Staff Ratios

[Guest]

hi just a quick one on the olc subject of staffing ratio's an example: lunchtime, 1 member of staff with 11 over 3's sat having a story, due to a child being taken to the toilet across the hallway by the other practitioner.. were we under ratios because that member of staff left the room?, is it in the room or building overall? , obviously the manager was on duty but dealing with a parent so couldnt cover in the room

[Cait]

There seems to be some discussions in other threads that it is the overall staffing in the provision, where indoors and outdoors is under discussion. It's a tricky one and possibly if they are over 3's it's not so 'severe' as if they were 2 year olds. I expect someone will be along with a definitive answer in a mo. It seems to be a grey area, so many people ask very similar questions

[valp59]

This link to the EYFS Statutory Framework accepts in paragraph 1 that sometimes the ratios may be exceeded and I would have thought that your nappy changing scenario would be covered in this way so long as consideration had been given as to the most appropriate time to do this ie remaining eleven children calm and setttled?

 

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/eyfs/reso...y-frame-app.pdf

[valp59]

Hmmm having just re-read that paragraph I realise it is actually saying the opposite that you could have MORE adults if deemed necessary! However para 3 says the ratios are for staff working directly with the children (as opposed to admin/maintenance tasks) and as nappy changing is child related my interpretation would be that it would be okay and if it were my setting I would not be worried. But then again it's late, I'm tired and I may be talking nonsense - think I should go to bed!

Edited June 17, 2009 by valp59

[Guest]

I think if the member of staff was not too far away it is fine. I don't think realistically you can always be 'in' ratio. Even if you had more staff you could still end up with a child in the loo, a child who had soiled themselves, a child vomitting, a child with blood pooring out of their head and to top it off a staff member who has fainted due to the stress of the situation

I think we should try to always mantain ratio's but there will also always be times when this is not possible, I think however if you are aware that this situation could arise you coudl cover it in your risk assessment - how you would cover in case of staff shortage or emergency, this way you can show that you are prepared for every eventuality (not myu senario described above!!)

[Guest]

I'd say that a common sense rule has to apply and that your situation sounds fine. I've also been told it's a ratio for the setting as a whole rather than just for each situation.