Ofsted have judged that one in three councils where inspectors have previously unearthed weaknesses in child protection services are still missing minimum standards.

Out of fifty local authorities re-examined by the regulator in the last 16 months, some 17 were rated as inadequate under the new inspection framework introduced in May 2012.

Under the new system of unscheduled inspections, Ofsted officials review a range of factors, including the quality of frontline arrangements, the standard of leadership in children’s services and how children are helped.

Of the fifty councils reassessed for their child protection services in the last 16 months, 17 were rated as inadequate.

Of the remaining 33 authorities, none were rated as excellent, although four were adjudged good with the other 29 found ‘adequate’ – a rating which will be soon changed to ‘requires improvement’.

Councils with failing children’s services include Birmingham City Council, Calderdale MBC, Doncaster MBC, Cumbria CC and Northamptonshire CC.

Chairman of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, Andrew Webb said he rejected Ofsted’s judgement that children’s services had got worse.

‘If you objectively look at the quality of life of children in Britain, the Ofsted judgments aren’t supported,’ said Mr Webb.

‘They have a way of looking at systems and services which is designed to find fault.’

The figures come the day after a serious case review yesterday into the death of 4-year old Daniel Pelka found numerous chances had been missed to protect the boy, who was systematically beaten and starved by his mother and her partner.

Coventry City Council chief executive Martin Reeves expressed his regret that not enough was done to protect Daniel.

‘Our city has never had such a tragic case before, and we have all been affected by it,’ said Mr Reeves.

He said the report made clear that the sharing of information and communications between all agencies was not robust enough.

Professionals were unable to fully understand what was really happening within the family and were deceived by his mother and stepfather ‘because they were not prepared to think the unthinkable and take action that could have protected Daniel'.

‘But every organisation involved in this case is determined to do what it can to try and make sure this never happens again in Coventry,' added Mr Reeves.