Over And Under 3 Ratios In A Mixed Room Setting

[AnonyMouse_12960]

Just looking for some clarity here.

 

We are a mixed age room setting, with some children under 3 and some over 3, (with the proportion changing day on day and term to term). If we had say 16 under 3's and 8 over, then the min staffing requirement would be 5 staff (4 for under 3's and 1 for over).

 

What would be the requirement if we had 14 under 3's and 12 over 3's. Would I calculate this as 3 staff plus half a staff for under 3's and 1 and a half staff for over 3's. thus needing a total of 5, or would I need more?

 

What then if I have a member of staff with QTS/EYPS. I know this allows a 1;13 ratio with the over 3's, but not at all sure how to apply this in a mixed age room.

 

Can anyone help here please? I did try to ask Mrs O at last visit, but she just looked confused.

 

I am sure that one of you will have the wisdom that I require!!!

 

many thanks

 

EYFS1966

[AnonyMouse_22106]

 

What would be the requirement if we had 14 under 3's and 12 over 3's. Would I calculate this as 3 staff plus half a staff for under 3's and 1 and a half staff for over 3's. thus needing a total of 5, or would I need more?

 

quote]

 

You would still need 4 staff for the under 3's which could be made up with 2 of your over 3's but that would still take you 2 children over for the over 3's and so as such you would still need 2 for the over 3's

I think you need 6 staff - that'w what I would have anyway.

 

Ratios are kind of like a question in a maths exam aren't they!

 

As for the rest of your questions sorry can't help but sure someone will soon!

[Guest]

Hi

 

I work it out, as 6 staff - 4 for your 14 under 3's and 2 for your 12 over 3's.

Sometimes you can combine the children within the ratio and 'save' a member of staff but only with certain numbers

 

 

 

 

I always find 'grouping' them on paper in their ratios helps, starting with your smallest ratio:

 

i.e 14 unders and 10 overs would be: 14= 4,4,4,2 (4 staff) 10= 8,2 (1 staff because the '2' could join the unders '2' to make the 4 needed for their staff ratio = 4,4,4,4 Total of 5 staff

 

 

had the 10 been 11, then another member of staff (6 in total) would be needed because it would be 8,3 and the 3 children would take the unders to 4,4,4,4,1

 

 

If you have an EYP it would be 5 staff - 4 for the unders and the EYP for the (up to 13) overs (for a specified period of time)

 

 

This is much easier to verbally explain than write!!!!

 

Another eg: 10 unders and 10 overs would be 4 staff (4,4,2 & 8,2. Join the two 2's together to make another staff worth changing it to 4,4,4,8)

This with an EYP would still be 4 staff. The EYP for the 10 overs and the other 3 for the unders

 

 

Hope I've got that right and i'm not leading you astray!!!

t's mindboggling. Ive even been known to get the play people to represent the children! LOL

[Guest]

Thumper Rabbit - you beat me to it and you've explained it so much easier (and to the point)

 

oh to be able to explain without waffling!! haha, one day!

[AnonyMouse_25331]

we always work it out with under 3's being 'worth' 2 children.

 

So 5 staff could have the equivalent of 40 children (5 x 8) or maybe 4 x 8 + 13 if you had an EYPS.

 

 

If you then had 14 under 3's they would be 'worth' 28 + your 12 over 3's = 40 so 5 members of staff.

 

If you had 4 members of staff and one of those was EYPS then your maximum would be:-

 

3 x 8 = 24 + 13 = 37.

 

Hope that makes sense!

[AnonyMouse_12960]

we always work it out with under 3's being 'worth' 2 children.

 

So 5 staff could have the equivalent of 40 children (5 x 8) or maybe 4 x 8 + 13 if you had an EYPS.

 

 

If you then had 14 under 3's they would be 'worth' 28 + your 12 over 3's = 40 so 5 members of staff.

 

If you had 4 members of staff and one of those was EYPS then your maximum would be:-

 

3 x 8 = 24 + 13 = 37.

 

Hope that makes sense!

 

This is exactly how I have always calculated to date, but it does not equate to the more "pure" calculations shown above, where the under 3's must be taught at 1:4 and may only be topped up by an over 3 but counting them as under 3's. Is there any difinitive answer to the rights or wrongs here?

[AnonyMouse_705]

Hi

 

You would need 6 members of staff for your second query.

 

I like to put the children into boxes!

 

So the 2 year olds - 4 go in a box (with one member of staff)

 

and the 3 year olds - 8 go into a box (with one member of staff)

 

Unfortunatey you cannot calculate the number of staff required by making the 2 year olds count as 2 children because in some instances that would mean that they are not maintained in a 1:4 ratio.

 

3 year olds can go down a ratio (ie to be with left over 2 year olds to make 1:4) but 2 year olds cannot go up a ratio (they cannot be put into a 1:8 ratio with 3 year olds which is effectively what you could be doing with doubling up).

 

Just to confuse the matter, this week I was told by our local Surestart advisor that we couldn't put 3 year olds into the 2 year old ratio as above 1:4. This did not make sense so I phoned Ofsted and they were HELPFUL!! I even have it explicitly in an email from them.

 

As for the 1:13 I'm afraid I do not have experience to comment.

 

Below is my edited query to Ofsted and their response.

 

XXXXX confirmed that with the following example numbers of children, the minimum staffing ratio we would need would be 2 members of staff. So with 10 three year olds, and 2 two year olds we would need 2 members of staff because 2 of the three year olds could be brought into the ratio for the 2 year olds. xxxxx confirmed that we could bring the ratio for children down for their age but we could never take children up to another age group ratio

 

Ofsted response

From: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk [mailto:enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk]

Sent: 11 March 2010 18:40

 

Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

 

In response to your enquiry; you are correct in believing you only require two staff for the children in the scenario.

 

 

This is because:

 

1. One adult could care for eight of the 3year olds. This leaves two unaccounted for

 

2. The ratio for 2 year olds is one adult to every four children- therefore the two 2 year olds are covered and there is still space to accommodate the two 3 year olds remaining from the first adult.

 

 

I hope you find this information helpful. However should you require any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

 

Regards

 

xxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Ofsted - National Business Unit

 

TEL: 0300 123 1231

[AnonyMouse_12960]

Thanks Deb for your reply. I think I finally get it!!!

[AnonyMouse_3735]

this is often discussed and in this thread.. Ratios .. there is a good table in one of the posts which gives a quick reference to find out if ratios are correct..

 

there are lots of formulas and counting children as 2 etc but majority of these are incorrect

 

if unsure I did the box thing too.. had boxes with 4 spaces for 2yr olds and 8 for over 3s.. Had to fill all the 2yrs in first.. any space in a box could be filled by 3yr old.. BUT any space in 3yr box could not be filled by younger child..

 

Inge

Edited March 13, 2010 by Inge

[Guest Janie4]

Hi,

 

We work it out from 2 year olds upwards, making sets of 4 per adult - any spaces in a set of 2yr olds can be filled by a 3 year old but 3 year olds are in sets of 8 which canot be filled with a 2 year old.

 

People have talked about ratio of 1:13 with a QTS or EYP but we have to remember that is only relevant if another member of staff also holds a Level 3 qualification.