School leaders’ union NAHT is today (Thurs 30 Apr) releasing a new analysis of Ofsted’s inspections under its new framework, launched in September last year.

Reviewing the final reports of more than 650 inspections, it is clear that the likelihood of a ‘needs attention’ judgement for ‘achievement’ or ‘attendance and behaviour’ is significantly higher for schools serving areas of high deprivation or with a higher proportion of pupils with special educational needs.

This raises alarm bells for the government’s ambition of more SEND inclusion in mainstream schools.

The analysis shows that:

• a third (33%) of schools with ‘above average’ pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement for ‘achievement’, compared to less than one in five (18%) schools with ‘below average’ pupil eligibility for free school meals.
• almost one in four (23%) schools with ‘above average’ pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement for ‘attendance and behaviour’, compared to one in ten (10%) schools with ‘below average’ pupil eligibility for free school meals.
• one in five (20%) schools with ‘above average’ numbers of pupils with special educational needs received a ‘needs attention’ judgement for ‘attendance and behaviour’, compared to one in ten (9%) schools with ‘below average’ numbers of pupils with special educational needs.

Paul Whiteman, NAHT general secretary said: “For a long time there have been well-founded concerns that successive Ofsted frameworks have penalised schools serving communities with higher levels of deprivation. Rather than fix that issue, the new framework appears to have compounded it.

“The latest inspection handbook states that to get the ‘expected’ standard, performance measures must meet or be above the national average. Most primary age pupils would immediately spot this as a mathematical howler. It is an impossible demand of schools. While it may not have been Ofsted’s intention, the expectation that results meet crude statistical averages means that schools serving the most deprived communities face an uphill battle.

“There is no lack of ambition on the part of school leaders – they all want every individual pupil and student to achieve the very best outcomes they are capable of. But we also have to recognise that, due to context, for some schools that is a significantly greater challenge than others. Recognising the challenges and barriers to pupils’ progress is to engage with their lived reality. It does not signal any kind of ‘bigotry of low expectations,’ as Ofsted’s HM Chief Inspector has claimed.

“Under Ofsted’s system, schools may do an incredible job in helping pupils who face all manner of challenges in their lives to progress from a poor starting point but still be marked down if overall test scores are below national averages. It’s hard to imagine anything more demoralising for leaders and teachers.

“Not only are these lower grades unfair for schools that operate in more deprived areas, they also actively penalise those that are more inclusive for pupils with SEND. Furthermore, it risks discouraging leaders and teachers from going to work in the very schools that need them the most. This should ring serious alarm bells for the government’s stated White Paper ambition for more pupils with SEND to be educated in mainstream schools.”

School leaders will be debating and voting on motions relating to Ofsted at NAHT’s Annual Conference in Belfast this weekend (1-2 May), including a call for ‘urgent, meaningful reform of the inspection system… which continues to present a danger to the health and safety of school leaders,’ and concern that ‘current data driven performance measures… unfairly penalises inclusive schools.’ (See notes for full motion wording.)

Notes to Editors

NAHT analysed 662 inspection reports published between 12 January and 11 April 2026.  This includes schools that ‘volunteered’ to be inspected when the new inspection framework came into effect. In full, it found that:

Achievement judgement by proportion of disadvantaged pupils served

Schools serving areas of higher deprivation, using free school meals eligibility as an indicator, are more likely to receive a ‘needs attention’ judgement for achievement:

•            a third of schools (33%) with 'above average' pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to less than one in five (18%) schools with 'below average' pupil eligibility for free school meals.

•            three in ten (29%) schools with ‘well above average' pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to one in ten (10%) schools with 'well below average' pupil eligibility for free school meals.

Attendance and behaviour judgement by proportion of disadvantaged pupils served

Schools serving areas of higher deprivation, using free school meals eligibility as an indicator, are more likely to receive a ‘needs attention’ judgement for attendance and behaviour:

•            almost one in four (23%) with 'above average' pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to one in ten (10%) schools with 'below average' pupil eligibility for free school meals.

•            Almost one in five (18%) schools with 'well above average' pupil eligibility for free school meals have received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to one in twenty (5%) schools with 'well below average' pupil eligibility for free school meals.

 

Attendance and behaviour judgement by proportion of pupils with special educational needs support served

The likelihood of receiving a ‘needs attention’ judgement for attendance and behaviour rises alongside the proportion of pupils with special educational needs.

•            One in five (20%) schools with 'above average' numbers of pupils with special educational needs received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to one in ten (9%) schools with 'below average' numbers of pupils with special educational needs.

•            Almost one in ten (19%) schools with 'well above average' numbers of pupils with special educational needs received a ‘needs attention’ judgement, compared to less than one in twenty (3%) schools with 'well below average' numbers of pupils with special educational needs.

 

Hundreds of school leader delegates attending NAHT’s Annual Conference this weekend (1-2 May) in Belfast, will debate and vote on the following motions relating to Ofsted:

Motion 10

Conference recognises that, across all key stages, current data driven performance measures do not support inclusion.

Conference believes that:

• the current methodology used to calculate performance measures unfairly penalises inclusive schools,
• this can damage school reputation with parents and can negatively affect Ofsted judgements, and
• the shortage of specialist SEND provision means more pupils with complex needs are educated in mainstream schools, intensifying the impact of this issue.

Conference calls on National Executive to:

• lobby the government to review current performance measures to ensure they are proportionate and that the methodology used supports inclusion, and
• advocate for accountability measures that actively promote inclusivity and do not penalise schools for meeting the needs of all learners.

Motion 12a

Conference notes and applauds the significant work undertaken by NAHT, including the legal action, to challenge Ofsted over its pedantic and toxic approach to school inspection which continues to present a danger to the health and safety of school leaders.

Conference knows that many members continue to experience unacceptable levels of stress, brutality and unfairness as a result of the current inspection system.

Conference calls on National Executive to strengthen the campaign for urgent, meaningful reform of the inspection system. This should include robustly challenging any practices that perpetuate unfairness, and renewed efforts to secure a system that is genuinely supportive, transparent and focused on school improvement.

Motion 12d

Conference notes the introduction of the revised Ofsted framework and the reports emerging from inspections during 2025–26, which indicate that the changes have not only failed to address longstanding concerns but have, in many cases, made the situation worse. Feedback from members highlights increased stress, heightened workload and a deepening sense of fear among school leaders.

Conference believes that the current framework represents a real threat to the well-being, livelihoods and, in some tragic cases, the lives of education professionals. The high-stakes nature of inspection continues to create an environment of anxiety and risk, undermining both personal health and professional integrity.

Conference further believes that NAHT must escalate its opposition and take urgent, visible action to protect members and to campaign for a system that prioritises support, fairness and the safety of those leading schools.

Conference calls on National Executive to:

• collect and publish comprehensive evidence from members on the worsening impact of the new framework, including testimonies on mental health and well-being,
• intensify political lobbying for the removal of single-word judgements and the creation of a supportive, developmental accountability model,
• launch a high-profile campaign highlighting the risks to life and livelihood posed by the current inspection regime, and
• explore legal, industrial and campaigning strategies to challenge the framework and promote an alternative approach that safeguards leaders and staff.

 

NAHT Conference is available to view via livestream: https://www.naht.org.uk/annualconference