FSFRebecca

For us, the main issue was that EYrs has always been 'tacked on' in other announcements - "schools must .... schools must .... oh, yes and nurseries" There has been a distinct lack of mentions for our childminding community as well, even when they do remember to mention nursery settings!

Some of the things that have been sent out in the guidance simply don't apply to our kind of provisions e.g that when we create the small groups of children they should stay the same all week - works fine if your children come all week, but if they come for 2 and a half days it doesn't work.

The guidance has been released 'out of hours' so there has been a sense of panic created

The initial communication regarding funding/fees was confusing and so owners made decisions based on inaccurately interpreted information and the consequences of this confusion have been costly

We've separated all our tables and some children will eat in their rooms - usually we have eveyone together in our 'dining room' (big space in the middle). We've got 6 groups and (3+3+4+6+8+10). We've put rainbow labels on our tables to show children where to sit 

We've been open throughout the period and I'm happy to share what we have put in place to prepare for reopening - too many things to put in one list as it's pretty overwhelming - but if you ask me the question .... I'll tell you what I've done and how I've risk assessed it. If it's helpful ...

Last Wednesday I went to a meeting at the House of Lords to discuss the recently published report on sector Financial Sustainability (more details here). I was invited to meet Lord Watson of Invergowrie following the APPG meeting in July. Lord Watson wanted to understand in more detail the issues facing the sector and how we (at the FSF) heard the voices of our members and contributed to the sector wide discussion. I was able to share with him our frustrations about the low funding rates, the problems we all have recruiting and holding onto qualified, motivated staff, the issues we face with rising staff costs, rates and utilities and the concerns we all have about provision for SEND and disadvantaged children. 

We have further meetings planned in the near future and are working with the Early Years Alliance and the rest of the APPG sponsors to ensure that the sector frustrations are addressed in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. 

Since our meeting, the Chancellor Sajid Javid has announced £66m in additional early years funding. This is just a 10% drop in the ocean of the £662m needed to plug the funding shortfall. The FSF will continue to work to make sure that the concerns that we all share are recognised by parliamentarians and that the voice of the sector is taken seriously in Westminster.

I think it's probably far far away 

Yes. Mouseketeer, this was highlighted during our evidence gathering and research sessions in Westminster. It seems that not only are the 15 hours underfunded but spaces are in short supply as one of the effects of the 30 hours is 'fewer children, more often' so the fears we had at the beginning, that one child one high earning parents (who fulfill the eligibility criteria (up to 200K for a working couple)) was taking the space of two children who wanted to access 15 hours 'free'. There's not a lot of sense in much of it - but it is what it is, and we have to steer a course through unfortunately! The issue of additional funding for SEND children who needed particular support in settings who want to access the 30 hours is also a real hot potato. All we can do is highlight our concerns and provide the evidence ... 

Yesterday Helen and I went to London for the publication of the APPG report into the financial sustainability of the Early Years PVI sector. The Minister, Nadhim Zahawi MP, attended the meeting to hear the recommendations from the year of research carried out by the APPG (of which, the FSF are co-sponsors). The report highlights the very challenging circumstances in which we find ourselves and sets out some positive recommendations that we hope the Minister will bear in mind when representing the sector to the Chancellor prior to the next Comprehensive Spending Review. We are all very well aware of the frustrations and irritation felt by the sector and there is a shared understanding that the finding rate for the 30 hours scheme is much too low and does not enable settings to employ the high quality staff they would like to. We all understand that there is a desperate shortage of qualified staff 'coming through the ranks'. We know too that the increased outgoings (business rates, pensions, nations minimum wage etc) are crippling many settings with an ever increasing list of closures. However, the report succinctly brings these points together in a well-reasoned, evidence backed presentation which made the necessary points firmly, but constructively. The meeting was well attended by Labour MPs and Lords, there was a noticeable absence of Conservative Party members (other than the Minister, of course!). The publication received plenty of press coverage some of which you might like to read:

From BBC news: Childcare might become 'available only in rich areas'

Early Years Alliance: Government risks childcare “becoming affordable only to the wealthy”

The recommendations of the report were as follows:

1. The Treasury and the Department for Education must address the funding gap that has  developed as a result of Government policies, and has been exacerbated by the 30-hours funded childcare policy for three and four year old children.
2. The Government must commit to a cross-department annual review of early years costs and funding rates, with a view to increasing funding levels as necessary to ensure they cover provider delivery costs.
3. The Treasury must deliver full business rates relief to providers
4. Providers must be supported to ease recruitment and retention challenges.
5. Reporting requirements must be made more consistent and less of a burden.
6. Prioritise closing the funding gap in deprived areas.
7. Universal Credit should allow payments direct from the Department for Work and Pensions to providers.
8. The Government should establish an independent early years commission
9. Parliamentarians should lead a campaign to champion the work of childcare practitioners.

The full report is very easy to read and is well worth a cup of tea of your time  If you read it, you will see that a significant quote in the report is from a forum thread addressing recruitment and retention of staff. Here at FSF we are very proud of our involvement and we are now looking to see if the Government will take on board any of the recommendations we have put forward with our APPG colleagues.

We'd be delighted to hear your comments! If you would like assistance to contact / liaise with your MP please do let us know, we can help you!

Steps to sustainability: a report by the APPG for Childcare and Early Education [This report was researched by Connect and funded by CACHE, Foundation Stage Forum, National Day Nurseries Association, Early Years Alliance, and Tops Day Nurseries. This is not an official publication of the House of Commons or the House of Lords. It has not been approved by either House or its committees. All-Party Parliamentary Groups are informal groups of members of both Houses with a common interest in particular issues. The views expressed in this report are those of the Group.]

Although the new framework doesn't come into effect until September I feel like I have noticed a shift in emphasis already in some of the recent inspection reports. Here are a few examples (with links to the report) if you want to have a look at what has been picked up on. If you have any one your own local examples I'm sure it would be really helpful to hear them! It might just be me being really sensitive!

• The inspector observed the quality of teaching and the impact this has on children's
  learning during activities inside and outside [109411]
• The inspector toured the premises and observed the impact of teaching on children's enjoyment and development [113556]
• Staff receive great support from managers to develop professionally. They benefit from
  frequent supervisions where managers praise their good practice and plan for their
  ongoing development. Staff have good opportunities to develop qualifications and
  skills, which they implement effectively to improve the outcomes for children [EY287683]
• Staff are particularly skilled at using songs to support children's communication,
  language and understanding of rhythm [EY457214]

We're full day care. Our staff leave their phone in the staff room in their bag or on a coat peg in the staff cloakroom area. No children visible to or from either areas. I'm happy that they are out of the way. We don't have a problem with staff 'nipping off' to check phones as they get a 10 minute break in the morning and then a full lunch break both away from children. Also, we have made it really clear that if they are expecting an important phone call they can put their phone out in the office and one of us will answer it and then swap into the numbers  for them - this has meant they don't need to keep checking their phone. I have been asked, when visiting other settings, to put my phone in their basket ( as per loubyloo above). However, when I was inspecting I didn't hand my phone over, I used to keep it in my bag and my bag was securely away. As inspectors we were advised to do this in case the inspection 'wasn't going according to the framework' and we needed to make a call for our own safety, or for the safety of the children in the setting. Sounds dramatic but the safety of inspectors is important and they are generally the only inspector on site. 

I’m not a Montessori specialist either .... if you are a Tapestry user, switch on the Montessori framework from your control panel and you will be able to see how the Montessori criteria map against EYFS. The refinements are listed there too! Our headings aren’t exactly the same but my best would be Introduced/understands with support/knowledge embedded (or similar?!)

Yes. Ofsted can look at any paperwork they need to. They are all fully DBS checked, have in depth safeguarding training and understand confidentiality requirements. 

Hi littleteapots!

Are you a member of the early years alliance ? I don't know if they wrote a template policy following their workforce wellbeing/mental health work last year. If not, their minds matter report might give you ideas about wording or focus. Maybe one of our members has a policy that they might share ...

We found a lighter (complete with fluid) in one of our 'little treasure's' pocket yesterday 

I always feel more comfortable with the correct inside ratio (1:3, 1:4, 1;8) +1 member of staff per 'group' for any children who are walking. So, if my babies are all in triple buggies and are not going to be walking about I'm happy to have them in their 1:3 ratio but when it's my toddlers I really want them 1:2 (one in each hand!). 

We have always had a number of highly qualified staff who step up as 'Duty Manager' when the need arises (usually very early and very late shifts). I have a Co-manager who is a baby room specialist and SENCo and I oversee the 3+ age groups. Neither of us are 'in numbers' except maybe over lunchtimes or in emergencies. Our Duty Managers have to be L3, have to have DSL training and have to be confident with the nursery operational plan. On a daily basis they are never 'in charge' for more than a couple of hours and we generally have two 'on' at a time as well as the other staff.

Have you seen all our cultural capital stuff?!! We're all over it! I'm going to be running training for my team in June. All in this forum

Ha! You're ahead of me Mouseketeer! I haven't changed the headings on our development plan (yet). Ours runs with the calendar year (otherwise we have too many things to review all at once) - we review salaries in April, policies and procedures in September and the Development plan / SEF in January. We then review the Dev. plan every school holiday to update progress and nudge people who were going to do something but who have forgotten etc. We do have it set as 'what we're doing and why we need to do it', how will we know when we have succeeded?' as well as the personnel and financial costs. Next year I will change the headings to reflect the Intention / implementation / Impact headings although we are talking 'whole setting' not just individuals. I will look at the children's play plans and next steps planning in terms of the new terminology too. 

At the moment I'm just constantly asking staff 'why are you doing that - what's your intention?' 'who is that activity for? etc

I had a really interesting conversation this morning with a member of staff who is fired up about different sensory play dough and we talked about all the different things she was planning to do (the children adore play dough and this was a good opportunity for her to 'change it up' for the children). The conversation was interesting because (she's a new L2 practitioner) I was challenging her to think of her intention for the activity - was it just because she was excited? or had she identified a need for the children or was she trying to challenge them to think about play dough in different ways (by grinding up herbs to put in for example)? The point I was making to her was that she was excited and had spend the weekend getting fired up and now she just wanted to 'do it' - but the children weren't expecting it and if she just 'parachuted' the activity in then the children wouldn't get so much from it as they would do if she talked to them about it first and shared her excitement with them. We agreed that a 'Hey look at this! I'm really excited about this ... look at what I've made. .. would you like to make them?...' was a good way of 'provoking' children's interests and was much more effective than 'here's some different play dough I have made for you.' This came about because in our 'resources sort out' on Friday she found a pestle and mortar!

I found this on the PACEY website (focus on childminders so if you are a day nursery you'll need to 'scale up')

We had a big old change around last week (we had an INSET afternoon last Friday). I delivered training on the new inspection framework and then we took the Intent / Implementation / Impact aspect and thought through what that meant for us as a setting - it turned out that it mostly meant going through our resources to see what 'stuff' we had so that we could react swiftly to the children's needs and dispositions. This is a 'roundabout' way of saying that we decided it was of lesser importance how things were 'arranged' on a day to day basis and that it was more important that the staff and children knew what we have available and what the potential opportunities are. 

Dear FSF friends!
I’m very sorry to tell you all that I will be leaving my role at The Foundation Stage Forum in June. As many of you know, as well as working as the Forum Content Editor and Education Advisor I own and manage my own large nursery. Additionally, I now find myself with elderly parents, one of whom is suffering with Dementia and needs constant care. Having regular hours at FSF is proving too much for me to manage and so I am stepping down. Steve and Helen, who are old (not that old) friends as well as my employers, have agreed that I will remain with FSF as a consultant (type of thing) from time to time sharing my knowledge and experience as a nursery owner, Ofsted inspector and general early years ‘bod’. So, you will certainly still be seeing me around as I will be writing articles, collaborating with the development of Tapestry going forward, delivering training and also continuing to represent the FSF at the APPG Childcare and Early Education in Westminster (which I am very passionate about!). I will also have a forum presence as myself – with views being my own, rather than the views of FSF. I will be leaving you in the very capable hands of my FSF colleagues. xx

It's the season of transition meetings, teddy bears picnics, school visits and decisions about friendship groupings. Share with us here the most successful things you have done, either as a nursery teacher or as a receiving Reception teacher! You never know, the things you think are obvious might not have occurred to someone else and you might find an idea that you haven't tried that is 'just the ticket' for your current cohort!

Whereabouts are you located Possum? That might encourage people's interest if they know they can come and pick things up 

Hi Ines,

I have moved your post to the open forum area as hopefully you will get more responses from there! Welcome to the FSF - we look forward to hearing more about your research - perhaps you can post some of your emerging findings? 

Hi currycraver,

The aspect of ambiguity sits around the Statutory Framework phrase 'suitable level 6 qualification' (point 3.33). The qualification you have named isn't listed in either the pre or post 2014 qualifications checkers. So, from that point of view I would say that the 1:13 ratio doesn't apply. However, if I were you I would be looking to see what proportion of the qualification was early years as that seems to be the difference between the qualification you have named, and the qualifications that are listed. If there is a large proportion of early years study I would contact the university and ask whether they are advertising this course as being a 'suitable L6 qualification'. If they are, I would be going back to the DfE for further clarification and asking why the qualification was excluded from the list.

Sorry not to have a more definitive answer!

Julian Grenier (Head of Sheringham Nursery School, London) has written eloquently regarding the curriculum requirements for children in the Early Years Foundation Stage. He urges us to understand how our pedagogy (how we teach what we decide to teach) relates to our planned curriculum (what we teach and why). It's a fascinating article which merits sharing with your staff team.

WHAT HAPPENED TO CURRICULUM IN THE EARLY YEARS?