Inspection and quality assurance

When someone comes to check.

Local authority quality assurance, commissioner reviews, inspection. The question is always the same: show me, for a named young person, on the day I am standing here.

This page collects what settings using Kloodle Hub have put in front of a reviewer and what the reviewers then wrote. Every document quoted here is published in full by the setting that owns it, so you can read the words in their context rather than ours.

Lancashire County Council

Alternative provision quality assurance · September 2026

SafeguardingGreen
Behaviour & Personal DevelopmentGreen
Attendance & InclusionGreen
Curriculum & Quality of EducationGreen
Health & SafetyGreen
Risk ManagementGreen
Leadership & GovernanceGreen
Insurance & ComplianceGreen
Overall provider ratingGREEN

Legacy Alternative Provision, Burnley. Risk level low in every area, and recommended for the council's Alternative Provision Directory.

A rating belongs to the setting that earned it. Legacy's green rating is Legacy's, won by its staff, its safeguarding and its building. What follows is only what the reviewers wrote about the platform they were shown.

Lancashire County Council · September 2026

Kloodle is named thirteen times across the two documents.

Two officers reviewed the paperwork, then visited on 10 September 2026. Both reports are published in full by Legacy. These are the passages that name the platform.

“A particularly impressive aspect of the provision is the use of the bespoke Kloodle platform ...”

QA Site Visit Feedback, under the heading “Innovative tracking and monitoring”

“Kloodle safeguarding system demonstrated, providing secure recording, chronology management, monitoring, and reporting functions.”

Quality Assurance Review, Safeguarding and Child Protection

“Attendance information is linked to learner welfare, safeguarding, and progress monitoring.”

Quality Assurance Review, Attendance and Inclusion

“Commissioners and partner agencies can receive attendance and engagement information through reporting functions.”

Quality Assurance Review, Attendance and Inclusion

“Particularly noteworthy is the platform’s focus on developing and evidencing the “soft skills” essential for adulthood and employment.”

QA Site Visit Feedback, Innovative tracking and monitoring

“It represents an innovative and well-considered approach to quality assurance, learner monitoring, and educational delivery.”

QA Site Visit Feedback, Innovative tracking and monitoring

In the officers' own list

What they recorded the platform being used to monitor and evidence.

Staff demonstrated the Hub during the visit. This is the list the officers wrote down afterwards, in their order.

Attendance
Safeguarding concerns
Learner engagement
Academic progress
Personal development
Employability skills
Character development
Individual targets and outcomes

Getting ready for a visit

The six things a reviewer asks for, and where they live.

Not a new feature set. A reviewer's lens over what the Hub already holds, so a head or a DSL can open it on a laptop with someone looking over their shoulder.

01

Is attendance live, and is it linked to welfare?

Attendance is recorded per session and sits alongside the learner’s welfare and safeguarding record rather than in a separate system. A dip shows next to any open concern for that young person.

02

Is there a safeguarding chronology?

Every concern carries its date, the action taken, the next step, who acted and where it stands, on an append-only record. Read top to bottom it is a chronology. Access is deny by default and safeguarding records are never sent to AI.

03

Are targets individual, and do they carry outcomes?

Each learner has their own plan and targets, each with a status, the evidence attached to it and the milestones met. Targets can be proposed automatically from a referral document or an EHCP, then edited by staff before anything is saved.

04

Is personal development evidenced, or asserted?

Character and employability show as a wheel, and every segment opens onto the evidence of practice behind it, written on the day by the adult who saw it. A count on its own is not an outcome.

05

Can a commissioner receive it?

A dated report can be produced for a learner or for the whole setting, carrying the setting’s own logo, name and address on every page. It is exported by the setting’s own admin, never by us.

06

What does the trend look like as numbers grow?

Attendance, engagement and progress are tracked over time rather than read one learner at a time, alongside where young people go next.

Two things we should say plainly

Kloodle's founder also works within Legacy. The reviewers knew the platform was built by someone on the team and recorded it in their report. We would rather you heard that from us than found it out. It is also why both documents are linked here in full: the words are the council's, and you can read them in context.

A platform does not pass a quality assurance visit. Staff do, safeguarding does, a building does. What a good system changes is whether the evidence for all of that can be produced on the day, for a named young person, without a fortnight of preparation. That is the only claim this page makes.

Got a visit coming?

We will walk your team through what a reviewer will ask for and what the Hub can put in front of them, using your own setting rather than a demo account.