A London primary school is demanding a 鈥渓essons learnt review鈥 from Ofsted after eight inspectors visited three times over two academic years. Inspectors first visited in Thornton Heath in July last year. The school is part of the Manor Trust. However, they said more evidence was needed, so made a rare revisit in October (just 37 revisits were made between September 2019 and March 2023). A third visit followed in March this year to allow inspectors to gather yet more evidence. Their report, published in March, rated the school 鈥榬equires improvement鈥. Clare Cranham, the schools鈥 headteacher, said the school wanted to meet Ofsted to discuss what lessons could be learnt. The saga 鈥渢ook up valuable staff time鈥, she said, while adding Ofsted must ensure its 鈥渄ecision-making is robust and evidence-based鈥 and its 鈥渋nternal moderation process is fit for purpose鈥. Ofsted said the extra visits were to 鈥済ather additional evidence to ensure our evidence base was secure鈥, which ensured the 鈥渞ight judgment was ultimately reached鈥. It has apologised. ‘Many shortcomings’ But Alan Chambers, chair of The Manor Trust, claimed there had been 鈥渕any shortcomings鈥. 鈥淭hese had a damaging impact on our staff and pupils鈥 wellbeing that we believe was both unacceptable and avoidable; at a minimum we expect key learnings can be taken so other schools do not endure a similar experience,鈥 he said in a letter to parents last week. Inspectors found that 鈥減upils enjoy attending鈥 the school and that they knew that staff 鈥渃are and want them to do well鈥. But they needed more help 鈥渢o achieve the academic success they are capable of鈥 and that 鈥渢oo many are regularly absent from school鈥, among other issues. Cranham said the school had 鈥渃oncerns鈥 after the first visit and flagged a 鈥渘umber of inaccuracies鈥 with Ofsted about its subsequent draft report. After moderation, Ofsted told her elements of its inspection evidence base were found to be 鈥渘ot sufficiently secure鈥, she said. The school said it requested a new full inspection at this time, but was told this was not possible. Instead, two different inspectors carried out thee first revisit in October last year. The school again raised concerns about the inspection process and the content of the second draft report. Eight of 14 complaints were upheld, Cranham said. Final report ‘from three visits by eight inspectors’ An Ofsted regional director later told the school a third visit would take place, led by a team from a different region. 鈥淭he final report has been complied from evidence gathered over all three visits by a total of eight inspectors over three consecutive terms and two academic years,鈥 Cranham said. 鈥淭he impact on a school when Ofsted get it wrong is immense and impacts at every level鈥 [we] do not want any other schools to go through this.鈥 She was critical of Ofsted undertaking its own complaint investigation, which 鈥渞elied completely on the notes made by the inspectors at the time of the inspection; there was little attempt to talk to staff or parents.鈥 Ofsted recently made changes to its complaints process, following a review last year. ‘Extremely unusual’ Adrian Gray, an education consultant and former Ofsted inspector, said the case was 鈥渆xtremely unusual鈥, adding: 鈥淭he key issue is how long can you be incomplete.鈥 鈥淲hen the time span is as long as it was between the start and the end, schools change鈥 The point of incomplete inspection is to return because inspection is still live.鈥 He suggested Ofsted should have voided the inspection after the second visit, although there is no guidance on how long an inspection can be incomplete. The school was rated 鈥榞ood鈥 in 2017 before it became an academy two years later. An Ofsted spokesperson said: 鈥淎ll of the judgments we make about a school are important and we have processes in place to make sure they consistently and accurately reflect the evidence collected. 鈥淲here our quality assurance process identifies gaps in evidence, we will return to gather additional evidence. 鈥淲e rightly apologised to the school for the inconvenience caused.鈥