PDA

View Full Version : oh dear, in a mess with numbers



toddlers896
08-10-2013, 07:04 PM
to cut a long story short I have 4 in the early years as I thought I was doing right by the new eyfs taking on twin babies.
Now I am so paranoid about the whole situation and realise that I need to let them go or let one of my others go. How on earth will
I do this. I am absolutely dreading it. I have a child that ive been struggling with for four months and people are telling me to terminate this
contract but I feel so guilty and just don't know what to do. I am so annoyed with myself for getting myself into this mess in the first place.:panic::(

Ali56
08-10-2013, 07:08 PM
Can you explain a little more about how you got to 4? Are you sure you got it wrong or just worried that you have? So many childminders have made mistakes interpreting the rules they way they are now.

moggy
08-10-2013, 07:09 PM
If you have a child who you are struggling with and you need to give notice to get back to within correct ratios I would be taking action ASAP. You have 2 very valid reasons. If you were to be inspected and you are over-numbers you could be down graded to inadequate- and you would still have to give notice. It is tough to do but I would not delay.
Only alternative is to take on an assistant, but that does sound unnecessary of you have a child you feel would be happier elsewhere.

toddlers896
08-10-2013, 07:24 PM
Can you explain a little more about how you got to 4? Are you sure you got it wrong or just worried that you have? So many childminders have made mistakes interpreting the rules they way they are now.

I have two two year olds and was asked if I would take on sibling babies one day a week. I agreed to do it because one of my two year olds does a week of earlies and a week of lates and my other two year old finishes at 12 every day so I would only have four children every other week for three hrs. I thought I could change my numbers for sibling babies (twins), but apparently not.:(

Ali56
08-10-2013, 07:32 PM
Ah, okay. If it is only for 3 hours every other week, is there a way to not have one of the 2 yrolds that day? are they at an age where one could go to pre school? Just trying to think how to not drop a child completely just for those three hours. I do agree that you need to sort it out though :(
If the other chiild is such a problem maybe you could suggest it to his parents first, or give them the option to end his contract. It's a difficult situation for you to be in. x

AdeleMarie88
08-10-2013, 08:07 PM
To ensure you are not over, not even for three hours, how about you suggest to help the other child's behaviour, they go to nursery one day a week? Or even a morning? That way you don't lose too much money and you won't feel as if you are letting anyone down.

A nursery I worked at until very recently frequently go over ratios during sleep time, but as children are asleep, they have been told by early years that it is acceptable, (sounds peculiar to me) is this true in your case? Perhaps an easier option would be to call ofsted and seek advice!

Bakez66
08-10-2013, 10:32 PM
Ofsted will just refer you back to the EYFS, I called them about variations a while ago and they said they can't advise, it is upto me to meet the requirements, he advised speaking to my co-ordinator

littlemiss60561
08-10-2013, 10:44 PM
It's unfair that ofsted won't simply say yes or no. It's confusing. But I guess the safest option is to always stick to the normal ratios and don't go over regardless of continuity!
My DO was trying to find a way I could take on 5 regularly as she was stuck to find someone to take on emergency children! Hmm... I'm hoping she was joking! But did say 5 was ok if continuity .
I'd say, try the nursery idea, or.. Business head on... If you can afford it, end the contract of the one causing you grief. Without wanting to sound heartless!

Bakez66
09-10-2013, 06:13 AM
I agree, you need to end the contract with one family as Ofsted won't accept this as it's new business. these situations would of been a lot easier if the increase of children we could care for went upto 4 as they were considering but so many childminders protested against it that they chose continuity of care instead which I think is more confusing.

sarah707
09-10-2013, 06:47 AM
As you know, you can only go to 4 under 5 for continuity of care - not new business - so you do need to give notice to one child.

I suggest you do this urgently because you are working illegally at the moment and apart from the backlash from Ofsted it is unlikely that you will be insured.

Explain to whichever parent that you have had a change in circumstances and that you need to resolve it - if you can help them to find alternative care within the notice period stated on your contract then I suggest you do it so they leave early (refund as necessary).

Make sure you write up how you have acted to resolve the situation because this will show Ofsted that as soon as you became aware of the rules you did something straight away to stop working over ratios.

I hope that helps. Hugs x

Bluebell
09-10-2013, 07:07 AM
Sarah - sorry I must be really thick - can you point me to the bit which says it must be continuity of care? In 3.40 it does not mention continuity of care and it also says exceptions can be made for exceptional circumstances. It also says exceptions can be made for sibling babies which includes twins. it does not say for sibling babies but only when its continuity of care.

I'm finding the leaflet 'The numbers and ages of children that providers on the early years childcare registers may care for' Is equally confusing as the specific example of twins in example one is new business.

Sorry - I don't mean to seem argumentative but it just seems so many people are misinterpreting the rules (- including me) so there must be somewhere that it is written more clearly that this is unacceptable and illegal that I haven't seen.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 07:30 AM
As you know, you can only go to 4 under 5 for continuity of care - not new business - so you do need to give notice to one child.

I suggest you do this urgently because you are working illegally at the moment and apart from the backlash from Ofsted it is unlikely that you will be insured.

Explain to whichever parent that you have had a change in circumstances and that you need to resolve it - if you can help them to find alternative care within the notice period stated on your contract then I suggest you do it so they leave early (refund as necessary).

Make sure you write up how you have acted to resolve the situation because this will show Ofsted that as soon as you became aware of the rules you did something straight away to stop working over ratios.

I hope that helps. Hugs x

I am insured by Pacey and have phoned them to check if my insurance is valid. My insurance covers me for 6 under eight and 6 over eight as everybodys will. Having more children in the early years does not make your insurance valid and says nothing about early years in the policy and they have confirmed this. Not having a contract written also does NOT make your insurance valid as a few people on here have said. They will not help you get your money back if you have no contract if a child doesn't pay you but it does not make you insurance invalid. Their words, a contract is for good practice and so that parents and yourself know where you stand.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 07:37 AM
Sarah - sorry I must be really thick - can you point me to the bit which says it must be continuity of care? In 3.40 it does not mention continuity of care and it also says exceptions can be made for exceptional circumstances. It also says exceptions can be made for sibling babies which includes twins. it does not say for sibling babies but only when its continuity of care.

I'm finding the leaflet 'The numbers and ages of children that providers on the early years childcare registers may care for' Is equally confusing as the specific example of twins in example one is new business.

Sorry - I don't mean to seem argumentative but it just seems so many people are misinterpreting the rules (- including me) so there must be somewhere that it is written more clearly that this is unacceptable and illegal that I haven't seen.

This is exactly how i, my do and many other cm's are reading it bluelion. Its got nothing to do with being thick, its how we all interoperate the wording. It is NOT clear in each section about what is required therefore people are making their own judgements and are sticking to it. I have finally been brainwashed into reading how they are reading it but ime still not convinced its the right answer. I wish I had an inspection coming up as I really want to get to the bottom of it.

anyway, terminating a contract today as my head is in a pickle

hectors house
09-10-2013, 08:13 AM
I am sorry you have found yourself in such a situation - I think Ofsted should have someone who can advise us on "their rules" but I don't think they want to comment as they don't understand them either. A friend of mine recently got into a muddle with her numbers as she thought the new EYFS said she could now have 6 children under 8 (she didn't read the next part about ages)! Thankfully she has manage to arrange Nursery for one child and swap days for another one. I must admit I thought that you could take on twins even if you only had one space - but I have only skim read that part as it hasn't ever applied to me.

Chatterbox Childcare
09-10-2013, 09:30 AM
To me the EYFS clearly states that we can have 3 under 5. If a parent or yourself have a baby then you can take the sibling into your ratio's and go to 4.

If you have 2 children and NEW business comes along, regardless of whether it is twins or 2 children under the age of 5 from the same family, you cannot take them on because you only have 1 space

this subject is repeating itself everyday and I wonder what is not clear?

Sorry if I sound harsh, I don't mean to but what is confusing?

Mummits
09-10-2013, 10:44 AM
To me the EYFS clearly states that we can have 3 under 5. If a parent or yourself have a baby then you can take the sibling into your ratio's and go to 4.

If you have 2 children and NEW business comes along, regardless of whether it is twins or 2 children under the age of 5 from the same family, you cannot take them on because you only have 1 space

this subject is repeating itself everyday and I wonder what is not clear?

Sorry if I sound harsh, I don't mean to but what is confusing?

Chatterebox, what the EYFS clearly states to you is apparently not clear to everyone, including myself. Could you clarify where in the new EYFS it says what you are interpreting to rule out taking on siblings as new business?

I think the root of my confusion is that the new EYFS document actually says (at 3.40) that "exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies, or when caring for their own baby..." There is no mention of continuity of care. There is no mention of the exception only applying to existing mindees, or ruling out "new business". The only stated requirement is that the parents must be consulted. So I can't see why someone could not take on new siblings, including twins, so long as all the children's needs were met. There is not even any definition of who might be regarded as a baby.

I suspect either that a lot of people are carrying forward ideas from the old EYFS and assuming they must still apply (when that is not OFSTED's intention) OR that OFSTED did intend that these old rules/concepts should be carried forward, but have failed to reflect this in the new EYFS framework. It certainly does not help that they are washing their hands of offering any clarification. I have just raised a point for clarification and been told (wearily) by OFSTED that it is not their role to clarify their own rules and that I should seek advice from my local authority. If the rules were properly drafted nobody would be in doubt. It would also seem to me to be grossly unfair if anyone were penalised by OFSTED for breaching a rule that they refuse to clarify.

Bluebell
09-10-2013, 10:54 AM
I completely agree with everything you said (except that babies are usually termed as being an under 1)

If it is so blatantly clear that the answer is no then Ofsted should say so!

Rachel6
09-10-2013, 10:58 AM
What about if you already have 2 children in the eyfs which one is a sibling & then mom has twins would that count as continuity of care :-)

Mummits
09-10-2013, 11:13 AM
I completely agree with everything you said (except that babies are usually termed as being an under 1)

If it is so blatantly clear that the answer is no then Ofsted should say so!

I agree that we are accustomed to call children under one "babies", but a legal document really should have terms such as this unambiguously defined. Otherwise one might argue that a child of say 18 months was a baby.

This does however raise an interesting point ... If as it says a childminder may apply an exception to the usual ratios when caring for sibling babies, what happens when the baby becomes a toddler? As this highly unsatisfactory document is worded, would they then have to leave? Common sense would suggest no ... EYFS document applied literally would say yes.

Sorry Toddlers896, I am digressing!

In your current situation, I would personally seek urgent written clarification from my local authority children's services as to whether the position you find yourself in is within the new EYFS rules (and if they say not, then be prepared to give notice as suggested above). If their advice were that you are okay as you are, I would personally be prepared to argue the case with OFSTED if it came to that, taking into account firstly that the chances of them even taking an interest are pretty low, but also that I would feel quite confident of winning the argument with LA backing.

Mouse
09-10-2013, 11:15 AM
I completely agree with everything you said (except that babies are usually termed as being an under 1)

If it is so blatantly clear that the answer is no then Ofsted should say so!

Even that's not straight forward as babies can sometimes be classed as under 2s!

I agree with what everyone is saying about it all being open to interpretation. I do however think that some people only read the bits they want to, forgetting the fact that Ofsted fact sheets need to be read in conjunction with the EYFS framework.

Sarah & others have worked very hard to gain what clarification they can from Ofsted (higher up people, not those on a phone line) etc. At the end of the day though we must each take responsibility for our own numbers. If someone wants to grant themselves a variation they need to be very sure they are clear on why they have done it and how they think it fits in with the regulations...then keep their fingers crossed that an inspector sees it the same way :rolleyes:

Wouldn't a clear answer from Ofsted make things so much easier? They should at least let us speak to someone in the inspection team to get their views on it.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 11:31 AM
I am insured by Pacey and have phoned them to check if my insurance is valid. My insurance covers me for 6 under eight and 6 over eight as everybodys will. Having more children in the early years does not make your insurance valid and says nothing about early years in the policy and they have confirmed this. Not having a contract written also does NOT make your insurance valid as a few people on here have said. They will not help you get your money back if you have no contract if a child doesn't pay you but it does not make you insurance invalid. Their words, a contract is for good practice and so that parents and yourself know where you stand.

sorry ive just noticed my wording is wrong in this post, I meant to write invalid and have put valid so I have probably confused people who are reading this.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 11:42 AM
To me the EYFS clearly states that we can have 3 under 5. If a parent or yourself have a baby then you can take the sibling into your ratio's and go to 4.

If you have 2 children and NEW business comes along, regardless of whether it is twins or 2 children under the age of 5 from the same family, you cannot take them on because you only have 1 space

this subject is repeating itself everyday and I wonder what is not clear?

Sorry if I sound harsh, I don't mean to but what is confusing?

yes your right chatterbox, it does clearly state that we can have 3 under 5 and it also states that we can change our numbers in exceptional circumstances and it also states that in exceptional circumstances we can change our numbers to accommodate sibling babies.

it might be very clear to you because this is how you are interoperating the words but its not to others because it DOES NOT state we cant go over numbers for new business. It does not say continuity of care either, it says exceptional circumstances so some would say twin babies are exceptional whereas others would say its not because its they keep going back to continuity of care.

This is my view and I can see it both sides but even you don't know the facts, only what you are reading unless you are an Ofsted inspector??

FussyElmo
09-10-2013, 12:28 PM
Sarah707 when the new eyfs came out last year spent a lot of time confirming with ofsted what you could and couldn't do when granting yourself a variation to your numbers.

One thing that was said was not for new business. It may not say it in the eyfs but that was what Ofsted said.

Now your are saying it doesn't say we could take on twins but no where does it say we can neither.

Yes you are right it is up to you to interpret the eyfs yourself but here on the forum we really don't want people reading that its okay to take on twins when you only have one space. There has been inspections recently where the minder has been considered to be overminding downgraded to inadequate and had to ring one of her parents to collect immediately while Ofsted waited.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 03:23 PM
Chatterebox, what the EYFS clearly states to you is apparently not clear to everyone, including myself. Could you clarify where in the new EYFS it says what you are interpreting to rule out taking on siblings as new business?

I think the root of my confusion is that the new EYFS document actually says (at 3.40) that "exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies, or when caring for their own baby..." There is no mention of continuity of care. There is no mention of the exception only applying to existing mindees, or ruling out "new business". The only stated requirement is that the parents must be consulted. So I can't see why someone could not take on new siblings, including twins, so long as all the children's needs were met. There is not even any definition of who might be regarded as a baby.

I suspect either that a lot of people are carrying forward ideas from the old EYFS and assuming they must still apply (when that is not OFSTED's intention) OR that OFSTED did intend that these old rules/concepts should be carried forward, but have failed to reflect this in the new EYFS framework. It certainly does not help that they are washing their hands of offering any clarification. I have just raised a point for clarification and been told (wearily) by OFSTED that it is not their role to clarify their own rules and that I should seek advice from my local authority. If the rules were properly drafted nobody would be in doubt. It would also seem to me to be grossly unfair if anyone were penalised by OFSTED for breaching a rule that they refuse to clarify.

Couldn't have worded this better myself. I agree with you totally and will stick by this until told otherwise.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 03:33 PM
Sarah707 when the new eyfs came out last year spent a lot of time confirming with ofsted what you could and couldn't do when granting yourself a variation to your numbers.

One thing that was said was not for new business. It may not say it in the eyfs but that was what Ofsted said.

Now your are saying it doesn't say we could take on twins but no where does it say we can neither.

Yes you are right it is up to you to interpret the eyfs yourself but here on the forum we really don't want people reading that its okay to take on twins when you only have one space. There has been inspections recently where the minder has been considered to be overminding downgraded to inadequate and had to ring one of her parents to collect immediately while Ofsted waited.

So if it's never been proven that we can or can't do something why can't people come on here and read the posts and make their own judgement. So what you are saying is if you come on this forum for advice then you have to listen to people like sarah Neville or say nothing. I think sarah Neville is great and has helped me a great deal but that is wrong to say you don't want people coming on here telling other people things just because YOU think you know the answer to everything.

Bluebell
09-10-2013, 08:41 PM
So if it's never been proven that we can or can't do something why can't people come on here and read the posts and make their own judgement. So what you are saying is if you come on this forum for advice then you have to listen to people like sarah Neville or say nothing. I think sarah Neville is great and has helped me a great deal but that is wrong to say you don't want people coming on here telling other people things just because YOU think you know the answer to everything.

hmm I think to be fair what Fussy elmo was saying is that it is a great place to come for advice but when there is a lot of confusion over something people shouldn't be relying on the forum to interpret the EYFS.
Especially if someone read this thread and read some of the comments saying that it looks like twins are allowed and then went away and took twins on and then got in trouble - its not really fair to put that kind of responsibility on the forum.
And some of the advice has been researched, come from Ofsted and DfE so its fair to assume that is accurate. There is nothing wrong with having an opinion or a discussion but sometimes there are things that are going to be wrong and Fussy Elmo was saying its fairer to everyone if this is pointed out and not lead to more confusion iyswim.
I do agree that its very confusing but what has been pointed out by those in the know on this forum is that people who have done this have got into trouble - and that is the answer we want isn't it? If I do this will I get into trouble? For me the risk is too high so an assistant it will be! ASAP!

Mummits
09-10-2013, 09:16 PM
I certainly intended no disrespect to Sarah. I am obviously not familiar with everything she may have discussed with OFSTED, and it is great that she is happy to set out here what she has heard/learned. If clarification from Sarah can illuminate this question, all well and good, but there must be lots of people who do not know about this forum and are quite likely to be making it up as best they can.

So I remain concerned that OFSTED's intentions and requirements are not clearly set out in the EYFS document or any of their own guidance.

It was incidently not my intention to tell anyone what to do, I just offer my opinion for what it is worth, including what I think I might do in the original poster's situation. I think that is about the limit of what you can hope for from a discussion forum and that anyone who reads the different opinions offered has to weigh up how much notice to take of each view expressed.

sarah707
09-10-2013, 09:47 PM
So if it's never been proven that we can or can't do something why can't people come on here and read the posts and make their own judgement. So what you are saying is if you come on this forum for advice then you have to listen to people like sarah Neville or say nothing..


I share good practice and advice - I check my facts - I double check things like this - I don't want any member to get an inadequate inspection as a result of bad advice received on this forum.

Take it or leave it but please do not shoot the messenger :(

jelly jiggles
09-10-2013, 09:58 PM
Where does it say in the EYFS that we can increase under 5 ratios up to a maximum of 4 for continuity of care?? I have more and yes all continuity of care. I read and re read the EYFS book to ensure I had it right. Eeeeeeek now I'm worried.

toddlers896
09-10-2013, 10:07 PM
hmm I think to be fair what Fussy elmo was saying is that it is a great place to come for advice but when there is a lot of confusion over something people shouldn't be relying on the forum to interpret the EYFS.
Especially if someone read this thread and read some of the comments saying that it looks like twins are allowed and then went away and took twins on and then got in trouble - its not really fair to put that kind of responsibility on the forum.
And some of the advice has been researched, come from Ofsted and DfE so its fair to assume that is accurate. There is nothing wrong with having an opinion or a discussion but sometimes there are things that are going to be wrong and Fussy Elmo was saying its fairer to everyone if this is pointed out and not lead to more confusion iyswim.
I do agree that its very confusing but what has been pointed out by those in the know on this forum is that people who have done this have got into trouble - and that is the answer we want isn't it? If I do this will I get into trouble? For me the risk is too high so an assistant it will be! ASAP!

I just hope that one day Ofsted will clarify the eyfs more clearly. Yes It would be awful for a new or existing childminder to take on twins when its not allowed and then get into trouble but it is also awful that childminders are being brainwashed into thinking they cant take on twins when there is no proper evidence apart from a few words that everybody interporates differently.

emma04
10-10-2013, 07:37 AM
I interpret the new EYFS to the best of my ability. If I were to misinterpret it and get down graded I would challenge it to the hilt!

The document is NOT clear to many people and I congratulate those that have managed to fathom it!

If the people that aided the production of the EYFS framework (Ofsted) can't give a straightforward answer to our questions, then we have no hope!

I agree, this forum is not here to tell people what is right and wrong when following the EYFS and I uphold this.

Therefore my advice is to interpret the EYFS in the best way you can and be prepared to challenge any actions should you misinterpret anything!

The whole thing is bonkers IMO!
THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE:

FOR THE UNDER 5's (not in school or registered on a school roll)

A maximum of 4 under 5
And of those 4......
A maximum of 2 under 1

FOR THE OVER 5s
(and children registered on a school roll)

As many as you see fit, so long as the TOTAL number of ALL children UNDER 8 you care for at any one time does NOT exceed 6


Forget continuity/siblings/ own baby and all that jazz....This rule would be much more straight forward.

Rick
10-10-2013, 08:22 AM
I just hope that one day Ofsted will clarify the eyfs more clearly. Yes It would be awful for a new or existing childminder to take on twins when its not allowed and then get into trouble but it is also awful that childminders are being brainwashed into thinking they cant take on twins when there is no proper evidence apart from a few words that everybody interporates differently.

Agreed. It should be clearer in the EYFS. But because it's not clear the correct information was sourced from Ofsted. I'm all for free speech and people giving opinions and debating but I also think admin would be being negligent if the forum allowed incorrect information to be given out which could have a negative impact on their business and career.
If we wish to be independent childminders we need to have access to up to date and correct information

AdeleMarie88
10-10-2013, 08:56 AM
Agreed. It should be clearer in the EYFS. But because it's not clear the correct information was sourced from Ofsted. I'm all for free speech and people giving opinions and debating but I also think admin would be being negligent if the forum allowed incorrect information to be given out which could have a negative impact on their business and career. If we wish to be independent childminders we need to have access to up to date and correct information

I completely agree. I wasn't worried I was wrong with my numbers, but reading this thread I am now at a complete loss because everyone is saying different things. When guidelines get misinterpreted and confusing, accidents and mix ups will happen. Unless Ofsted can be definite about the rules they intend to enforce, how are we suppose to know? I am going to stop reading this thread now before I get stressed!

toddlers896
10-10-2013, 10:56 AM
I completely agree. I wasn't worried I was wrong with my numbers, but reading this thread I am now at a complete loss because everyone is saying different things. When guidelines get misinterpreted and confusing, accidents and mix ups will happen. Unless Ofsted can be definite about the rules they intend to enforce, how are we suppose to know? I am going to stop reading this thread now before I get stressed!

Couldn't agree with you more. That's exactly how I feel.so stressed out to the point I feel like giving it up.

toddlers896
10-10-2013, 11:11 AM
Agreed. It should be clearer in the EYFS. But because it's not clear the correct information was sourced from Ofsted. I'm all for free speech and people giving opinions and debating but I also think admin would be being negligent if the forum allowed incorrect information to be given out which could have a negative impact on their business and career.
If we wish to be independent childminders we need to have access to up to date and correct information

Definitely. Even my DO won't yet say yes or no, she passed me an email from a recent meeting with regards to the questions that people are asking and said this is from Pacey. We can all go to meetings and get different answers but until ofsted answer our questions with a yes or no instead of a cryptic clue then we have to make our own judgements following the EYFS.

christine e
10-10-2013, 11:17 AM
sorry ive just noticed my wording is wrong in this post, I meant to write invalid and have put valid so I have probably confused people who are reading this.

I'm pretty sure that someone on the insurance document it mentions complying with ofsted regarding the number you can care for so if you go above your numbers you could invalidate your insurance and increasing the numbers of your early years children (and not complying with ratios) could invalidate your insurance. Yes you are covered for up to 6 children under 8 but if you increase the under 5's to 4 without complying with ofsted then you could find yourself in serious trouble.

toddlers896
10-10-2013, 12:49 PM
I'm pretty sure that someone on the insurance document it mentions complying with ofsted regarding the number you can care for so if you go above your numbers you could invalidate your insurance and increasing the numbers of your early years children (and not complying with ratios) could invalidate your insurance. Yes you are covered for up to 6 children under 8 but if you increase the under 5's to 4 without complying with ofsted then you could find yourself in serious trouble.

My insurance through pacey covers me for 6 over and 6 under. I rang them last week. Insurance is still valid

toddlers896
10-10-2013, 12:56 PM
Hallelujah have finally had confirmation from my local authority for early years to care for sibling babies(twins) under the age of one despite it being new business. Ofsted referred me to them and their interpretation of the EYFS is this is ok.

emma04
10-10-2013, 01:02 PM
Hallelujah have finally had confirmation from my local authority for early years to care for sibling babies(twins) under the age of one despite it being new business. Ofsted referred me to them and their interpretation of the EYFS is this is ok.

Go for it! But yet another reason why Ofsted are a waste of space!

Chatterbox Childcare
10-10-2013, 01:19 PM
That is good news then. I hope that the inspector recognises the la authority as I didn't think they had any as far as enforcing the EYFS because I still believe that it is wrong (just my opinion)

I am glad you don't have to give notice though.

christine e
10-10-2013, 01:37 PM
My insurance through pacey covers me for 6 over and 6 under. I rang them last week. Insurance is still valid

but there is a condition on the insurance document that you comply with the statutory framework requirements - have copied and pasted below and this was taken from the pacey/RSA document and the maximum number for the EYFS is 3 under 5 unless for continuity of care etc

Number of Children Condition
The Indemnity provided by Section 2 Public/Products Liability shall
only apply to Childcarers who care for no more than the maximum
number of children permitted by the Statutory Framework for the
Early Years Foundation Stage in England or the National Minimum
Standards for Regulated Childcare in Wales or the Care Inspectorate
in Scotland at any one time and subject to a policy maximum of
12 children of any age at any one time and upto 18 children under 8
if the childcarer has 2 assistants working with them

TooEarlyForGin?
10-10-2013, 02:05 PM
but there is a condition on the insurance document that you comply with the statutory framework requirements - have copied and pasted below and this was taken from the pacey/RSA document and the maximum number for the EYFS is 3 under 5 unless for continuity of care etc

Number of Children Condition
The Indemnity provided by Section 2 Public/Products Liability shall
only apply to Childcarers who care for no more than the maximum
number of children permitted by the Statutory Framework for the
Early Years Foundation Stage in England or the National Minimum
Standards for Regulated Childcare in Wales or the Care Inspectorate
in Scotland at any one time and subject to a policy maximum of
12 children of any age at any one time and upto 18 children under 8
if the childcarer has 2 assistants working with them

But this is where the disagreement arose. The wording, continuity of care, isn't in the framework. The framework isn't totally transparent and can be open to interpretation.

hectors house
10-10-2013, 02:13 PM
Hallelujah have finally had confirmation from my local authority for early years to care for sibling babies(twins) under the age of one despite it being new business. Ofsted referred me to them and their interpretation of the EYFS is this is ok.

I would keep written confirmation from your local authority to show Ofsted as a friend of mine was recently given completely the wrong advice firstly by our Development Officer and then by the Local Authority on variations - my friend has kept the e-mails but she has now given notice to one of the children as she realised that the advice they had given her wasn't correct.

teacake2
10-10-2013, 02:31 PM
Wish I was in the position of having parents wanting my care, no work around here at all at the moment.:(:(:(
Teacake2

FussyElmo
10-10-2013, 02:58 PM
I would keep written confirmation from your local authority to show Ofsted as a friend of mine was recently given completely the wrong advice firstly by our Development Officer and then by the Local Authority on variations - my friend has kept the e-mails but she has now given notice to one of the children as she realised that the advice they had given her wasn't correct.

My concern is that even with written confirmation from the la - its always been our responsibility to make sure that what we do is correct.

Glad you have sorted it out :D

Mouse
10-10-2013, 03:19 PM
Hallelujah have finally had confirmation from my local authority for early years to care for sibling babies(twins) under the age of one despite it being new business. Ofsted referred me to them and their interpretation of the EYFS is this is ok.

Sadly the only opinion that counts is that of the inspector during an inspection or visiting you as a result of a complaint. No matter what the LA authority says, if that single Ofsted inspector disagreed, you could be in trouble.

Hopefully they wouldn't see any problem with it and wouldn't give it a second thought, but in case they do, keep copies of any correspondence you have, names, times & dates of calls etc. Cover your back & be prepared to argue your case if you have to.

christine e
10-10-2013, 03:58 PM
Hallelujah have finally had confirmation from my local authority for early years to care for sibling babies(twins) under the age of one despite it being new business. Ofsted referred me to them and their interpretation of the EYFS is this is ok.

I discussed this my my dev worker some time ago and yes could take on twins for new business and therefore have two under one year but only if I had two spaces - couldn't go over 3 under 5 unless they were siblings of an existing child

toddlers896
10-10-2013, 04:51 PM
I would keep written confirmation from your local authority to show Ofsted as a friend of mine was recently given completely the wrong advice firstly by our Development Officer and then by the Local Authority on variations - my friend has kept the e-mails but she has now given notice to one of the children as she realised that the advice they had given her wasn't correct.

I have worked really hard over the last two years to get my business up and running with the help of sarah Neville and other wonderful people on these forums and if I thought for one minute that all this hard work was going to be taken away from me I would take action now. I am very passionate about my job, hence the reason I have questioned this over and over again. I am not doubting what anybody is saying on this forum and I understand there is people that have also worked very hard to gain information on our behalf but I have to go with how I understand the EYFS and hope that I haven't been given the wrong advice. If I have then I will hold my hands up and will deserve what lies ahead for me.
I am sorry if I offended anybody, but this was not my intention.
Let's just hope I don't get the inspector that went to your friend house hector:panic::panic:

Rick
10-10-2013, 05:48 PM
I have worked really hard over the last two years to get my business up and running with the help of sarah Neville and other wonderful people on these forums and if I thought for one minute that all this hard work was going to be taken away from me I would take action now. I am very passionate about my job, hence the reason I have questioned this over and over again. I am not doubting what anybody is saying on this forum and I understand there is people that have also worked very hard to gain information on our behalf but I have to go with how I understand the EYFS and hope that I haven't been given the wrong advice. If I have then I will hold my hands up and will deserve what lies ahead for me.
I am sorry if I offended anybody, but this was not my intention.
Let's just hope I don't get the inspector that went to your friend house hector:panic::panic:

Good luck.....I don't think anyone was offended :)

Zoomie
10-10-2013, 07:23 PM
Well ..... do I have the courage to say this ???

I cared for 5 under 5 earlier this year.

I used to care for 3 under 5s. Then baby sibling of an existing mindee started, so I was caring for 4 under 5s. (I did a RA and 'a variation application citing baby sibling')

Then I had a phone call to say mum of another mindee (who didn't usually come on that day) was in hospital and mindee was 'stranded' at nursery.

I collected said mindee, and had 1x9m, 1x18m 1x30m and 2x4y that one particular afternoon. I did a written RA afterwards and another 'variation application - citing continuation of care and one off emergency situation').

Ofsted allowed me to care for 5 under 5s for a single day (about 3 years ago), so if they allowed it then, I am pretty sure I was okay in allowing it on this particular time again.

Rick
10-10-2013, 07:33 PM
Well ..... do I have the courage to say this ???

I cared for 5 under 5 earlier this year.

I used to care for 3 under 5s. Then baby sibling of an existing mindee started, so I was caring for 4 under 5s. (I did a RA and 'a variation application citing baby sibling')

Then I had a phone call to say mum of another mindee (who didn't usually come on that day) was in hospital and mindee was 'stranded' at nursery.

I collected said mindee, and had 1x9m, 1x18m 1x30m and 2x4y that one particular afternoon. I did a written RA afterwards and another 'variation application - citing continuation of care and one off emergency situation').

Ofsted allowed me to care for 5 under 5s for a single day (about 3 years ago), so if they allowed it then, I am pretty sure I was okay in allowing it on this particular time again.

The difference with your situation was all children came under continuity of care

julie w
10-10-2013, 07:49 PM
I have 4 under 5. I called ofsted who basically said i would need to prove i could care for them (which I can) and ensure I informed other parents (which I did). I would only need to prove I can cope if ofsted inspected me.

NinaBowen
11-10-2013, 12:48 PM
It is so confusing, why can't we just have a straightforward set of rules ie 3 children under the age of 5. No variations, no continuity of care, no confusion, and no one being down graded because they couldn't read the unclear guidance. Simples.

I must admit I took on 4 under 5's temporarily for 6 months a while back and now after reading this post am thinking that I shouldn't have. Think it is just easier if you stick to 3 children at any one time or just as a one off change to the routine to have 4 under fives. Anything else which is a long term change to numbers I think Ofsted are saying no and would then not be classed as an exceptional circumstance.