The Ofsted inclusion toolkit is the inclusion section of Ofsted’s inspection toolkit: for further education and skills providers, the part that grades, across the whole provider, how leaders and staff identify and support learners’ needs. This Ofsted inclusion checklist turns it into questions you can check your practice against before inspectors do.
Ofsted’s reports show what separates the grades. Across 496 Ofsted reports on further education and skills providers, published from 12 January to 27 October 2026, the two commonest gaps were written in reports graded needs attention and expected standard, and in none of the 101 graded strong standard or exceptional: staff not equipped to adapt, and support given, impact not reviewed.
What the Ofsted inclusion toolkit is
There is no separate Ofsted inclusion toolkit: inclusion is one of the evaluation areas in the inspection toolkit Ofsted publishes for each remit. For further education (FE) and skills, it is graded across the whole provider under toolkit v2.0, in use from 1 September 2026.
Inclusion is graded on a five-point scale, from urgent improvement to exceptional, and published on the provider’s report card. There is no single overall-effectiveness grade. Ofsted now updates the toolkit once a year, ahead of each September, and this guide reflects the September 2026 toolkit.
The primary sources are Ofsted’s: the FE and skills inspection toolkit, operating guide and information (GOV.UK), and the FE and skills inspection toolkit v2.0 (PDF). This guide explains the inclusion area; for the full text, read the toolkit.
Which learners the inclusion area covers, and the four factors inspectors focus on
The inclusion evaluation area considers how leaders and staff identify and support the needs of learners and apprentices, in particular five groups, through four factors inspectors focus on. The toolkit does not specify a method for assessing needs.
| The five groups | Who that includes |
|---|---|
| Disadvantaged learners and apprentices | Those who received free school meals in the past six years, and those from low-income families. |
| Learners and apprentices with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and those who receive high needs funding | This “includes learners and apprentices who receive additional support with their learning and those with an education, health and care (EHC) plan”, so it reaches well beyond learners with an EHC plan. |
| Those known, or previously known, to social care | Learners and apprentices known to social care now or in the past. |
| Those known, or previously known, to youth-justice services | Learners and apprentices known to youth-justice services now or in the past. |
| Those facing other barriers | Including those previously not in education, employment or training (NEET), and those without level 2 English or maths. |
| The four factors | What inspectors look for |
|---|---|
| High expectations | High expectations set for all learners and apprentices, in particular the five groups. |
| Early and accurate assessment | Establishing “a culture in which early and accurate assessment of learners’ and apprentices’ needs is prioritised”. The toolkit names no method. |
| Reducing barriers | Barriers reduced, involving specialists where appropriate. |
| Working closely | With learners, parents where appropriate, professionals and staff, with learners’ views part of decisions about their support. |
In FE and skills, “there is no requirement for a provider to appoint a special educational needs coordinator (SENCo)”, though inspectors expect someone to coordinate SEND provision.
The five inclusion grades, side by side
Inclusion is graded on five points, lowest to highest: urgent improvement, needs attention, expected standard, strong standard and exceptional. Inspectors check the expected standards first, then strong, then exceptional.
| Grade | What it looks like in toolkit v2.0 |
|---|---|
| Urgent improvement | Likely when any of these apply. Leaders do not identify and assess needs effectively, “and/or this identification and assessment do not have a meaningful impact on the provision”. Leaders do not take account of the needs of learners or groups, in particular the priority groups. “Leaders are not using dedicated funding to support the learners and apprentices it is intended for.” Statutory requirements for learners on high needs funding are not met, with a significantly negative impact. |
| Needs attention | The expected standard is not met. It may include: leaders have only recently started to act to identify and assess needs and reduce barriers; weaknesses or inconsistencies in support have a negative impact on a particular group; leaders’ decisions, for example on high needs funding, do not have the impact intended; staff put their training into practice inconsistently; information about needs is not shared well enough with subcontracted provision or placements, or support there is not monitored closely enough. |
| Expected standard | All of these apply. A culture in which needs are met and learners feel welcome and supported. “Leaders and staff quickly and accurately identify learners’ and apprentices’ learning and support needs”, and programmes adapt as needs emerge or change. An appropriate graduated approach (assess, plan, do, review) that generally meets needs well. “Staff receive suitable training and support to implement this approach.” Appropriate action for the period of need, without lowering expectations. Where there is a leader responsible for SEND, they are qualified, experienced and exercise sufficient leadership. Alternative settings are suitable. Looked-after learners are supported, “having regard to personal education plans, if any are in place”. Where relevant, leaders play their part in the local area partnership’s SEND strategy. |
| Strong standard | The expected standard is met, plus all of these. Strategies consistently enhance opportunities for all, in particular the five groups. Leaders ensure “the barriers to learners’ and apprentices’ learning are reduced swiftly and consistently”, and support is systematically reviewed and adapted. Leaders carefully monitor the progress of all learners, in particular those groups, and “make good use of data to understand the needs of their learners”. Inclusion is embedded, with significant, consistent impact. “Leaders consistently identify when additional learning support is no longer required or can be reduced”, preparing learners for independence. Proactive, evidence-informed adaptations to the inclusion strategy. |
| Exceptional | The strong standard is met, plus: exceptional standards sustained over time; transformational impact on how learners achieve, thrive and belong; no significant unprioritised areas for improvement; learning shared externally. |
The expected standard names the graduated approach. For what it is and how it runs in a college or training provider, our guide answers what is the Ofsted graduated approach?
Where a provider claims learning support funding, the claim is the provider’s own, and it rests on a record of the learner’s need, the support agreed with them and its delivery. That record is also the evidence of practice inspectors look for: good records are evidence of good practice. For the full descriptors, read the FE and skills inspection toolkit v2.0 (PDF).
What changed for inclusion in September 2026
Toolkit v2.0, in use from 1 September 2026, reworded two needs attention indicators and added a line on inclusive mainstream fund plans. It also clarified how looked-after learners’ personal education plans are considered.
| What changed | Before (September 2025 toolkit) | Now (toolkit v2.0) |
|---|---|---|
| Inconsistent support for a group (needs attention, reworded) | “Inconsistent practices have a negative impact on a particular group.” | “Leaders mostly take the right actions to support learners or apprentices, but weaknesses or inconsistencies in providing support have a negative impact on a particular group.” |
| Staff training (needs attention, reworded) | Leaders had not ensured that staff received the necessary training. | “Leaders have considered the training or development that staff require as part of their inclusive approaches but there are inconsistencies in how well staff put these into practice.” |
| Inclusive mainstream fund plans (new) | No such line. | Where providers receive the inclusive mainstream fund for learners aged 16 to 19, “leaders and governors have developed (and published, where necessary) plans and taken steps to strengthen inclusive practice to improve access, participation and outcomes across their provision”. |
Ofsted says it “clarified the ‘needs attention’ indicators to make it clearer why a provider might receive this grade”. At expected standard, looked-after learners are now supported “having regard to personal education plans, if any are in place”. Read Ofsted’s summary of the September 2026 updates.
What inspectors ask in the planning call, and how they case-sample
In the planning call, inspectors ask how leaders make sure staff can identify learners in the five priority groups, and they consider this even if leaders report none. Case sampling then tests it with real learners.
From Ofsted’s operating guide for inspectors, for use from September 2026:
- The planning call. Inspectors explore leaders’ approach “to ensuring that staff are able to identify” learners in the priority groups. The guide tells them “you need to consider this even if leaders have not identified any learners/apprentices who fall into these groups”. If leaders report none, inspectors “reflect on why this may be the case”.
- Case sampling. The sample always includes learners with an EHC plan (and, where possible, a disabled learner), learners on high needs funding and learners known to social care (where possible, a looked-after child). It is likely to involve “reviewing records, speaking with staff who know the learners/apprentices well, and observing routines and support strategies in action”.
- When no one is identified. Inspectors “consider how well staff are supported and trained to be able to accurately identify these learners’ and apprentices’ needs”.
- The SEND lead. An inspector must “meet to discuss inclusion with the leader or leaders who have responsibility for SEND”.
Low identified numbers are a question inspectors ask, not a pass. Ofsted names no method of identification: what inspectors test is whether staff can find needs, early and accurately. Our guide on how to identify learning needs of students compares the ways providers do it and what each one misses.
What Ofsted’s reports say separates the grades
Two gaps stand out in Ofsted’s reports: staff not equipped to adapt, and support given, impact not reviewed. Across 496 Ofsted reports on FE and skills providers published from 12 January to 27 October 2026, inspectors wrote both in reports graded needs attention and expected standard, and never in reports graded strong standard or exceptional.
- Staff not equipped to adapt: in 42 of the 47 reports graded needs attention, 45 of the 257 at expected standard and none of the 101 graded strong standard or exceptional.
- Support given, impact not reviewed: in 26 of the 47 graded needs attention, 38 of the 257 at expected standard and none of the 101 graded strong standard or exceptional.
- Support reviewed, adapted and reduced, the mirror-image strength: in 86 of the 101 graded strong standard or exceptional, and 3 of the 47 graded needs attention.
All 10 findings we count, by inclusion grade:
| Finding | Kind | All 496 reports | Exceptional (7) | Strong standard (94) | Expected standard (257) | Needs attention (47) | Monitoring visits (91) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Staff not equipped to adapt | gap | 111 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 42 | 24 |
| Support given, impact not reviewed | gap | 74 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 26 | 10 |
| Needs found late, or only when declared | gap | 41 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 16 | 8 |
| Data on needs not used | gap | 28 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 2 | 3 |
| Support never stepped down | gap | 26 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 7 | 2 |
| What is known about needs is not shared | gap | 11 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 1 |
| Adjustments used well in the room | strength | 327 | 4 | 77 | 197 | 17 | 32 |
| Support reviewed, adapted and reduced | strength | 281 | 6 | 80 | 176 | 3 | 16 |
| Needs identified early and accurately | strength | 265 | 4 | 72 | 161 | 9 | 19 |
| Learners with needs achieve as well as their peers | strength | 204 | 5 | 46 | 133 | 12 | 8 |
A count is the reports in which inspectors wrote the finding; a report that does not mention one is silent, not clear of it. Monitoring visits grade nothing, so they have their own column, and no report in the period graded inclusion urgent improvement. Counted by Cognassist from Ofsted’s published reports. The excerpts below are verbatim; providers are not named.
Staff not equipped to adapt, in two reports graded needs attention:
However, although trainers have sound industry knowledge and experience, they lack the training to develop learning strategies for individuals with special educational needs and/or disabilities.
Leaders do not ensure that staff receive specific training to deepen their awareness and expertise in supporting apprentices with special educational needs and/or disabilities.
Support given, impact not reviewed, in two more:
Leaders do not systematically review the impact of the support learners with different additional learning needs receive.
Leaders do not yet ensure that staff routinely review, monitor or assess the impact of the support strategies provided.
Support reviewed, adapted and reduced, at strong standard:
They frequently review support plans and adapt these as apprentices’ needs change.
Staff track learners’ progress closely and monitor the effectiveness of support diligently, reducing it swiftly wherever appropriate.
Practice, not paperwork
Inspectors gather evidence on inclusion mainly through professional conversation and joint inspection activity, and Ofsted says it does not need leaders to produce documents for an inspection.
We do not need leaders to produce documents specifically for an Ofsted inspection of their provider. This would create unnecessary workload.
Staff workload, including avoiding unnecessary burdens, is itself inspected under leadership and governance. Good records are evidence of good practice, not a file for inspectors: what matters is that staff can show, in conversation, the support a learner gets and whether it works. For what that practice looks like across a whole provider, read our guide to inclusive practices in education.
The Ofsted inclusion checklist: what it checks
The Ofsted inclusion checklist turns the inclusion area into 30 items in six sections, built on the FE and skills inspection toolkit v2.0, for colleges, training providers and apprenticeship providers. Here is what each section checks, with two of its items.
| Checklist section | What it maps to in the toolkit | Two of its items |
|---|---|---|
| Identifying needs and starting points | The factor on early and accurate assessment; “Identifying, assessing and meeting needs, and reducing barriers” | Every learner’s and apprentice’s learning needs are assessed at the start, across every programme and cohort, not only those with an EHC plan or a declared need. We can say how many learners we have identified in each priority group, and if the number is low or none, why. |
| Support for every learner | The factors on high expectations for all and reducing barriers | Every learner can use study strategies and tools matched to how they learn, whether or not they receive formal support. Use is monitored by cohort and programme. |
| Understanding barriers and adapting teaching | The needs attention indicator on training put into practice inconsistently; reasonable adjustments, under “Identifying, assessing and meeting needs, and reducing barriers” | Tutors and coaches see what the assessment found before they teach. Reasonable adjustments are specific to each learner, and meet the Equality Act 2010 and the SEND Code of Practice. |
| Planning support | The graduated approach in the expected standard; the factor on working closely with learners; the needs attention indicator on subcontracted provision | Plans draw on what the assessment found and on the learner’s own views and aspirations, and the learner agrees them. Staff at subcontracted provision and placements know the learner’s needs, and leaders check the support there. |
| Delivering and reviewing support | The strong standard: support systematically reviewed and adapted, and knowing when it can be reduced | Support is reviewed regularly and adapted when it is not working. We know when support can be reduced or ended, and step learners off it as they become independent. |
| Leadership, monitoring and culture | The expected standard on the leader responsible for SEND; the strong standard on monitoring progress and using data | An experienced leader is responsible for SEND and can explain how inclusion works across the provider. Leaders monitor the progress of learners with additional needs, by group, and use the data to act. |
The checklist covers learning needs: identifying them, supporting them and showing the support works. It does not cover the pastoral side of the area. It is a guide to prepare with, not a guarantee of a grade: Ofsted endorses no checklist, and the grade is the inspectors’ to give.
The full 30 items, and what inspectors wrote at each grade, are in the PDF.
Inclusion at strong standard: one provider’s practice
Educationwise, a national training provider, had inclusion graded strong standard when Ofsted inspected it in July 2026. In the report, published 22 September 2026, inspectors found “comprehensive and rigorous processes to assess swiftly the support that apprentices and adult learners need”.
They review the support they provide critically and adjust this over time to ensure that it remains impactful or can be removed.
That is the strength counted above: support reviewed, adapted and reduced appears in 86 of the 101 reports graded strong standard or exceptional, published from 12 January to 27 October 2026, and Educationwise’s report is one of them. In the same report’s apprenticeships judgement, inspectors also found that “nearly all apprentices who have an identified barrier to learning and remain on their programme achieve their qualification”.
Cara Anderson, Internal Quality Assurer at Educationwise, on identifying needs for every learner from enrolment:
For us it was always every learner. Maths and English initial assessments are mandatory, and when we first started in 21/22, we wanted all learners to have the same opportunities.
We give the learner all the tools and support they need from the start of the qualification, rather than two, three, six months in. We can identify those barriers straight away, and we know exactly how to support them.
And on stepping support down, which the strong standard asks leaders to identify:
At any point throughout their journey, they have an option to opt out, we refer to it as learner support graduation. All learners have an opportunity to opt back in at any point.
Educationwise has used Cognassist since 2021. The grade, and the practice inspectors found, are its own.
Read how Educationwise makes support part of every apprenticeship
Short answers
What are Ofsted’s evaluation areas for FE and skills?
Up to four are graded across the whole provider: safeguarding (met or not met); inclusion; leadership and governance; contribution to meeting skills needs (FE colleges, sixth form colleges and designated institutions only). Three are graded by provision type: curriculum, teaching and training; achievement; participation and development.
What are the seven principles of inclusion?
The FE and skills inspection toolkit does not set out seven principles of inclusion. It names four factors inspectors focus on: high expectations, early and accurate assessment, reducing barriers and working closely with learners. They are set out in the four factors inspectors focus on.
Does the inclusion area apply to independent training providers?
Yes. The FE and skills inspection toolkit covers independent training providers, including apprenticeships up to level 7, as well as colleges, employer providers and other FE and skills providers. Inclusion is graded across the whole provider for each.