Revised Eyfs - first thoughts

**sarah707** · 29-03-2012, 08:30 PM

Ok so I have had a brief look through the new requirements.

Here are my first comments / things that immediately spring into my tired and slightly addled brain -

No requirement to ask for permission to seek emergency medical advice or treatment for a child

No requirement to register as a food business or use SFBB for childminders

No requirement to ask about legal contact details (the parental responsibility one is still there)

No note that while P & Ps are not required to be in writing (with the usual disclaimers of course) you MUST have certain ones for the Childcare Register anyway!!

How long is a ‘reasonable period of time’ for keeping documents after a child has left then? Answers on a postcard to – why have you thrown that away @ a childminder’s house near you

No length of time for keeping complaints records... and no requirement for a complaints policy

Nothing to be displayed except registration certificate – what about Ofsted complaints poster and emergency evacuation plan then?

New requirement to use Working together to safeguard children

New requirement to use Health and Safety at Work Act

New requirement to know about Data Protection Act and Freedom of information Act – but no requirement to register with ICO

New requirement to use Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006

Strange statement about English as an Additional Language with nothing to say we should consider parents wishes – so how does that strengthen relationships exactly if parents say teach English and we say sorry we can’t just do that what’s the word for ‘potty’?!?

Any more daft things spotted guys? I'm not seeing anything yet that says it will lessen paperwork or make things easier.

What about you?

**buildingblocks** · 29-03-2012, 08:41 PM

so there is no requirement to do the legal things such as registering with the ICO and EH or the things that Ofsted ask of us so basically more confusion then ever.

what I will do is wait till you do a wonderful book on it all and buy that xxx

I haven't looked at it yet printing it off tomorrow for a little light reading over the weekend

**karensmart4** · 29-03-2012, 08:43 PM

"Paperwork should be limited to that which is absolutely necessary to promote children's successful learning and development"

Who deems what is necessary.... will all Ofsted inspectors be looking for the same amount of information or will it be left up to their individual preferences??

**sarah707** · 29-03-2012, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by karensmart4

"Paperwork should be limited to that which is absolutely necessary to promote children's successful learning and development"

Who deems what is necessary.... will all Ofsted inspectors be looking for the same amount of information or will it be left up to their individual preferences??

Oh yes that's a good one as well!

It then goes on to talk about recording 'formative' (day to day ones we already do) and 'summative' (summary) observations, assessments and different types of planning in great detail

**Mouse** · 29-03-2012, 08:55 PM

Is Ofsted now going to issue guidelines & factsheets on how they interpret the new framework? We all know how their interpretation can be quite different to ours!

Do you think they will clarify certain aspects like they do now with the factsheets?

**karensmart4** · 29-03-2012, 09:16 PM

"Providers must enable a regular two-way flow of information with parents and/or carers, and between providers, if a child is attending more than one setting"

Does that mean that we wont have to badger other settings any more, they will freely work with us?

**blue bear** · 29-03-2012, 09:19 PM

3.43 medicines must not usually be administered unless they have been prescribed fir the child by a doctor, dentist, nurse or pharmacist

3.44 medicine (both prescribed abs non-prescription) must only be administered to a child where written permission....

So can we give non prescribed medicine or not?

What on earth does 3.40 mean?

There is no note about exceptions for variations under continuity if care so what happens in September if we have 4 under 5 do we have to give one notice to comply with new eyfs?

Same with 2 under 1, is it only 1under 1 now, it's says should, does that mean we can still have 2 under 1 if we have it now or cone September will we have to give notice to one if the children under 1 to comply with mew eyfs?

It states that there are exception to usual ratios for sibling babies, so I take that to mean we can have 4 under 5 to accommodate sibling baby. It then goes on to state we can care for reception aged child along with three other young children, so what happens if we have four to accommodate sibling baby? Can we not then have reception aged child?

I'm totally confused.com

**sarah707** · 29-03-2012, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by fi fi

3.43 medicines must not usually be administered unless they have been prescribed fir the child by a doctor, dentist, nurse or pharmacist

3.44 medicine (both prescribed abs non-prescription) must only be administered to a child where written permission....

So can we give non prescribed medicine or not?

Yes we can because of the word 'usually'...

What on earth does 3.40 mean?

We can have an extra baby for twins or if we have a young baby of our own.

The rising 5 clause that we use now is still valid

There is no note about exceptions for variations under continuity if care so what happens in September if we have 4 under 5 do we have to give one notice to comply with new eyfs?

Good question

Same with 2 under 1, is it only 1under 1 now, it's says should, does that mean we can still have 2 under 1 if we have it now or cone September will we have to give notice to one if the children under 1 to comply with mew eyfs?

Another good question - they don't seem to have dealt with variations (current or future) at all do they?

It states that there are exception to usual ratios for sibling babies, so I take that to mean we can have 4 under 5 to accommodate sibling baby. It then goes on to state we can care for reception aged child along with three other young children, so what happens if we have four to accommodate sibling baby? Can we not then have reception aged child?

No that's not what it says I don't think...

It says max of 3 under 5 whatever (hence the variation concern) so a sibling baby or twins would, imo, take up 2 of the spaces.

I'm totally confused.com

Yes I am now too...

I think I need to re-read it in the morning

**rickysmiths** · 29-03-2012, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by fi fi

3.43 medicines must not usually be administered unless they have been prescribed fir the child by a doctor, dentist, nurse or pharmacist

3.44 medicine (both prescribed abs non-prescription) must only be administered to a child where written permission....

So can we give non prescribed medicine or not?

What on earth does 3.40 mean?

There is no note about exceptions for variations under continuity if care so what happens in September if we have 4 under 5 do we have to give one notice to comply with new eyfs?

Same with 2 under 1, is it only 1under 1 now, it's says should, does that mean we can still have 2 under 1 if we have it now or cone September will we have to give notice to one if the children under 1 to comply with mew eyfs?

It states that there are exception to usual ratios for sibling babies, so I take that to mean we can have 4 under 5 to accommodate sibling baby. It then goes on to state we can care for reception aged child along with three other young children, so what happens if we have four to accommodate sibling baby? Can we not then have reception aged child?

I'm totally confused.com

I would say yes as long as the parents provide it because a if a pharmacist has prescribed it it could just be through talking to a parent and advising an over the counter product, they don't write a prescription for it.

I have read the ratios as if we and all the parents agree we could take on 11mth old twins as long as all agreed we could cope with it but under no circumstances may we ever have more than 6 under 8s.

**Childrenatheart** · 29-03-2012, 10:26 PM

There may be no requirement as far as EYFS is concerned to register with EHO/SFBB and other similar stuff but that doesn't mean we don't still have to as we still have to comply with the law.

I for one will still be providing written policies cos how else do I share them & prove I have them. I think saying CM's don't need to have policies written down serves two purposes. It plays lip service to the 'we've reduced the paperwork burden' and it demeans childminders. It sets us apart as a less professional group which is a serious retrograde step. And from my point of view it was never the policies that caused my 'burden' but writing up obs/next steps & my accounts

I spotted the bit about ratios too & am concerned about the implications.

I visited a pre-school today & the manager was over the moon about the ratios as it says 1:13 if someone with QTS, EYPS or an appropriate L6 is working with the children as opposed to 1:8 so she plans to make staff cuts as soon as she gets her degree & won't bother doing EYPS as she won't need it now cos she'll be a L6. Can see that one being very open to abuse. Just imagine if it applied to CMs too...

**rickysmiths** · 29-03-2012, 10:34 PM

Originally Posted by sarah707

Ok so I have had a brief look through the new requirements.

Here are my first comments / things that immediately spring into my tired and slightly addled brain -

No requirement to ask for permission to seek emergency medical advice or treatment for a child

This was an absolutely meaningless permission anyway!!

No requirement to register as a food business or use SFBB for childminders

I don't believe the EYFS supersedes our responsibility to comply with other legal requirements and now it is compulsory for all childminders to register as a Food Business whereas when first EYFS came out it wasn't so they don't need to make a statement about it now.

No requirement to ask about legal contact details (the parental responsibility one is still there)

I would because we still need to know who has access to the child. It is on my PR form so it will just stay there.

No note that while P & Ps are not required to be in writing (with the usual disclaimers of course) you MUST have certain ones for the Childcare Register anyway!!

How long is a ‘reasonable period of time’ for keeping documents after a child has left then? Answers on a postcard to – why have you thrown that away @ a childminder’s house near you

Keeping certain records until a child is 21yrs old is a requirement of our insurance companies not EYFS it makes sense to keep contracts and info forms as well so you have some hope of remembering who the child/family were if anything cropped up.

No length of time for keeping complaints records... and no requirement for a complaints policy

This is a bit confusing because Ofsted keep records of complaints on our file. Or can we now demand that all complaints that are not upheld are destroyed as soon as they have been resolved?

Nothing to be displayed except registration certificate – what about Ofsted complaints poster and emergency evacuation plan then?

Good question

New requirement to use Working together to safeguard children

New requirement to use Health and Safety at Work Act

New requirement to know about Data Protection Act and Freedom of information Act – but no requirement to register with ICO

There wasn't in the old EYFS it is a legal requirement outside EYFS so we will still have to register.

New requirement to use Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006

Strange statement about English as an Additional Language with nothing to say we should consider parents wishes – so how does that strengthen relationships exactly if parents say teach English and we say sorry we can’t just do that what’s the word for ‘potty’?!?

Any more daft things spotted guys? I'm not seeing anything yet that says it will lessen paperwork or make things easier.

What about you?

I'm sure there will be more things. I agree with you about paperwork unless of course you take the literal view and don't write any RAs or Policies or Procedures. As far as I can see on the paperwork stakes is that the Reception Teachers gain because the Profile is much shorter but cms don't gain anything.

**rickysmiths** · 29-03-2012, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by Childrenatheart

There may be no requirement as far as EYFS is concerned to register with EHO/SFBB and other similar stuff but that doesn't mean we don't still have to as we still have to comply with the law.

I for one will still be providing written policies cos how else do I share them & prove I have them. I think saying CM's don't need to have policies written down serves two purposes. It plays lip service to the 'we've reduced the paperwork burden' and it demeans childminders. It sets us apart as a less professional group which is a serious retrograde step. And from my point of view it was never the policies that caused my 'burden' but writing up obs/next steps & my accounts

I spotted the bit about ratios too & am concerned about the implications.

I visited a pre-school today & the manager was over the moon about the ratios as it says 1:13 if someone with QTS, EYPS or an appropriate L6 is working with the children as opposed to 1:8 so she plans to make staff cuts as soon as she gets her degree & won't bother doing EYPS as she won't need it now cos she'll be a L6. Can see that one being very open to abuse. Just imagine if it applied to CMs too...

I agree with you. As a cm who had had a large number of variations to hav 4 under fives and one who has a permanent 'two under ones' no more than 3 under 5s on my cert, do I now loose this?

**EmmaReed84** · 30-03-2012, 05:10 AM

I went on a course last night and the lady had a copy of what we have all read/downloaded/printed etc. She said "It is supposed to lesson paper work...erm...it doesn't" She has just trained to be an Ofsted inspector and said the thing that is drilled in to them is the one question "What is it like for a child here?" The main focus is the CHILD! From what she was saying she sounds like she will be a great inspector, shame that other inspectors focus on paperwork MORE than the child, which is what this is all about!

**Tink** · 30-03-2012, 05:53 AM

After scanning the document my first thought was where is there less paperwork? It all seems very confusing to me and I will have to read it again over the weekend.

**miffy** · 30-03-2012, 06:15 AM

New requirement to attend a child protection course (3.5)

Miffy xx

**flowerpots** · 30-03-2012, 06:15 AM

Ive scanned through most of it now and im totally confused. Are you going to write an e-book Sarah?

jumpinjen · 30-03-2012, 06:16 AM

My head hurts!!!

One of my mindees is going to a private school nursery in September, all day 9-3, she will be four, as she just misses out on going to reception so will have to wait til 2013 for reception, Mum wants me to have her after nursery and in the holidays - will she be classed as wrap around for the purposes of my numbers or in my under fives?

Don't even want to think about reading all the other bits of legislation - freedom of information act???? Does that mean we have to breach confidentiality if asked and release documents to people that want them?

Jen x

**rickysmiths** · 30-03-2012, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by miffy

New requirement to attend a child protection course (3.5)

Miffy xx

Yes I spotted that. I think that is good but it implies it only needs to be done once and no renewal time scale given. Tough we do have to have a good knowledge of signs of abuse.

**rickysmiths** · 30-03-2012, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by jumpinjen

My head hurts!!!

One of my mindees is going to a private school nursery in September, all day 9-3, she will be four, as she just misses out on going to reception so will have to wait til 2013 for reception, Mum wants me to have her after nursery and in the holidays - will she be classed as wrap around for the purposes of my numbers or in my under fives?

Don't even want to think about reading all the other bits of legislation - freedom of information act???? Does that mean we have to breach confidentiality if asked and release documents to people that want them?

Jen x

I would understand from that that it means we would have to make information available to a parent or Ofsted or Social Services but we do that anyway so I don't read it as a change so much as pointing out the legislation which covers making it available.