Pacey Members - please read

[Chatterbox Childcare]

Every member who has given their email address to Pacey should have got their latest online newsletter today. In it is a survey which can be completed anonymously asking for your views.

Not sure if previous members who have left recently can use it but please give it a go and let them know what you are happy/not happy with

https://www.snapsurveys.com/wh/s.asp?k=137647444489

[tulip0803]

Thank you very much - I have not received anything from Pacey since last Friday when I had a really short survey about the support they give members. I have not received the on-line newsletter but I normally do! Thanks for the link I have completed it

[Simona]

I am going to reflect on this request...I have engaged positively and professionally with pacey over many issues and many of my queries have gone unanswered so far

sad to say I will not jump at this survey this time...throw any criticism at me but that is the way I feel!

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I am going to reflect on this request...I have engaged positively and professionally with pacey over many issues and many of my queries have gone unanswered so far

sad to say I will not jump at this survey this time...throw any criticism at me but that is the way I feel!

Simona I am not jumping on you but this is the perfect time to make your feelings known. this survey is all about the membership of pacey, costs, the way it is run and how it could be changed. If there was one that needed constructive critic, this is the one.

[supermumy]

I just filled it out it is all about money how much we earn who we look after and if we would be prepared to pay for add ons etc which I feel should be included in our amount anyway
For the 1st time in 10yrs I'm seriously considering leaving pacey insurance

[Simona]

Has any other cm completed this survey?
Apart from wanting to know our income and what services we are prepared to pay for what else does the survey cover?

[bunyip]

Thanks for putting up the link Chatterbox. I didn't get the email; the only pacey messages I had in the last few days are "back to school" ads for resources and a training notice.

I started filling in the survey with the best of intentions, got half way through and stopped. Sorry, but I've seen this kind of survey before and it is wide open to false results and misinterpretation. The questions are asking about training, resources, representation, being listened to, etc. Fine. But the wording - "Please can you rate them in order of how useful you might find them in your role?" - is problematic and will give false responses and is wide open to being spun.

"Might???" So are we being asked how important these things are, or whether we think pacey is doing a good job of them? :huh: The survey confuses 2 very different questions with each and every response.

So, "listening to your view" is IME a 5 (really, really, very, crucially important.) But are pacey doing this? Well, I'd score them a "1" on this. I'm not doing the survey, cos I can see where this is going. I don't want to be a part of members saying something is really important to them for someone at Ivory Towers Bromley to pick up the results and read it as if we're saying they're doing a good job of it.

[Mouse]

Thanks for putting up the link Chatterbox. I didn't get the email; the only pacey messages I had in the last few days are "back to school" ads for resources and a training notice.

I started filling in the survey with the best of intentions, got half way through and stopped. Sorry, but I've seen this kind of survey before and it is wide open to false results and misinterpretation. The questions are asking about training, resources, representation, being listened to, etc. Fine. But the wording - "Please can you rate them in order of how useful you might find them in your role?" - is problematic and will give false responses and is wide open to being spun.

"Might???" So are we being asked how important these things are, or whether we think pacey is doing a good job of them? :huh: The survey confuses 2 very different questions with each and every response.

So, "listening to your view" is IME a 5 (really, really, very, crucially important.) But are pacey doing this? Well, I'd score them a "1" on this. I'm not doing the survey, cos I can see where this is going. I don't want to be a part of members saying something is really important to them for someone at Ivory Towers Bromley to pick up the results and read it as if we're saying they're doing a good job of it.

But if you keep going through the survey there are a couple of opportunities for you to have your say, not just tick boxes. I'm sure there'd be room to tell them what you really think!

[Simona]

Thanks for putting up the link Chatterbox. I didn't get the email; the only pacey messages I had in the last few days are "back to school" ads for resources and a training notice.

I started filling in the survey with the best of intentions, got half way through and stopped. Sorry, but I've seen this kind of survey before and it is wide open to false results and misinterpretation. The questions are asking about training, resources, representation, being listened to, etc. Fine. But the wording - "Please can you rate them in order of how useful you might find them in your role?" - is problematic and will give false responses and is wide open to being spun.

"Might???" So are we being asked how important these things are, or whether we think pacey is doing a good job of them? :huh: The survey confuses 2 very different questions with each and every response.

So, "listening to your view" is IME a 5 (really, really, very, crucially important.) But are pacey doing this? Well, I'd score them a "1" on this. I'm not doing the survey, cos I can see where this is going. I don't want to be a part of members saying something is really important to them for someone at Ivory Towers Bromley to pick up the results and read it as if we're saying they're doing a good job of it.

Bunyip...the important thing is whether you wish to continue with your pacey m'ship...if so what would you like to tell them? do you feel well represented? what are your worries? are you being listened to?

You have raised some very valid points on their service and representation in this forum...why stop now?
I have also raised many valid points with them in many emails...some have received a reply ...some not
I have posted on pacey Local...not always got a reply there
I see so many people leaving pacey...why?
I think more will follow...rumours are around

For me pacey has to come out and be a bit more approachable
I will take a look at the survey ..at the moment the need is for pacey to come out and join the inspection debate, help us with the LA funding and agencies...

[bunyip]

But if you keep going through the survey there are a couple of opportunities for you to have your say, not just tick boxes. I'm sure there'd be room to tell them what you really think!

OK, I'll consider it. Maybe I should contact pacey about how the questions are worded. Then again, would anyone there have an answer, and would they get back to me before the survey closes? Not if recent experience is anything to go by. :mad:

[Simona]

OK, I'll consider it. Maybe I should contact pacey about how the questions are worded. Then again, would anyone there have an answer, and would they get back to me before the survey closes? Not if recent experience is anything to go by. :mad:

Go for it Bunyip...I am sure someone will have an answer for you at pacey HQ! maybe you could email the Director of Membeship herself...she is bound to have formulated those questions to shape future package of benefits?

[lisbet]

Thanks for posting the link, Chatterbox - I didn't spot it when I skimmed through the email.

I agree it was frustrating because you could only give a 'best fit' answer, like so many of these surveys. I used the comments boxes towards the end to say quite a lot though! :thumbsup:

[bunyip]

OK, I'll consider it. Maybe I should contact pacey about how the questions are worded. Then again, would anyone there have an answer, and would they get back to me before the survey closes? Not if recent experience is anything to go by. :mad:

I emailed pacey yesterday morning and, to their credit, a reply was sent yesterday afternoon. So at least some improvement in their response times.

The reply itself was rather disappointing, starting with the fact that it was anonymous, coming from an unnamed person of "The PACEY Membership Team". Forum members can decide for themselves whether they regard it as 'professional' for anyone to refuse to put their name to such a communication.

The reply made reference to my question about the vagueness of using the conditional term "might" within the more important survey points. But it completely failed to answer my questions.

Mr/Ms Anonymous expressed the view that, "The questions are certainly not intended to be misleading, opaque or misinterpreted, rather an opportunity to share your views on how you would like you [sic] membership to be shaped." OK - so I now know their intentions, but that doesn't really get us anywhere, does it? :huh:

S/he also stated, "I am sorry to read that you feel disappointed in PACEY’s performance at the moment, and would welcome some more clarity on your concerns so we can address them fully for you." I will therefore try emailing again, and maybe put the question in more simple terms so maybe they'll understand it second time around. I shall report back here. Who knows - they might even be prepared to give an answer.

Btw, I entirely agree with Lisbet about the frustration of "best fit" answers (along the lines of "how long ago did you stop beating your wife?") I didn't ask pacey about that, cos it would only confuse matters. It's the sort of thing that will see us in 6 months' time being told something is happening "because the membership responded positively" when the truth is that a lot of respondents are merely selecting the 'least worst' option so they can move onto the next page in the survey. Hardly any of the questions have a "no view/don't know/none of the above" option and you must answer all the questions. It is an entirely badly-designed survey. Probably another case of pacey doing something on the cheap, cos members simply won't pay the sort of fees it would cost to operate a truly professional organisation. :mad:

[Simona]

I emailed pacey yesterday morning and, to their credit, a reply was sent yesterday afternoon. So at least some improvement in their response times.

The reply itself was rather disappointing, starting with the fact that it was anonymous, coming from an unnamed person of "The PACEY Membership Team". Forum members can decide for themselves whether they regard it as 'professional' for anyone to refuse to put their name to such a communication.

The reply made reference to my question about the vagueness of using the conditional term "might" within the more important survey points. But it completely failed to answer my questions.

Mr/Ms Anonymous expressed the view that, "The questions are certainly not intended to be misleading, opaque or misinterpreted, rather an opportunity to share your views on how you would like you [sic] membership to be shaped." OK - so I now know their intentions, but that doesn't really get us anywhere, does it? :huh:

S/he also stated, "I am sorry to read that you feel disappointed in PACEY’s performance at the moment, and would welcome some more clarity on your concerns so we can address them fully for you." I will therefore try emailing again, and maybe put the question in more simple terms so maybe they'll understand it second time around. I shall report back here. Who knows - they might even be prepared to give an answer.

Btw, I entirely agree with Lisbet about the frustration of "best fit" answers (along the lines of "how long ago did you stop beating your wife?") I didn't ask pacey about that, cos it would only confuse matters. It's the sort of thing that will see us in 6 months' time being told something is happening "because the membership responded positively" when the truth is that a lot of respondents are merely selecting the 'least worst' option so they can move onto the next page in the survey. Hardly any of the questions have a "no view/don't know/none of the above" option and you must answer all the questions. It is an entirely badly-designed survey. Probably another case of pacey doing something on the cheap, cos members simply won't pay the sort of fees it would cost to operate a truly professional organisation. :mad:

Bunyip...I have been emailing the M'ship dept for the last few days...the answers come back, in fact I have one last to reply to which I received yesterday...the person ...not unnamed, appers to want to listen.
I am told I could escalate this to the Director of M'ship herself if I want to...not really what I want or was trying to achieve is now resolved

I did the survey but did not submit it...it is obvious that pacey are trying to compete with all other associations in terms of what package they offer...
I am also sure the discussions here in this forum have helped to kick that survey ...we have compared and listed the various packages here but without some associations responding themselves it is a bit more difficult to choose

For those who wish to connect with pacey it does give the opportunity at the end to comment as much as you can or want and express your views...don't miss that opportunity!

[bunyip]

Hi Simona :waving:

I've replied to their email today, requesting proper clarification over the survey, and listing a few of my current grievances.

I appreciate what members have said about filing in the survey's "Any other comments" box, but am not prepared to do that until I've had clarification on the rest of the survey that I'd have to go through first. It's a very poorly-designed survey and I suspect a lot of people will have replied one way and will have their answers interpreted in another.

[Simona]

Hi Simona :waving:

I've replied to their email today, requesting proper clarification over the survey, and listing a few of my current grievances.

I appreciate what members have said about filing in the survey's "Any other comments" box, but am not prepared to do that until I've had clarification on the rest of the survey that I'd have to go through first. It's a very poorly-designed survey and I suspect a lot of people will have replied one way and will have their answers interpreted in another.

Bunyip...waving back to you ...no icon as I have not worked out how you add them on??? pitiful really I know!!
Keep us posted ..interesting to see if your questions are answered

[VeggieSausage]

Bunyip...waving back to you ...no icon as I have not worked out how you add them on??? pitiful really I know!!
Keep us posted ..interesting to see if your questions are answered

I am moving to Morton Michel for my PLI and not renewing my PACEY membership. Have filled out questionnaire, I think their ****** stuff is rubbish, we shouldn't have to pay for full member benefits, their facebook page stuff is poor, their online presence is poor, paperwork is expensive.....and after telling me when I called to renew that all contracts should be renewed yearly in case the small print has changed and they do not stand up in court, I have abandoned them, their magazine of often just promoting PACEY, I prefer others......need I go on!!!

[mum24]

Thanks for putting up the link Chatterbox. I didn't get the email; the only pacey messages I had in the last few days are "back to school" ads for resources and a training notice.

I started filling in the survey with the best of intentions, got half way through and stopped. Sorry, but I've seen this kind of survey before and it is wide open to false results and misinterpretation. The questions are asking about training, resources, representation, being listened to, etc. Fine. But the wording - "Please can you rate them in order of how useful you might find them in your role?" - is problematic and will give false responses and is wide open to being spun.

"Might???" So are we being asked how important these things are, or whether we think pacey is doing a good job of them? :huh: The survey confuses 2 very different questions with each and every response.

So, "listening to your view" is IME a 5 (really, really, very, crucially important.) But are pacey doing this? Well, I'd score them a "1" on this. I'm not doing the survey, cos I can see where this is going. I don't want to be a part of members saying something is really important to them for someone at Ivory Towers Bromley to pick up the results and read it as if we're saying they're doing a good job of it.

I totally agree bunyip, I couldn't have said it better. I have been a member of pacey for 9 years and now feel totally disillusioned with them. Not sure where else to go though, the local officers here are really supportive at ground level, but head office?
By the way, I replied using my phone for the first time, so I hope I have replied correctly.

[k1rstie]

a lot of respondents are merely selecting the 'least worst' option so they can move onto the next page in the survey. Hardly any of the questions have a "no view/don't know/none of the above" option and you must answer all the questions. It is an entirely badly-designed survey. :mad:

Bunyip, I thought you were right, the answer I really wanted was not listed, so had to do a best fit.
My renewal is due at Easter time. I am really considering changing after 10 years if membership.


Kirstie

[Simona]

I am not sure about this but the survey looks to me to be open to non members too...it is called Pacey members benefit

Unless non members can give their views on what they would like to have how can Pacey respond?
maybe the members could clarify this for us?
thank you

I have just looked at Pacey local to see if I can find this survey anywhere...I cannot see it not even in the members' area so wonder where it has come from?

[rickysmiths]

I am moving to Morton Michel for my PLI and not renewing my PACEY membership. Have filled out questionnaire, I think their ****** stuff is rubbish, we shouldn't have to pay for full member benefits, their facebook page stuff is poor, their online presence is poor, paperwork is expensive.....and after telling me when I called to renew that all contracts should be renewed yearly in case the small print has changed and they do not stand up in court, I have abandoned them, their magazine of often just promoting PACEY, I prefer others......need I go on!!!

MM paperwork is more expensive.

Contracts do NOT have to be renewed annually to stand up in court just because some small print may have been changed, any current NCMA or Pacey Contracts are perfectly good and would stand up in Court if they are filled in correctly. It is and always has been considered good practice to review Contracts every year anyway and this would go for any Contracts produced by MM or anyone else. Pacey Contracts cost £1.67 so they are very cheap compared to the annual income even for a child who only may attend one day a week. If you consider £1.67 a year to potentially protect yourself and your business if you had to go to court then of course that is your choice but to me it is actually a very small price to pay. This has been the subject of another thread.

I really don't know what the fuss is about. Pacey Contracts are not expensive,

[Simona]

MM paperwork is more expensive.

Contracts do NOT have to be renewed annually to stand up in court just because some small print may have been changed, any current NCMA or Pacey Contracts are perfectly good and would stand up in Court if they are filled in correctly. It is and always has been considered good practice to review Contracts every year anyway and this would go for any Contracts produced by MM or anyone else. Pacey Contracts cost £1.67 so they are very cheap compared to the annual income even for a child who only may attend one day a week. If you consider £1.67 a year to potentially protect yourself and your business if you had to go to court then of course that is your choice but to me it is actually a very small price to pay. This has been the subject of another thread.

I really don't know what the fuss is about. Pacey Contracts are not expensive,

Rickysmiths...once again you state 'I don't know what the fuss is about'
The fuss, as you wrongly term it, is about discussing pacey and they way cms feel represented
Once again you raise the contracts...are they really perfectly good as you say? if so why are cms constantly discussing them and feeling far from sure about what they cover?

I told you last week that the small print between the 03/04 and 06/11 contracts is 'exactly' the same...so why should pacey recommend they be renewed if no small print has changed?
and before you tell me they are out of date where is the newest version since the rebranding... as we were told we could put pacey stickers on them to cover the ncma logo...No No thank you!

Pacey contracts are not expensive...at £1.67 in fact for me they are too cheap...I also said I would bet contracts would come up again as a discussion...sad to see I was right.

unfortunately it has been impossible for years to engage positively with ncma/pacey ...cms are either ignored, or jumped upon, or called a nuisance or left thinking 'why do I bother'?

This thread is about the new 'survey' which I could not find anywhere and unless Chatterbox had not posted it here we would have missed the opportunity to input ...

Again the survey is causing problems and cms are unhappy about its format but it gives plenty of space for comments..so what are my worries or at least which topics I would have liked a response to.... or would have liked to engage in further discussion

Widening of the membership
rebranding
agencies
childcare hubs
More Affordable Childcare...what is pacey response to the threat cms will lose wrap around care to schools?
Present Ofsted Registration fee and what is in store in future

Contracts
pacey paperwork

lack of grants awarded to pacey for 2013-2015
Ofsted inspections
#OfstedBigConversation...is pacey including itself in the group and attending the meetings??
Networks which ncma endorsed for years
accreditation which has no weight any more and left 90% of cms out of the funding since the EYFS 2008 included cms in the education delivery but still excluded them in funding
The reason LAs moved from the pacey network model (CCF) to their own
Statutory Guidance for LAs...how is pacey helping cms to access it if the LAs are not complying?
sporadic pacey representation at LA level

Lack of knowledge of pacey management structure
the departure of too many directors and recently CEO Farrell in the last year
pacey local...who does it benefit?
NPF structure and representation of concerns
Professional Occupational Standards, levels of m'ship and CPD requirements
too much online training

the loss of a wonderful chair in Susanna Dawson
the loss of the annual conference
lack of response when a cm writes in
helpline

Last is the fact I would have liked Pacey to be part of the Task and Finish group as 'observers' not involved in developing agenmcies but listening and being a lot more informed by their presence at the meetings...NDNA, PLA and ******* are there...why not pacey?

On all these topics I have engaged positively but not always received a plausible answer.....has anyone else?

[sarah707]

MM paperwork is more expensive.




Just to clarify for forum members who are concerned - childminders who are insured by Morton Michel do NOT have to use their paperwork.

Thank you :D

[rickysmiths]

Rickysmiths...once again you state 'I don't know what the fuss is about'
The fuss, as you wrongly term it, is about discussing pacey and they way cms feel represented
Once again you raise the contracts...are they really perfectly good as you say? if so why are cms constantly discussing them and feeling far from sure about what they cover?

I told you last week that the small print between the 03/04 and 06/11 contracts is 'exactly' the same...so why should pacey recommend they be renewed if no small print has changed?
and before you tell me they are out of date where is the newest version since the rebranding... as we were told we could put pacey stickers on them to cover the ncma logo...No No thank you!

Pacey contracts are not expensive...at £1.67 in fact for me they are too cheap...I also said I would bet contracts would come up again as a discussion...sad to see I was right.

unfortunately it has been impossible for years to engage positively with ncma/pacey ...cms are either ignored, or jumped upon, or called a nuisance or left thinking 'why do I bother'?

This thread is about the new 'survey' which I could not find anywhere and unless Chatterbox had not posted it here we would have missed the opportunity to input ...

Again the survey is causing problems and cms are unhappy about its format but it gives plenty of space for comments..so what are my worries or at least which topics I would have liked a response to.... or would have liked to engage in further discussion

Widening of the membership
rebranding
agencies
childcare hubs
More Affordable Childcare...what is pacey response to the threat cms will lose wrap around care to schools?
Present Ofsted Registration fee and what is in store in future

Contracts
pacey paperwork

lack of grants awarded to pacey for 2013-2015
Ofsted inspections
#OfstedBigConversation...is pacey including itself in the group and attending the meetings??
Networks which ncma endorsed for years
accreditation which has no weight any more and left 90% of cms out of the funding since the EYFS 2008 included cms in the education delivery but still excluded them in funding
The reason LAs moved from the pacey network model (CCF) to their own
Statutory Guidance for LAs...how is pacey helping cms to access it if the LAs are not complying?
sporadic pacey representation at LA level

Lack of knowledge of pacey management structure
the departure of too many directors and recently CEO Farrell in the last year
pacey local...who does it benefit?
NPF structure and representation of concerns
Professional Occupational Standards, levels of m'ship and CPD requirements
too much online training

the loss of a wonderful chair in Susanna Dawson
the loss of the annual conference
lack of response when a cm writes in
helpline

Last is the fact I would have liked Pacey to be part of the Task and Finish group as 'observers' not involved in developing agenmcies but listening and being a lot more informed by their presence at the meetings...NDNA, PLA and ******* are there...why not pacey?

On all these topics I have engaged positively but not always received a plausible answer.....has anyone else?

I was only addressing a comment about the cost of Pacey Contracts and nothing else.

Just for the record though. When I have had any issues with Pacey i have emailed or phoned them and I must say they have mostly been resolved quickly and within the bounds of a big organisation. A sensible conversation with some solid constructive discussion I find goes a long way and it has worked for me. I find getting emotional does not work as well. Compromise is also good because no organisation is every going to be right in every single way for every single one of their members life just isn't like that.

To be honest you seem to have so many issues with pacey why don't you just leave them and go to one of the other organisations that you keep saying are so much better at being there for childminders?

You keep pulling pacey apart in thread after thread. You are not doing this with any of the other oragnisations and I think it is wrong that you keep doing this on a public forum. I think it is producing a very bias un balanced view of the organisation and I think it boarders on being a very unprofessional thing to do. Fine if you finely pick apart all the other membership organisations in exactly the same way but you don't and from my personal view some of them have some very dubious set ups but that is my personal view and I would never dream to talk about them in the way you do about Pacey. It frankly is bordering on the obsessive and I find it unpleasant and I wish you would please stop having a go at every opportunity on here.

If you are so personally un happy then just leave them or take up your personal concerns with Pacey directly.

[Simona]

I was only addressing a comment about the cost of Pacey Contracts and nothing else.

Just for the record though. When I have had any issues with Pacey i have emailed or phoned them and I must say they have mostly been resolved quickly and within the bounds of a big organisation. A sensible conversation with some solid constructive discussion I find goes a long way and it has worked for me. I find getting emotional does not work as well. Compromise is also good because no organisation is every going to be right in every single way for every single one of their members life just isn't like that.

To be honest you seem to have so many issues with pacey why don't you just leave them and go to one of the other organisations that you keep saying are so much better at being there for childminders?

You keep pulling pacey apart in thread after thread. You are not doing this with any of the other oragnisations and I think it is wrong that you keep doing this on a public forum. I think it is producing a very bias un balanced view of the organisation and I think it boarders on being a very unprofessional thing to do. Fine if you finely pick apart all the other membership organisations in exactly the same way but you don't and from my personal view some of them have some very dubious set ups but that is my personal view and I would never dream to talk about them in the way you do about Pacey. It frankly is bordering on the obsessive and I find it unpleasant and I wish you would please stop having a go at every opportunity on here.

If you are so personally un happy then just leave them or take up your personal concerns with Pacey directly.


I have contributed to the discussions like everybody else in this forum, especially about contracts, and have also taken some points to pacey itself and, as said, some have been listened to...that is not pulling apart but voicing my opinion which you dislike but do not seem to pick on any other unhappy cm.
For the record I have not spoken about any other association as I am not their member I do not know how they represent cms or what services they offer but have mentioned PLA a few times....yes they appear to be listening and I like that at this particular time


maybe you should take a look at pacey local and the many posts there that still await an answer from pacey
You are also not aware of the emails I exchanged with pacey...so like you I use the same positive engagement strategy...sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't
I have given pacey 12 years of membership and loyalty and they should listen to positive/constructive criticism...I think they do, not sure about you.

I totally respect your view but you must also respect mine...I am honest about what worries me and I would have liked to discuss in pacey local but it s not possible...we need to agree to disagree

[FloraDora]

As a new member, still in the pre registration stage I have welcomed the open discussions around PACEY ,PLA and MM
I was not under the impression that it was constantly negative, but honest and open and a little concerned around some areas. So 'equal' have the posts been that I have still not yet made a decision as to who to join.

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I think that Pacey get confused and there is an undertone going on here.

let's clarify AGAIN:)

1. Pacey offer Membership - lots of negativity about this and I think this is mostly what Simona is getting at (not blaming you Simona but your threads are mostly about this and I am using them as an example)

2. Pacey offer PLi - lots of complaints about this all over the place but clarification has been given in another thread so if you want to know about contracts please go there as I feel most people count this insurance as "get my money back when a parent doesn't pay insurance" (my opinion). The insurance also covers you (and in my opinion is more important than any other cover of this policy) for Liability so you have someone to back you if a claim is made against you for whatever reason. I again state the policy that Pacey offers is different to MM and I expect other insurance companies - I expect that they will all be different so please read and see what you are getting for your money, as you would a travel insurance.

I posted this thread so that members of Pacey could be involved in the potential introduction of new lines. If you don't like them then say no but can this thread please stay on target of the subject that it was intended and not turn into another "Pacey didn't do this thread".

I know everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I am not belittling them but there are loads of other threads under the Pacey heading doing exactly that.

[Simona]

I think that Pacey get confused and there is an undertone going on here.

let's clarify AGAIN:)

1. Pacey offer Membership - lots of negativity about this and I think this is mostly what Simona is getting at (not blaming you Simona but your threads are mostly about this and I am using them as an example)

2. Pacey offer PLi - lots of complaints about this all over the place but clarification has been given in another thread so if you want to know about contracts please go there as I feel most people count this insurance as "get my money back when a parent doesn't pay insurance" (my opinion). The insurance also covers you (and in my opinion is more important than any other cover of this policy) for Liability so you have someone to back you if a claim is made against you for whatever reason. I again state the policy that Pacey offers is different to MM and I expect other insurance companies - I expect that they will all be different so please read and see what you are getting for your money, as you would a travel insurance.

I posted this thread so that members of Pacey could be involved in the potential introduction of new lines. If you don't like them then say no but can this thread please stay on target of the subject that it was intended and not turn into another "Pacey didn't do this thread".

I know everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I am not belittling them but there are loads of other threads under the Pacey heading doing exactly that.

No Chatterbox it is not 'negativity'...it is called 'constructive criticism'...
it is part of the reflection process that makes anyone offer a better service.
it is what parents do to cms when they make a suggestion to improve practice and what we do the SEF in order to improve our service...
do we tell those parents to go somewhere else or do we discuss and adapt practice in order to improve as service providers?

What I and many other cms on this forum have done is raise our worries and confusion over contracts, PLI and much more.... that is not negativity
it is being honest and proactive when one is confused and getting clarification...
it is receiving a satisfactory answer when one rings the helpline
it is being treated with respect when exchanging information on a forum

it is also a lot more and without evidence of what I have done or how I have engaged with pacey or, indeed how pacey have engaged with me, neither you nor Rickysmiths can accuse me of anything or trying to bully me...

It is sad that once again you have to 'clarify' what pacey is, about their contracts or PLI...I have no problems with either

Yes I have listed a lot of things that I am confused about and, honestly, after 12 years of membership I should not be
I also know that as a cm and alongside thousands of cms we face the most difficult of times ...I don't think it is inappropriate to question those who represent me and get paid to do so?

[hectors house]

I am no longer a member of NCMA (PACEY) but I still completed the survey - I agree the tick boxes weren't always very helpful but I made sure I told them of why I am no longer a member in the comments box.

Simona and Rickysmith please just agree to disagree or PM each other as Chatterbox says when you two answer a post it seems to get quite heated! :D

[Simona]

I am no longer a member of NCMA (PACEY) but I still completed the survey - I agree the tick boxes weren't always very helpful but I made sure I told them of why I am no longer a member in the comments box.

Simona and Rickysmith please just agree to disagree or PM each other as Chatterbox says when you two answer a post it seems to get quite heated! :D

Thank you Hector House...I have clearly asked to agree to disagree in one of the posts below
Hopefully this will be the last we hear on this
I have no more interest in discussing pacey contracts or their PLI

Sorry for the prolonged discussions...they were meant to clarify questions

[Chatterbox Childcare]

Anyone else doing the survey? Anyone had anything positive to say about the new ideas?