Froebel House School

This was a progress monitoring inspection of Froebel House School, a small independent school in Hull, after it was judged not to meet the independent school standards in September 2025. The school still does not meet all of the standards checked. The proprietor has not taken sufficient action to address the unmet standards, and the action plan submitted after the previous inspection was rejected by the Department for Education. Leadership and management do not meet Part 8: the proprietor lacks sufficient understanding of how to meet the standards consistently, leadership capacity is insufficient, and compliance has fluctuated, with several standards that were previously met now unmet. There are serious weaknesses in safeguarding, welfare and education. Visitors are not routinely identity-checked or signed in, medicines are not safely stored or administered, fire drills are too infrequent, pupils with physical disabilities lack risk assessments and evacuation plans, and supervision has been inadequate, with a class left unattended. The curriculum is not coherently sequenced in all subjects, SEND provision is ineffective and records are out of date, the early years foundation stage requirements are not met, and assessment is not embedded. The behaviour approach is punitive and limits pupils' self-esteem and social development; some pupils report derogatory and racist language that staff do not address effectively. There are some positives. Pupils study a broad curriculum, with art and design and PSHE structured well, and pupils behave well. Safeguarding training is regular, the electronic concern-recording system is generally used well, and the admissions and attendance register is now compliant. However, overall the school does not meet the independent school standards in Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8, the early years foundation stage requirements, or the accessibility planning requirements.

Strengths

• Pupils study a broad curriculum.
• Art and design and PSHE are suitably structured and organised.
• In subjects with effective sequencing, pupils can talk about their learning.
• Staff receive regular safeguarding training.
• The electronic safeguarding reporting system generally records concerns in a timely and detailed way.
• The school generally takes appropriate follow-up action on safeguarding concerns, including involving parents.
• Pupils behave well and understand school rules.
• Pupils say bullying is rare and trust staff to resolve it.
• Some pupils demonstrate knowledge of fundamental British values and different faiths and cultures.
• The admissions and attendance register is now compliant.
• The single central record is compliant.
• The school generally makes appropriate recruitment checks and makes overseas checks where staff have worked abroad.
• Some staff are trained in safer recruitment.
• The safeguarding and child protection policy references current guidance and is available on the website.

Areas for Improvement

• Proprietor has not taken sufficient action to address the independent school standards that were unmet at the last inspection.
• Action plan submitted after the previous inspection was rejected by the Department for Education.
• Proprietor does not demonstrate sufficient understanding of how to meet the standards consistently.
• Leadership capacity is insufficient to bring about required improvements.
• Staff do not receive subject-specific training or sufficient time to fulfil their roles effectively.
• Staff are not trained to support pupils with SEND or other barriers to learning and wellbeing.
• Part 8 leadership and management standard is not met.
• Visitors are not routinely identity-checked, signed in or given badges.
• Curriculum is not coherently sequenced and progressive in all subjects.
• Subject leaders lack time and training to monitor curriculum implementation.
• Curriculum does not take account of the aptitudes and needs of all pupils, including SEND and EAL.
• SEND information is out of date and some pupils who should be on the SEND register are not.
• Proprietor is not aware of the obligation to apply for an EHC plan where it would benefit a pupil.
• Early years foundation stage requirements are not met.
• Physical development is not prioritised in early years and outdoor provision is limited.
• Behaviour management is punitive and does not prepare pupils for life in British society.
• Behaviour approach inhibits pupils' self-esteem and self-confidence.
• Some pupils do not enjoy attending school.
• Pupils report derogatory and racist language that staff do not address effectively.
• School rules prevent interaction with other year groups, including siblings, and require silent eating and working.
• Some pupils with protected characteristics do not receive the support they need to be safe.
• Assessment framework for English and mathematics is not well established or embedded.
• Chronology of safeguarding records for some pupils is not well organised, delaying responses.
• Some pupils are unclear about who to go to if they are worried.
• Behaviour incidents and sanctions for serious misbehaviour are not consistently recorded.
• There were insufficient staff to supervise pupils, and a class was left unattended repeatedly.
• Staff are unclear where bullying incidents should be recorded, and incidents are not recorded.
• No formal arrangements for storage and administration of medicines; medication is sometimes left within pupils' reach.
• Pupils with physical disabilities lack risk assessments and personal evacuation plans.
• School does not conduct fire drills often enough; last recorded drill was June 2025.
• No specific arrangements for intimate care of children in early years.
• No formal process for following up pupil absence, including persistent absence.
• Some absence is accepted to avoid participation in particular activities.
• Risk assessment policy is in place but proprietor lacks sufficient understanding of identifying and managing risk.
• Proprietor does not check candidates' medical fitness.
• Overseas checks are not translated into English, so their content is not assured.
• Proprietor cannot access the electronic single central record.
• Accessibility plan does not sufficiently account for pupils with physical disabilities.
• School does not meet independent school standards in Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8.

In 2025–26, 3.8% of pupils at Froebel House School were on SEN support (nationally 18.4%) and 0.0% had an education, health and care (EHC) plan (nationally 7.9%).

Source: Department for Education, Special educational needs in England (the 2025–26 school census). SEN support is extra help in school without an EHC plan. National figures are for all state-funded independent school schools. Counts are as published, with small numbers not hidden.

• Primary Schools
• Secondary Schools

All schools in Hull · Kingston upon Hull, City of local authority: places and applications

What is Froebel House School's Ofsted rating?

The latest Ofsted rating for Froebel House School is Requires Improvement, from an inspection in July 2026.

When was Froebel House School last inspected by Ofsted?

Froebel House School was last inspected in July 2026.

How many pupils does Froebel House School have?

Froebel House School has 78 pupils on roll.

What age range does Froebel House School cover?

Froebel House School for pupils aged 3 to 11.

Where is Froebel House School?

Froebel House School is at 5 Marlborough Avenue, Hull, HU5 3JP.