school, and the consultation outcome acknowledges that, “report cards first and foremost have been, and should be, designed for parents and carers.”

With the new format, Ofsted aims to provide more detailed findings, and crucially, a more balanced assessment of each school’s performance.

What has changed since the consultation was launched?

Ofsted has incorporated consultation feedback through several key adjustments to its original proposals. These include a reduced number of core evaluation areas, with the stated aim of ensuring greater consistency and reducing workload for school staff. Terminology used in the grading scale has been amended to increase clarity, and the definitions have been tightened for improved differentiation.

Ofsted’s new methodology has also undergone some further changes, and the previous ‘best fit’ approach – which has long attracted criticism for leaving too much to the discretion of individual inspectors – has now been replaced by a ‘secure fit’ model.

The aim here is a more standardised approach: schools will now need to meet every standard within a grade in order for that grade to be awarded, with ‘expected standard’ to be considered as the starting point in each case. 

Balancing inclusion and achievement

While some of the new core evaluation areas will be familiar to those used to the current framework, ‘inclusion’ and ‘achievement’ were not previously inspected as standalone areas. 

Ofsted’s continuous message has been that disadvantaged and vulnerable children are at the heart of their reforms, that inclusion takes centre stage and that achievement matters for all groups. However, schools and trusts have consistently raised concerns that Ofsted insufficiently considers individual school contexts when evaluating outcomes and attainment.

Schools serving higher proportions of SEND pupils and socioeconomically disadvantaged students may have concerns about the enhanced focus on achievement, particularly when measured against national attainment and progress benchmarks.

Ofsted will argue that the toolkits have been designed to cater for this and that the evidence-gathering in this area is not just about the pure data. The coming months will test whether that translates on the ground and whether the report cards will effectively communicate the impact of these challenges to parents. 

Will the changes deliver greater consistency?

Our experience with schools and trusts confirms that inconsistency across inspections remains a significant source of dissatisfaction, and this is often felt particularly keenly by larger multi-academy trusts who experience frequent inspections.

Ofsted has recognised the need to improve consistency, and the consultation outcome sets out various changes aimed at addressing these concerns in terms of gradings, including measures around quality assurance and moderation. 

Changes to inspection methodology, including the new ‘secure fit’ approach and additional transparency in the toolkit around the types of evidence inspectors should consider also aim to increase consistency in outcomes by reducing the degree of discretion awarded to individual inspectors.

Unpleasant surprises…

While inspections cannot be identical – requiring flexibility to accommodate individual school characteristics and inspector personalities – what often causes frustration for schools and trusts, and leads to complaints about inspection, is “surprises” in the inspection experience.

Inconsistency in inspectors’ approach to evidence gathering, and to interactions with staff and leaders, have historically been repeated points of concern. The tension that these “surprises” create can send an inspection entirely off-course. 

It’s unclear whether the new approach goes far enough to constitute the kind of institutional change that Ofsted has been under pressure to deliver, but ultimately, improving dialogue and collaboration between inspectors and schools will be essential in ensuring an inspection outcome is perceived to be fair. 

Notably, there has been a significant reduction in inspection complaints during the last academic year compared to 2022-2024. This is indicative, hopefully, of Ofsted’s action thus far, and perhaps in particular the removal of overall effectiveness grades.

Wider issues

The consultation outcome leaves several broader questions and concerns unaddressed. Many stakeholders have questioned whether the new framework amounts to genuine change – are the reforms little more than rebranded terminology?

Returning to the catalyst for these reforms – the death of Ruth Perry and subsequent findings – underscores the profound impact inspection can have on lives and careers. It remains to be seen whether these reforms will adequately mitigate the impact of inspection on school staff.

On a highly relevant point, the Department for Education’s (DfE) parallel consultation outcome on school accountability reform, published alongside the Ofsted reforms, confirms that, where Ofsted judges schools to be underperforming, mandatory intervention remains on the cards. 

Immediate structural intervention remains the default policy position for schools in special measures, and, until September 2026 (allowing RISE to build its capacity in the interim), for schools requiring significant improvement.

Although the increased reliance on RISE teams (for “stuck” schools and, eventually, schools requiring significant improvement) does mean a shift away from forced academisation and re-brokerage in those cases, high stakes are still at play. 

What happens next?

Ofsted will begin inspecting under the new framework from 10 November 2025, but until Christmas will prioritise schools that have volunteered to undergo inspection. This allows Ofsted an initial period to evaluate and further shape the new process.  

The DfE also proposes to launch a further consultation this term on options for using its new RISE teams to address low attainment in schools, so further routes to (non-structural) intervention could be on the cards. 

Importantly, the future position on intervention remains subject to the contents and enactment of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is currently making its way through Parliament. The revised policy approach for maintained schools requiring significant improvement (as explained above) depends on this legislation coming into force, as it will remove directive academy orders for failing maintained schools.