OFSTED do listen to parental feedback, but they don?t accept it?s a true picture until it is researched. The OP is clearly concerned about safeguarding, but the inspectors will not automatically speak to her about it, so she can?t assume it wasn?t investigated.
OK ? to add to the debate; some anecdotes,
Parents complaining OFSTED didn?t take their comments seriously ? 17 parents complained that the school gives too much homework, but about the same number say they don?t give enough. OFSTED reports that parents raised homework in the questionnaire, but generally parents were very happy with the school and when giving feedback to the SLT and governor explain that they realise the school can?t keep all the people happy all the time.
Parent reports that they are not happy with the ?lunchbox police?. They don?t like the fact that their child is not supposed to bring peanut butter sandwiches, and when he did he had to eat them on a different table to his two friends. ? I needn?t explain why nuts including peanut butter are no-go foods and that this is made clear in the prospectus and various letters, and why he can?t sit with these particular friends on the days his mum decides it?s still OK to send peanut butter. OFSTED didn?t take the complain seriously.
Parent expressed safeguarding concerns regarding the appointment of a member of staff. A parent they have had an argument with in a personal capacity is appointed as a dinner lady. School has followed a rigorous recruitment process and she has a clear CRB check. OFSTED discuss the appointment with the personnel governor and head teacher, and look at all the interview paperwork, references and induction training records and conclude school has secure safeguarding.
Parent voices concerns about the standards at school and is concerned that children in her daughter?s class are not working at the level they should be. OFSTED look at assessment data. They talked to the teachers and looked at their continuous assessment records; they observed a series of lessons and conclude quality of teaching and learning was outstanding, that children achieve better than expected outcomes and they make better than expected progress in the year group. As a result OFSTED dismiss the parents concerns and do not mention it in the report (although in the summary % of comments it does record that the negative comment was received)
An outstanding school might not suit your child, but it doesn?t mean it is not outstanding. It is not just a snapshot. The inspection team have access to a range of long term information; they look at children?s work for the whole year; they have data reaching back several years relating to attainment, progress, percentage of SEN and FSM and attendance and any other records shared with the LA; they have access to the information from lesson observation made other professionals (HMI, LA, head teacher); they interview staff, school leaders, governors and sometimes parents and make judgements on the school?s ability to develop and improve. All the inspections I have been through and inspectors I have met are highly trained and quick, perceptive and knowledge people.
So, no, OFSTED is not the be all and end all, but to throw their reports out completely makes a mockery most parents expectation of external and independent professions making judgement to hold schools accountable and them providing reports to help parents make decisions about where to send their child. What I have found is that it is sometimes either sour grapes because someone has a personal compliant about the school for which they can?t get the answer they want or about the whole ranking system of schools. We need the reports to help make the decisions, as a parent you will never have the full picture. If you have such a major safeguarding concern report the school to the police or the child protection services; let them investigate.