I've read a lot of ofsted inspection reports that have a "good" rating for childminders but whilst some are simply "good" others have a section that states "this childminder is not yet outstanding because of a,b and c" - I just wondered why this is on some good reports and not others. Does anyone know?

I don't know the answer, but don't want to read and run, so here's a suggestion.

:idea: Why not spend a little time on the Ofsted site looking at inspection reports, to see what the recent 'good' ones say?

I do know that most if not all CMs are given verbal feedback at the end of each inspection, including comments on where they can improve. Some find this useful, others find it insulting. :p

It's worth understanding that we work in the unreal world of childcare where some idiot dreamed up the culture of 'continuous improvement' - so all inspectors are expected to find fault and tell every CM how to do their job a bit better, otherwise their manager thinks they're not doing their job properly IYSWIM. In practice, it means the worst thing you can possibly be is perfect in any respect, as you'll instantly be required to tinker with your perfection in an effort to improve, and thereby instantly mess it up.

In short, the watchword is "If it ain't broke, you must certainly fix it." :p

I've read a lot of ofsted inspection reports that have a "good" rating for childminders but whilst some are simply "good" others have a section that states "this childminder is not yet outstanding because of a,b and c" - I just wondered why this is on some good reports and not others. Does anyone know?

My understanding is the wording you mentioned changed when Ofsted made Satisfactory 'requires improvement'.
There is an article on this and if I find the announcement I will post the link for you.

Hope it helps

My understanding is the wording you mentioned changed when Ofsted made Satisfactory 'requires improvement'. There is an article on this and if I find the announcement I will post the link for you. Hope it helps

Ah that would make sense, thanks Simona :-) Would be great to see the article if you can find it :-)

It sounds like you are looking at more recent ones from 2012 and ones prior to that because the older ones were very different and didn't have information on the front page. It's the ones since September 2012 that have the information you referred to.