Simona
03-09-2013, 05:10 PM
I have posted this elsewhere but wanted more cms to see and read.
I met Sue Robb back in June at a London conference and was reassured when she said that she had concerns about agencies.
You may remember I fed back from that conference
Today I have read her article in the October issue of EYE...I am now not so reassured.
These are some of her statements
- concerns about potential 2 tier system
- concerns that cms who prefer to remain independent will be viewed as 'suspicious' by parents
- concerns about cost of registration and cost to parents
- 4Children is in favour of innovative ideas to make life easier for families
- we should not dismiss out-of-hand the gains that agencies could help deliver to families and the
sector
- benefits to parents to secure places and safety net when their cm is unwell
- cms will be freed from having to fill vacancies because of the parent matching system
- reducing bureaucratic burden on cms
- cms could benefit from discounted fees on training and sharing resources
- participants in the pilot will be chosen by the department, the DfE strategic partner, The
Children's Partnership, of which 4 Children is a co-founder, will be involved in facilitating the trials
- Learning from the trials will be shared among participants and more widely to inform further
delivery
- 4Children will watch the trials with interest in the 'hope' they will produce the insight we need to
introduce a flexible cm agency model, which will be welcomed by cms and alleviate some of the
pressure of family life for parents everywhere
I am stunned by some of the statements...
where is the evidence that parents will view non agency cms with 'suspicion'?
Thousands of cms have clearly stated we do not need help in running our businesses
What expertise have 4 Children in cms practice?
Innovative idea? maybe she should look at what happened in Holland...there is nothing 'innovative' about agencies
Cms have also clearly stated we do not welcome agencies so 4 Children's hope to see a flexible model introduced sound like this is a fait accompli..
While I agree that families face pressure should cms be used as guinea pigs to alleviate them by taking our businesses away..it is enough we subsidise childcare for parents often more well of than we are
I am hugely concerned at the various grants 4 Children have received from the DfE...will their judgement be unbiased when helping the DfE decision to introduce this controversial reform?
I met Sue Robb back in June at a London conference and was reassured when she said that she had concerns about agencies.
You may remember I fed back from that conference
Today I have read her article in the October issue of EYE...I am now not so reassured.
These are some of her statements
- concerns about potential 2 tier system
- concerns that cms who prefer to remain independent will be viewed as 'suspicious' by parents
- concerns about cost of registration and cost to parents
- 4Children is in favour of innovative ideas to make life easier for families
- we should not dismiss out-of-hand the gains that agencies could help deliver to families and the
sector
- benefits to parents to secure places and safety net when their cm is unwell
- cms will be freed from having to fill vacancies because of the parent matching system
- reducing bureaucratic burden on cms
- cms could benefit from discounted fees on training and sharing resources
- participants in the pilot will be chosen by the department, the DfE strategic partner, The
Children's Partnership, of which 4 Children is a co-founder, will be involved in facilitating the trials
- Learning from the trials will be shared among participants and more widely to inform further
delivery
- 4Children will watch the trials with interest in the 'hope' they will produce the insight we need to
introduce a flexible cm agency model, which will be welcomed by cms and alleviate some of the
pressure of family life for parents everywhere
I am stunned by some of the statements...
where is the evidence that parents will view non agency cms with 'suspicion'?
Thousands of cms have clearly stated we do not need help in running our businesses
What expertise have 4 Children in cms practice?
Innovative idea? maybe she should look at what happened in Holland...there is nothing 'innovative' about agencies
Cms have also clearly stated we do not welcome agencies so 4 Children's hope to see a flexible model introduced sound like this is a fait accompli..
While I agree that families face pressure should cms be used as guinea pigs to alleviate them by taking our businesses away..it is enough we subsidise childcare for parents often more well of than we are
I am hugely concerned at the various grants 4 Children have received from the DfE...will their judgement be unbiased when helping the DfE decision to introduce this controversial reform?