A while ago - around the beginning of August there was a thread about exceptions and if could take on siblings even if only had one place available.

I expressed my view but there was difference of opinion - and so because I did not want others to act on my personal view, I emailed my contact at Ofsted to get Ofsted's view so we could all be clear.

This is the email I sent

Dear
My apologies for sending another email but I do not know who else to ask about this.

I have a reputation for understanding EYFS 12 - which I do - and as a result other childminders tend to ask me questions. However I have responded to one question and some others have questioned my understanding of one aspect of exceptions.

I have explained that each of us is responsible for our own decisions about exceptions - and that we must comply with all requirements of EYFS 12 and follow the guidance document issued by Ofsted.

This is understood as is the fact that my assessment may be different to others due to my experience / the children in my care and so on. So everyone is agreed that they must decide themselves and be accountable for their decisions.

The problem lies with my personal interpretation about the care of siblings in the following situation.

Parent has two under fives and wants to place both children with the same childminder. In her area both childminder A and childminder B have one space for an under five child and there are no childminders with 2 under five spaces.

Parent would like to send both children to childminder A because childminder B can not provide care for all her work shifts

My understanding is that childminder A - could agree to care for both children for the follow reasons

She has one space for one child - so clear cut
The other child is a sibling and the parent can not find suitable hours or two spaces locally.
She has risk assessed and is confident that she can meet all the needs of all the children
She has discussed with the parents already using her service and they have no concerns
She is maintaining the overall ratio's - the maximum number of children in her care would be 4 children under 5 and will not exceed 6 under 8 at any one time
It is not long term
She has all the equipment needed and space in her car for another car seat.

I believe this is the honest and professional way to assess this scenario - and my understanding is it is within the 'rules' for exceptions.

I also believe that some childminders would not deal with a scenario such as this so honestly or professionally because they would take on the first child - then a week or two later grant themselves an exception to care for the second child on the grounds of continuity of care for a sibling.


My professional view is that to take on one child because you have a space but to not initially take on the second child would not be in the best interests of the parent or either of the children - due to separation issues, extra stress for parent (two children with two childminders) and could not only be confusing but detrimental to the children's emotional well being to be move childcare setting after such a short period of time.

As I say I believe it would be better to be honest, and take on both children even though only have one space - much the same as would do for twins.

However - as other childminders have questioned my understanding and my rational for it - I would be grateful if you could give me Ofsted's view - so that I can either admit to misunderstanding the 'rules' and to state Ofsted's view or to give reassurance than if meeting all other requirements of EYFS - that a childminder could take on siblings even if only have one space.

I have copied Sarah Neville in as she is aware of the questions being asked


This is the reply I received today (please note apology for delay)

Dear Penny

So sorry for the delay in replying. I think your view is right and in line with our guidance. The main thing childminders must do is consider in each particular case where they choose to take on extra children their rationale for doing so – it must be an exceptional circumstance and in the best interest of children. It is not in the best interests of anyone to take on one child first and then another later.

Best wishes

I hope this helps with everyone's understanding

Penny :)

Thanks Penny!!!

Thank you for sharing the clarification Penny :D

:laughing:

Sorry, I'm laughing at Ofsted, not you.

I made a recent call to them as I have a situation where a mum has enquired about starting 2 EY lo's in about a year's time. (It is a bit tentative, as she can only afford to start them both if she either gets a promotion, or I've got accreditation by then to offer funded places. Otherwise, she may leave them in nursery until one starts school, then I have one for before/after school, and the remaining EY lo all day. Hope that makes sense.)

The key thing is that, if they start together in 2013, that would take me from 2 EY children to 4 on many days.

Anyway, I made a call to Ofsted, who were initially reluctant to comment on a specific case. So I said, "let's call it a hypothetical case instead, as it's at least a year away."

They suggested I should stagger the start, separating the children's start dates by at least 2 weeks, then I could say #1 was settled and it would be a case of 'continuity of care' when #2 joined us. In short, exactly the opposite advice to what they emailed to you. I was pretty gobsmacked, as the guy was putting it like it was a sort of acceptable 'cheat' to make the most of the continuity rule. :eek:

Btw, I'm not suggesting for one moment that I'm right or you're wrong. I'm suggesting that Ofsted's right hand doesn't know what its left hand is doing.:(

I'm positive that Ofsted guidance used to give this scenario as an example of when they would NOT grant a variation. It specifically said that they would not grant a variation to take on siblings if you only had one space available. This was of course for EYFS (2008)

But then when I phoned up about taking on 2 siblings when I only had one space, they gave me an immediate variation and actually suggested I made it permanent even though I only needed it for a limited time.

I'm not doubting your source at all Penny, but have my doubts that if you spoke to anyone else at Ofsted you'd get the same reply twice. Your contact obviously applies a lot of common sense, but I'm never convinced their sensible interpretations filter down to anyone else.

Q: Why do Ofsted officials always go around in three's?

A: One of them can read and write; one of them knows how to make a telephone call; and the third one has to keep an eye on the other 2 dangerous intellectuals.

;)

:laughing:

Sorry, I'm laughing at Ofsted, not you.

I made a recent call to them as I have a situation where a mum has enquired about starting 2 EY lo's in about a year's time. (It is a bit tentative, as she can only afford to start them both if she either gets a promotion, or I've got accreditation by then to offer funded places. Otherwise, she may leave them in nursery until one starts school, then I have one for before/after school, and the remaining EY lo all day. Hope that makes sense.)

The key thing is that, if they start together in 2013, that would take me from 2 EY children to 4 on many days.

Anyway, I made a call to Ofsted, who were initially reluctant to comment on a specific case. So I said, "let's call it a hypothetical case instead, as it's at least a year away."

They suggested I should stagger the start, separating the children's start dates by at least 2 weeks, then I could say #1 was settled and it would be a case of 'continuity of care' when #2 joined us. In short, exactly the opposite advice to what they emailed to you. I was pretty gobsmacked, as the guy was putting it like it was a sort of acceptable 'cheat' to make the most of the continuity rule. :eek:

Btw, I'm not suggesting for one moment that I'm right or you're wrong. I'm suggesting that Ofsted's right hand doesn't know what its left hand is doing.:(

Often is the case of right hand and left hand not saying same thing - but in this case - person telling me is not only very senior but also has the responsibility for stating this.

I think she would be very interested to know what some people are saying. A guess but was it a 'helpline' person you spoke to.

Penny :)

Often is the case of right hand and left hand not saying same thing - but in this case - person telling me is not only very senior but also has the responsibility for stating this.

I think she would be very interested to know what some people are saying. A guess but was it a 'helpline' person you spoke to.

Penny :)

Absolutely. I've always suspected that the ones on the phones represent the lower echelons of the office food chain. ;)

I'm positive that Ofsted guidance used to give this scenario as an example of when they would NOT grant a variation. It specifically said that they would not grant a variation to take on siblings if you only had one space available. This was of course for EYFS (2008)

But then when I phoned up about taking on 2 siblings when I only had one space, they gave me an immediate variation and actually suggested I made it permanent even though I only needed it for a limited time.

I'm not doubting your source at all Penny, but have my doubts that if you spoke to anyone else at Ofsted you'd get the same reply twice. Your contact obviously applies a lot of common sense, but I'm never convinced their sensible interpretations filter down to anyone else.

You are right of course Mouse - as has often been proved. Maybe everyone should copy and paste the response I had in a document to keep on file- and if ever questioned I would be more than happy to pass on any inspector or helpline persons name to my contact - so she can tell them herself!

Penny:)

Often is the case of right hand and left hand not saying same thing - but in this case - person telling me is not only very senior but also has the responsibility for stating this.

I think she would be very interested to know what some people are saying. A guess but was it a 'helpline' person you spoke to.

Penny :)

That's the problem Penny. It's alright a very senior person saying it, but most of us have to deal with helpline staff and don't have the option of going to senior staff. And isn't that still just her interpretation, not a definitive answer?

You are right of course Mouse - as has often been proved. Maybe everyone should copy and paste the response I had in a document to keep on file- and if ever questioned I would be more than happy to pass on any inspector or helpline persons name to my contact - so she can tell them herself!

Penny:)

I've already copied and saved it and wouldn't hesitate to quote it if I needed to!

That's the problem Penny. It's alright a very senior person saying it, but most of us have to deal with helpline staff and don't have the option of going to senior staff. And isn't that still just her interpretation, not a definitive answer?

IT is a definitive answer - Sarah will confirm that this person WOULD NOT state in writing (in a email) if it was not right. She is the same person who has advised both myself and Sarah - and although not the top Ofsted person is about as senior as you can be without being the top person!


And you have raised a good point about not being able to go to senior person - we should have a means of being able to do so - LA's can;t either - they do have a named person but it is not a senior person. MMMM needs thinking about

And I am sure that I will not have this communication door open for much longer!

Penny :)

IT is a definitive answer - Sarah will confirm that this person WOULD NOT state in writing (in a email) if it was not right. She is the same person who has advised both myself and Sarah - and although not the top Ofsted person is about as senior as you can be without being the top person!


And you have raised a good point about not being able to go to senior person - we should have a means of being able to do so - LA's can;t either - they do have a named person but it is not a senior person. MMMM needs thinking about

And I am sure that I will not have this communication door open for much longer!
Penny :)

Don't you dare take your foot out of that door :laughing:

It is just so frustrating that you get info from people on here (which I take as reliable), but when you phone and speak to the helpline they will not accept what you are saying.

Thanks Penny - have also copied and pasted for future reference.

Miffy xx

Q: Why do Ofsted officials always go around in three's?

A: One of them can read and write; one of them knows how to make a telephone call; and the third one has to keep an eye on the other 2 dangerous intellectuals.

;)

:laughing::laughing::laughing:

The trouble is that we don't have the 'senior person's' name to include in the quote so Ofsted could say it's just hearsay if they queried it as we can't prove it came from the top.

I must admit when I read the Ofsted guidance factsheet on exceptions I took it that you couldn't take twins or siblings as new business if you only had one space too so maybe it needs clarifying in an updated factsheet. Penny/Sarah do you think your high up person could facilitate that then we would all have the official line in writing.

NB Penny I am not for one moment doubting the veracity of what you've written/received just querying how the rest of us would prove to Ofsted/LEA it was genuine

The trouble is that we don't have the 'senior person's' name to include in the quote so Ofsted could say it's just hearsay if they queried it as we can't prove it came from the top.

I must admit when I read the Ofsted guidance factsheet on exceptions I took it that you couldn't take twins or siblings as new business if you only had one space too so maybe it needs clarifying in an updated factsheet. Penny/Sarah do you think your high up person could facilitate that then we would all have the official line in writing.

NB Penny I am not for one moment doubting the veracity of what you've written/received just querying how the rest of us would prove to Ofsted/LEA it was genuine

Our contacts have made it very clear to us that they are not referenced individually - all references must say 'Ofsted' which is why Penny and I do not share names with you.

However, that does not mean we don't have the name of the people we are speaking to if there is a problem with the advice we have given and you have followed.

We are both committed to checking everything out and giving the best possible advice.

So if you ever need to check anything out you can always contact us :D

The trouble is that we don't have the 'senior person's' name to include in the quote so Ofsted could say it's just hearsay if they queried it as we can't prove it came from the top.

I must admit when I read the Ofsted guidance factsheet on exceptions I took it that you couldn't take twins or siblings as new business if you only had one space too so maybe it needs clarifying in an updated factsheet. Penny/Sarah do you think your high up person could facilitate that then we would all have the official line in writing.

NB Penny I am not for one moment doubting the veracity of what you've written/received just querying how the rest of us would prove to Ofsted/LEA it was genuine

I think the crux of the particular case was that there was a shortage of available minders - part of the variation system has always been that under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances, variations are allowed, so if there is only one minder in a village and a parent with two siblings, then it would be allowed, if there were ten minders in a town and five had two spaces but the 6th minder had one and wanted a variation to have them then the answer would have been no - as that would be a way of increasing numbers. It keeps being repeated that if you are confident that you can cope, have risk assessed and think that Ofsted would have agreed then go for it - you can justify your decision if it is ever queried - if you think it wouldn't have been allowed then don't do it!! There will always be different opinions from different bods at Ofsted - like all the inspectors have a different take on what they want to see - Jen x

I've had another thought. WHat would happen if you took on a child who didn't actually fall into the continuity category? If it was picked up at an inspection, what would Ofsted actually do?

What if you had by then had the child for a year? They were happy & progressing well, parents were happy, you could show you were managing 4 children well. Ofsted aren't likely to say they had to leave as by then the child would be settled. What action could they take?

I've had another thought. WHat would happen if you took on a child who didn't actually fall into the continuity category? If it was picked up at an inspection, what would Ofsted actually do?

What if you had by then had the child for a year? They were happy & progressing well, parents were happy, you could show you were managing 4 children well. Ofsted aren't likely to say they had to leave as by then the child would be settled. What action could they take?

You would have an action on your Ofsted online report telling you not to do it again!

It would stay on the Ofsted website for 5 years.

I suppose it would depend on how much you value your inspection grade as well because if you are given an action for doing something wrong you are unlikely to get a better grade than good at your next inspection...

Probably not worth the risk?? :D

You would have an action on your Ofsted online report telling you not to do it again!

It would stay on the Ofsted website for 5 years.

I suppose it would depend on how much you value your inspection grade as well because if you are given an action for doing something wrong you are unlikely to get a better grade than good at your next inspection...

Probably not worth the risk?? :D

Thank Sarah.

There are several cms in our group who are planning on taking on extra children, assuming that Ofsted wouldn't make them give notice if it was ever picked up that they hadn't really followed the rules. I though there must be some sanction, but wasn't sure what.
Unfortunately any impact on their grade won't really bother them :(

Our contacts have made it very clear to us that they are not referenced individually - all references must say 'Ofsted' which is why Penny and I do not share names with you.

However, that does not mean we don't have the name of the people we are speaking to if there is a problem with the advice we have given and you have followed.

We are both committed to checking everything out and giving the best possible advice.

So if you ever need to check anything out you can always contact us :D

I never doubted that for a minute! Thanks for confirming though :)

I think the crux of the particular case was that there was a shortage of available minders - part of the variation system has always been that under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances, variations are allowed, so if there is only one minder in a village and a parent with two siblings, then it would be allowed, if there were ten minders in a town and five had two spaces but the 6th minder had one and wanted a variation to have them then the answer would have been no - as that would be a way of increasing numbers. It keeps being repeated that if you are confident that you can cope, have risk assessed and think that Ofsted would have agreed then go for it - you can justify your decision if it is ever queried - if you think it wouldn't have been allowed then don't do it!! There will always be different opinions from different bods at Ofsted - like all the inspectors have a different take on what they want to see - Jen x

That makes perfect sense but how would you prove there were no minders available? What if there were other minders but the parent didn't gel with them, or they had a lower grade or any other reason why the parent wanted you? Just a thought. And I quite agree with your points about capability & RAs but as you say it is open to interpretation.

That makes perfect sense but how would you prove there were no minders available? What if there were other minders but the parent didn't gel with them, or they had a lower grade or any other reason why the parent wanted you? Just a thought. And I quite agree with your points about capability & RAs but as you say it is open to interpretation.

I think the answer from Ofsted is clear - although referring to the scenario I set she said that childminders must be able to justify the reason for the exception.

So provided you have good reason and record why you applied a exception then Ofsted will look at the reasons and if sensible and a professional judgement then you should be ok.

Those that 'bend' the rules 'might get away with it' - but as Sarah has said is it worth the risk to be downgraded?

PLUS is it worth the risk that your insurance would be invalid because you have not upheld the requirements of the EYFS (registration)? YOU can be sure that in the event of an insurance claim that involved a child - that every single detailed would be checked - including if you should be caring for that number of children.

Which is why you need to document your reasons, your risk assessment and the parents agreement to the exception.

Rules can be broken - but sooner or later you get found out and the consequences often change your life.

For example - I could drive through my estate at 70 MPH for weeks, even months without any consequences - but then one day there will be an accident or a speed camera and without doubt the consequences would be life changing.

I don't risk it when driving - and I don't risk it when childminding.


Penny :)

Penny :)

I hope you didn't think I was advocating breaking the rules Penny :panic: quite the opposite, I was trying to show (but not well obviously) how even something explained relatively clearly could still be misinterpreted, especially by those not averse to a bit of bending. I am seeing worrying threads popping up on all sorts of forums where minders genuinely believe that can just up their numbers for any scenario from September without justification.

hi ladies,

can you help me im confused with all of this, however. im currently looking after a 5 year old and yesterday his mum asked me if i could take on his younger brother (due to changes in work hours) whos 3 for 2 afternoons a week as shes been unable to find childcare for him as ive already got 3 ey would i be able to take him on in sept?

I hope you didn't think I was advocating breaking the rules Penny :panic: quite the opposite, I was trying to show (but not well obviously) how even something explained relatively clearly could still be misinterpreted, especially by those not averse to a bit of bending. I am seeing worrying threads popping up on all sorts of forums where minders genuinely believe that can just up their numbers for any scenario from September without justification.

Not at all Childrenatheart - although can see why you might have thought that - as for some reason the word 'you' was in capitals in my post - my apologies for that and due to my poor typing skills :blush: and not done on purpose.

You are right to be concerned about some comments on other forums - and there is a lot of both confusion and as you say an intent to bend rules.

Apologies again for my typp - I did not doubt for a second what you were saying.

Penny :)

hi ladies,

can you help me im confused with all of this, however. im currently looking after a 5 year old and yesterday his mum asked me if i could take on his younger brother (due to changes in work hours) whos 3 for 2 afternoons a week as shes been unable to find childcare for him as ive already got 3 ey would i be able to take him on in sept?

Changes to conditions of registration such as taking on an extra child in a certain age group can only be done for continuity of care in exceptional circumstances.

Hth :D

hi ladies,

can you help me im confused with all of this, however. im currently looking after a 5 year old and yesterday his mum asked me if i could take on his younger brother (due to changes in work hours) whos 3 for 2 afternoons a week as shes been unable to find childcare for him as ive already got 3 ey would i be able to take him on in sept?

In theory yes - however it is not for me or anyone else to say so.

There is plenty of guidance about how you apply an exception and what you need to do

You must ensure you meet all the requirements of EYFS 12 -

So:

Check space available
Risk assess - including equipment needed and your own ability to care for an extra child
Tell the other parents your intentions
Make sure you do not exceed6 under 8 at any time.
Consider how long you will need to apply the exception for

You should keep records of your decision and reason for making it

As I say in theory yes you should be able to provide care for the sibling of a child already in your care - but you must be personally sure yourself because full responsibility lies with you.

And remember it is for exceptional circumstances only


Penny :)

thanks for your help penny.

i don't think i should have any problems because the only other child in my care on those days is my son.

are there any risk assessments sample documents on here that would cover this

yes in the downloads section at the top of the page, there is the ofsted variation form - if you use this, you will record all the information you need - but if on the afternoons you want to have him, there is only one other under five there (your son) then you don't need a variation do you, as there will only be two under fives with you? Have I understood that right?

Jen x

I don't think this person sounds to sure him/herself and I quote 'I THINK your view is right .......'

Christine

I don't think this person sounds to sure him/herself and I quote 'I THINK your view is right .......'

Christine

Sorry Christine, not sure what/who you are quoting........?

Jen x

Sorry Christine, not sure what/who you are quoting........?

Jen x

Dear Penny

So sorry for the delay in replying. I think your view is right and in line with our guidance. The main thing childminders must do is consider in each particular case where they choose to take on extra children their rationale for doing so – it must be an exceptional circumstance and in the best interest of children. It is not in the best interests of anyone to take on one child first and then another later.

Best wishes


Just wish the 'I think' was a more positive response

Cx

Oh I see - I suppose that like Penny can't say to another poster on here that their variation is OK to do, so the Ofsted bod can't blanket condone every variation under that theme....... so they are a bit vague and then can't be blamed if a variation goes belly up for whatever reason - I'm thinking that it will be like most things with minding, there are those of us that tow the line, and those of us that sail close to the wind, sometimes they are caught and pay the price and sometimes they benefit financially from sailing close and not getting caught - in the child's best interests? often not...... annoying for everyone else? you bet...... ever going to change? nope!!!!

Jen x