Ofsted has been endlessly criticised within government – not least because of its grossly inefficient inspections of school finances.  Time and again Ofsted inspectors have announced that the school is well run financially, and then it is revealed that during the inspection wholesale theft has been going on.

The Schools News Service (www.schools.co.uk/subscribe.html) has been particularly outspoken on this issue.

Ofsted also made itself a laughing stock when it inspected itself and get itself the highest possible level of grades for its own performance.    Then it admitted in the middle of the Baby P scandal that it only kept records for 3 months – thus when it referred back to previous inspections and reports it was in fact working from non-existent documentation.

Now at last voices are being raised.   Councils, headteachers and MPs who have accused the inspectorate of being “flawed, wasteful and failing”.

Ofsted is to have several aspects of its inspection techniques brought under the spotlight.  One example being quoted is a school that was marked down because a playground fence was deemed to be too low.

Worse, as we all know, Ofsted sub-contracts everything – but has little control over the quality of its inspection regime.

The most damning criticism has come from the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS), which represents the head of children’s departments in councils in England. The body said that new annual performance profiles being developed by Ofsted were “not fit for purpose”.

A spokesman for Ofsted said: “We are disappointed to hear the ADCS criticisms but have to say that their views just don’t accord with what we are being told by directors and frontline social workers who have actually experienced our children’s services inspections. The feedback we are getting is much more positive.”

The children, schools and families select committee will shortly publish a report saying that Ofsted’s inspectors aren’t trained properly and inspections focus too much on exam data. Committee chair Barry Sheerman claimed that schools in poor areas were “aggrieved” that even when they had improved they could still be failed because of low exam results.

I think most of us in education have known this for a long, long, time.