Early Years Foundation Stage Safeguarding Assurance Declaration 2025

Early Years Foundation Stage S3 Safeguarding Assurance Declaration April 2025

Statutory Drivers The safeguarding duties within the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) are underpinned by the Childcare Act 2006. Specifically: Section 39(1)(b) of the Childcare Act 2006 gives legal force to the safeguarding and welfare requirements through regulations Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 provides the GSCP with the mandate to be assured

Gloucestershires Gloucestershire s Safeguarding Children Safeguarding Children Partnership (GSCP) Partnership (GSCP) have the responsibility, under WT2023 and their published arrangements, to provide assurance to the Safeguarding Executive that Early Years settings within Gloucestershire meet the requirements described within the relevant EYFS legislation.

Purpose Its purpose is multi faceted it is to offer the settings leadership and staff assurances that they know their duties, have processes in place to meet those duties, to know what is required to fill any gaps identified. Offers the GSCP and the Local Authority assurances that settings have a grasp on their duties under the EYFS legislation.

Ambition Settings see a wider engagement within their own staffing and leadership cohort in their assessment processes Settings own the declaration as their statement of effectiveness Settings have longer to assess themselves and can be open, honest in identifying areas for improvement

Compliance The GSCP developed with the sector the EYFS self assessment process. Working Together and the GSCP Published arrangements makes this a statutory obligation. The GSCP test compliance annually submitting a report to the GSCP Executive

Compliance The Declaration procedure is broken down into five sections as defined within Statutory Guidance. Standard one: Standard one: Suitable people Standard two: Standard two: Qualifications, training, support and skills Standard three: Standard three: Health Standard four: Standard four: Safety and Suitability of Premises, Environment and Equipment Standard five: Standard five: Policy and Procedure

Compliance S Submission compliance ubmission compliance A combination of the percentage of the online self- assessment completed How recent was the last review of the self-assessment. Assurance compliance Assurance compliance Percentage of setting who are fully assured regard's the requirements of the EYFS standards. Quality Compliance Quality Compliance A review of the quality of the supporting evidential content of the free text answers, specifically if the information provided justifies the assurance status selected.

Childminders Compliance Data 2024/2025 269 Childminders registered on the audit website 247 (92%) Childminders accessed the assessment 19% (50 settings) completed the declaration by 95% or more 73% (197 settings) completed the declaration by less than 20% of all the answers submitted: 21% of answers were deemed to have sufficient evidence 19% of answers were deemed to have partial evidence 60% of answers were deemed to have insufficient evidence 15 Childminders were dip sampled for the quality review The proportion of sufficiently evidenced answers declined as the assurance declaration continued. Standard 1 = 34% of answers had sufficient evidence Standard 5 = 11% of answers had sufficient evidence

Daycare Compliance Data 2024/2025 274 Daycare settings registered on the audit website 257 (93%) Accessed the site 37% (102) completed the declaration by 95% or more 56% (154 settings) completed the declaration by less than 20% of all the answers submitted: 51% of answers were deemed to have sufficient evidence 23% of answers were deemed to have partial evidence 26% of answers were deemed to have insufficient evidence 14 Daycare provisions were dip sampled for the quality review There is no change in quality of answers submitted as the assurance declaration progresses.

Compliance 2024/2025 The current position not all settings have even logged in Those that have logged not all have some form of submission Not all have completed within an ideal timeframe The majority identified themselves as fully assured against all standards The majority of free text answers were of insufficient quality Most Submissions suffered from trailing off information for the latter standards A number (too many) used one word or phrases such as we have a policy

Good Practice Timeliness Settings showing recent access to their submission Multiple reviewers Identification of non- compliant areas, detailed actions to rectify Consistency of submission throughout SMART actions to improve settings practice. A few submissions reviewed were identified as exemplar we aim to share with permission

Key Takeaways This isn t an inspection However it s backed by WT2023 - Statutory Involve others Fill in consistently, don t trail off on detail by S5 Be SMART what are you doing who's responsible and by when Its ok to be honest are you really fully assured against all standards? really ! Is what you ve said Good or Standard Practice. Overselling doesn t provide assurances The exemplars identified aren t those setting who are fully compliant

Questions