Ofsted inspections - West Midlands

Coventry 2006

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice – 3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3 (Service described as good and providing good value for money).

Also of interest...

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Dudley 2007

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 2; Quality of youth work practice – 2; Quality of curriculum and resources – 2; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 2 (Service described as adequate and providing satisfactory for money).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Herefordshire 2005

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 2; Quality of youth work practice – 2; Quality of curriculum and resources – 1; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 2(Service described as adequate and providing satisfactory value for money).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Sandwell 2006

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 2; Quality of youth work practice –2; Quality of curriculum and resources – 2; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 2(Service described as adequate and providing satisfactory value for money).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Shropshire 2008

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice –3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3(Service described as good).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Solihull 2008

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice –3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3(Service described as good).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Staffordshire 2005

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice –3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3(Service described as good and providing good value for money).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Stoke-on-Trent 2006

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice –3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3(Service described as good and providing good value for money).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Telford and Wrekin 2008

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice –3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3 (Service described as good).

Grade 4: A service that delivers well above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 3: A service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users:

Grade 2: A service that delivers only minimum requirements for users:

Grade 1: A service that does not deliver minimum requirements for users.

Walsall 2005

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 4; Quality of youth work practice – 4; Quality of curriculum and resources – 4; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 4 (Service described as inadequate and providing unsatisfactory value for money).

The table above shows overall grades about provision. Inspectors make judgements based on the following scale: Very Good (1), Good (2), Adequate (3) and Inadequate (4).

Warwickshire 2005

Youth service key aspect grades: Standards of young people’s achievement – 3; Quality of youth work practice – 3; Quality of curriculum and resources – 3; Strategic and operational leadership and management – 3 (Service described as adequate and providing satisfactory value for money).

The table above shows overall grades about provision. Inspectors make judgements based on the following scale: Very Good (1), Good (2), Adequate (3) and Inadequate (4).

Wolverhampton 2004

(Service described as satisfactory and providing satisfactory value for money).

Worcestershire 2004

(Service described as satisfactory and providing satisfactory value for money).





Young Researcher Network website
Youth Work 4 Health
Find out more about Hear By Right and What's Changed
Youth Information