I thought I was clear about numbers and variations, but have begun to have doubts.
My first impression was that the rules on numbers had not changed under new EYFS. The only change is that Ofsted expect us to follow the rules without troubling them to issue a variation. So far, so simple.
Following a closer reading of
EYFS Statutory Framework, section 3.40, I noticed that:-
- Early Years children for whom we provide wrap-around care don't really count as EY (but do count as under-8's). So no change from the current EYFS.
- But, "exceptions to the usual ratios can be made when childminders are caring for sibling babies, or when caring for their own baby." (My emphasis.)
This latter bullet point is significantly different from the current
EYFS Statutory Framework, section 14, which doesn't refer to babies. It says, "Exceptions to these ratios may be made for siblings and to provide continuity of care in certain circumstances ..."
Given that the term "babies" is generally used by Ofsted to refer to under-1's, I'm now confused. Does this mean they're tightening up and CMs can no longer make exceptions for EY children who are between 1 year and school age?
I checked Ofsted's guide:
Numbers and ages of children that providers on the Early Years and Childcare Registers may care for. Section 7 of that document says, "Paragraph 3.29 in the EYFS also allows childminders to care for more children in the early years age group through an overarching 'exceptional circumstances' statement." We normally interpret an exceptional circumstance as relating to the continuity of care for children and/or where sibling children are not babies."
That now looks as if Ofsted are contradicting their own
EYFS Statutory Framework, section 3.40. It's even more confusing because the paragraph they refer to (3.29) which contains their "overarching 'exceptional circumstances' statement" is in the section that applies to group settings, and not the bit that refers to CMs.
I'm sure the devil is in the detail, as they say. but which particular detail is he in?
If it's a clarification, then it's not a very clear clarification (at best, it suggests they didn't say what they meant when they published new 'improved' EYFS.)
I've referred this to my NCMA DW who, after a pause said she'd get back to me......
I think I feel a migraine coming on.
Bookmarks