Ratios

[leah.kyranidis]

I hope someone can help ASAP, I have been asked to care for my first family and really hope im aloud these ratios!
I have 2 year old and 4 year old of my own(4 year old starts school in sept), the care is for 3 days a week 9-1, one is aged 6 months and the other is 4 (starts school in sept) so will be 4 under school age until sept and then only 2 under school age! Is this aloud as they are siblings?
I don't know who to ring to check as in the framework it says that exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies, so does this mean it is ok?
Thanks
Leah

[adedwards68]

I don't think you can. If you had the 4 year old and then the parents had another baby you would be allowed. Could you nanny at the mindees house until sept I'm assuming both the 4 year olds will be at school full time

[peppa Pig]

There is mixed views on this, many say it's not for new business and there is those that say under the old eyfs a variation would have been granted to allows new business for siblings if there were no other providers available then that means it could be applied to revised eyfs.
To be honest I don't know if there is a straight answer and the only person who would give one would be an inspector during an inspection.
Ring your early years for advice.

[FussyElmo]

No you wont be able to take these children on until the 4 yos are in full time education - so September.

The exceptions for sibling babies are if you already look after a child and then the parents went on to have a new baby. Exceptions are not allowed for new business as this is :thumbsup:

[Goatgirl]

Hi,
no, as it stands you will be over numbers by one :(.
however, you could start with just one child and then add the other one a couple of weeks later :rolleyes:. Obviously risk assess etc... I would think it would be fine in practice as the older 2 are going to be a bit more self sufficient. Hope you come up with a solution :thumbsup:

[chezzagriff]

You wouldnt be allowed as its not an existing child who then has a sibling its new business althogether. Like Goatgirl said though you could take on the 4 yo and in a months time take on the other. Thats the only way you would be able to get around it. I think you should be able to really but those are the rules :( Hope you figure it out :thumbsup:

[MiniKins]

I've pondered over this before but gave up when I couldn't find a legal definition of 'baby' ~ the regulations state:

'If a childminder can demonstrate to parents and/or carers and inspectors, that the individual needs of all the children are being met, then exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies, or when caring for their own baby.'

I've always assumed that a baby is 0–12mths but can't for the life of me find anywhere that it is actually stated to be so ~ when does a baby become a child?

What I'm getting at is that if there is no official definition of 'baby', no longer a requirement to apply for a variation and Ofsted are advising Childminders 'follow the requirements set out in the Statutory Framework'…

If you consider your 2-year-old to be a 'baby'… mmmm

Excuse me for playing Devil's advocate!

[CLL]

For my EYP purposes a 'baby' is between 0-20 months!

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I think you are talking about you having a new baby yourslef and not adding mindees afterwards.

I think you will be over and only have 1 space until September

[FussyElmo]

The wording used to be on our certificates.

May care for 1 under 1 - that is the definition of a baby.

Your child are 2 and 4 so you wont be able to use that an a valid reason to take on 2 more children under the age of 5.

Until you 4yo starts school in September you only have the 1 eyfs place.

[MiniKins]

The wording used to be on our certificates.

I agree FussyElmo, and that is exactly my point ~ it used to be specified on our certificates, conditions that have since been removed ~ in fact, I don't think the word 'baby' appeared, it just referred to 'children'…'under 1 year'. We're now left to deal with the word 'baby' for which i'm trying to find an official definition, perhaps it might be buried somewhere in the Childcare Act?

And I totally agree that for all intents and purposes we are talking about 0–12mths but until I see it in writing I'm going to consider it a matter open to interpretation (devil that I am), and therefore an option for the OP to consider.


start with just one child and then add the other one a couple of weeks later

Goatgirl ~ that's a very cunning method of circumventing things ~ I like it! x

[FussyElmo]

I agree FussyElmo, and that is exactly my point ~ it used to be specified on our certificates, conditions that have since been removed ~ in fact, I don't think the word 'baby' appeared, it just referred to 'children'…'under 1 year'. We're now left to deal with the word 'baby' for which i'm trying to find an official definition, perhaps it might be buried somewhere in the Childcare Act?

And I totally agree that for all intents and purposes we are talking about 0–12mths but until I see it in writing I'm going to consider it a matter open to interpretation (devil that I am), and therefore an option for the OP to consider.

x

The problem with interpretation is if the Ofsted inspector doesn't agree with it then you are officially overminding risking an inadequate. Also If an accident was to happen and Ofsted deem over minding your insurance becomes invalid.

Something for the Op to seriously consider too :thumbsup:

[MiniKins]

The problem with interpretation is if the Ofsted inspector doesn't agree with it then you are officially overminding risking an inadequate. Also If an accident was to happen and Ofsted deem over minding your insurance becomes invalid.

Absolutely right ~ looking at my wording, perhaps it does come across that I am seriously advocating trying this, which is not what I intended ~ apologies for that.

I was just offering the idea up for interesting debate. x

[Rubybubbles]

What about if you have 1 space and twins ask then? Just throwing it in the mix

[adedwards68]

I would think it would be the same, it's not continuity of care, but new business

[leah.kyranidis]

Thank you so much for everyone's replies, it seems as though I am not going to be able to care for these children until sept when my 4 year old starts school! I tried contacting my early years advisor to clarify it but am still waiting on a call back from this morning but think I know what the answer will probably be now
Thanks again x

[leah.kyranidis]

Been thinking of a way around this as dont want to turn this opportunity away! I would have 1 too many under school age from June until 2 of then start school in September! I am newly registered and not due my first inspection until September! Would I be able to get away with this? X

[FussyElmo]

Been thinking of a way around this as dont want to turn this opportunity away! I would have 1 too many under school age from June until 2 of then start school in September! I am newly registered and not due my first inspection until September! Would I be able to get away with this? X

What do you mean get away with it?

[mummyMia]

Been thinking of a way around this as dont want to turn this opportunity away! I would have 1 too many under school age from June until 2 of then start school in September! I am newly registered and not due my first inspection until September! Would I be able to get away with this? X

I think you would be taking a big risk as surely the inspector would look at the children's learning journeys and realise that you have had them since June. Also, it only takes one nosy neighbour/rival childminder etc. to see you out and about with all four and report you to Ofsted.

Do you have a friend/family member who could act as an assistant for June to September?

[leah.kyranidis]

Yeah I have never thought of an assistant, and don't really know how this works but it could be my only option! I don't want to end up with an inadequate if ofsted decide to come out early!
I have spoke to my early years advisor and they said it is down to me to interpret the framework wording but then I will have an issue if the inspector does not interpret it the same way as me! It seems a shame to turn it down when Will only be over from June to sept! X

[JCrakers]

This is why I feel the ratio rules at the moment are rubbish. There isn't any rule to cover this and I've turned work down before because the parent cant wait a couple of weeks and then not had another phonecall for nearly 2yrs.

Under the old rules of Ofsted making the decisions I had a variation in place to take 2 children on with 1 space as the eldest was at preschool and needed picking up with an overlap of 40mins. It was granted and I had 4 under 5 for 40mins but now the rules aren't so straight forward as no one knows what will happen if we make wrong decisions...
And the new rules are so vague and easy to lots of different interpretations :angry: Plus since September I've had to do about 8-9 variations myself due to being full and parents needing an exra day here and there I'm starting to wonder if Trusses ratio raise makes sense just to ease the pressure of decision making....Shoot me now :blush:

Can the parent wait until September? Can you take one child for now?

[MiniKins]

I'm going to rock the boat again guys…

You mean 'get away with this' as in stay legal?

We don't have to phone Ofsted to ask about a exception if we are sure we can


'…demonstrate to parents and/or carers and inspectors, that the individual needs of all the children are being met, then exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies…'

as they have put the ball in our court (and going by many of the posts here, they're no real help if we do!)

The new children are not sibling babies i.e. both of them babies ~ so you can't argue that as an exception (although I still call my 20yo son my 'baby'!)

However, if you were already looking after the 4-year-old (for exactly how long I don't know ~ half a day?…9 months?…) could you then take on it's 6-month-old baby sister/brother? GoatGirl: Sorry to plagiarise your argument.

Here's a link to the helpful Ofsted factsheet:

Ofsted | Factsheet: childcare - The numbers and ages of children that providers on the Early Years and Childcare Registers may care for (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/factsheet-childcare-numbers-and-ages-of-children-providers-early-years-and-childcare-registers-may-c)

Example 3 does not totally rule out a decision to look after four under 5s, but does reference 'continuity of care' (another vague phrase meaning different things to different people I've spoken to).

And where in the Statutory Framework does it mention 'new business'?

So…are you sure you can meet the requirements? ~ what's your interpretation?

Again, like Ofsted, I'm not going to commit myself to a definitive answer!

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I'm going to rock the boat again guys…

You mean 'get away with this' as in stay legal?

We don't have to phone Ofsted to ask about a exception if we are sure we can


'…demonstrate to parents and/or carers and inspectors, that the individual needs of all the children are being met, then exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies…'

as they have put the ball in our court (and going by many of the posts here, they're no real help if we do!)

The new children are not sibling babies i.e. both of them babies ~ so you can't argue that as an exception (although I still call my 20yo son my 'baby'!)

However, if you were already looking after the 4-year-old (for exactly how long I don't know ~ half a day?…9 months?…) could you then take on it's 6-month-old baby sister/brother? GoatGirl: Sorry to plagiarise your argument.

Here's a link to the helpful Ofsted factsheet:

Ofsted | Factsheet: childcare - The numbers and ages of children that providers on the Early Years and Childcare Registers may care for (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/factsheet-childcare-numbers-and-ages-of-children-providers-early-years-and-childcare-registers-may-c)

Example 3 does not totally rule out a decision to look after four under 5s, but does reference 'continuity of care' (another vague phrase meaning different things to different people I've spoken to).

And where in the Statutory Framework does it mention 'new business'?

So…are you sure you can meet the requirements? ~ what's your interpretation?

Again, like Ofsted, I'm not going to commit myself to a definitive answer!

To me continuity of care means continuation of care for the same child/family (not new business)