2 Year Progress Check

[Helen]

I've been messing about with a design for the 2 year progress check (mainly to stop me eating any more chocolate), and you're welcome to do with it what you will.

 

2 year check.docx

 

2 year check.doc

[Guest mukerjee1]

Thanks Helen - fab of you to share...now have some more chocolate as a reward...x

[SueJ]

Thanks Helen - am pondering the check format so this is a brilliant starting point. As for the chocolate I have taken to hiding it from myself to stop me eating it - honestly is there no self control

[fimbo]

many thanks -thats very kind of you to share.

[louby loo]

thank-you for that Helen

 

............................now off to find that bar of choc to eat whilst I have a really good read through!!!! :P

[apple]

Thank you for sharing. Although we are a school nursery with 3-4 year olds it is good to see what type of check to look for when the wee ones come to us

[finleysmaid]

Thank you for sharing. Although we are a school nursery with 3-4 year olds it is good to see what type of check to look for when the wee ones come to us

but presumable apple it would be your responsibility to do this if children have not attended elsewhere?

[Panders]

I've been messing about with a design for the 2 year progress check (mainly to stop me eating any more chocolate), and you're welcome to do with it what you will.

 

Thank you Helen, but I can't open it - any chance of putting it into an old format so that others like me who runt their computers on a mixture of steam and bloodymindedness can open it?

[sunnyday]

Thank you Helen, but I can't open it - any chance of putting it into an old format so that others like me who runt their computers on a mixture of steam and bloodymindedness can open it?

 

Oh yes please........

[Fredbear]

Me too please as I am prehistoric.

[Steve]

I added the .doc version of this document to Helen's original post so you have the option to download either. :1b

[Helen]

You're welcome :1b

That's an interesting point finleysmaid: if a child starts with you at just 3 years of age, and hasn't had the 2 year check, will practitioners complete it then? I wonder what the percentage is of children who do not attend any form of childcare. Does anyone know?

[Guest]

This is something I've been wondering about. I guess there are only a small number of children who don't attend anywhere before starting reception but the whole thing does seem to be moving to making the starting age for education of some kind earlier.Would a HV carry out a similar check on these children by visiting on a series of occasions to build a relationship? What about those families who don't want to engage with anyone? I do know of one child for example, now in school nursery, but who previously didn't attend anywhere and whose parents didn't engage with HV. He has some form of developmental delay which is quite significant and school is now trying to work with HV to get to the bottom of it, but parents are still not fully engaged.

[Panders]

Thanks Steve

[SueJ]

I recently attended a Learn Explore Debate - Supporting Families in the Foundation Years conference. The conference speaker was Sue Robb Head of Early Years 4Children who are the Department for Education's strategic partner. There was some debate about the 2 year old check and who should be doing it and the cost implications for early years settings doing it. We were advised that the progress check is for children aged between 2 and 3 years old and that by 2015 it should be an integrated check shared between health and early years. Interestingly there were no representatives from health at the conference and Sue Robb acknowledged that "reaching out" to health was something that they needed to work harder at. I asked about how the 2 year old check for those children who would hit school having never seen an early years setting or who perhaps were in families categorised as "hard to reach". I suggested that sometimes these were perhaps the children who might benefit the most from such a check and how were they going to be prevented from "slipping through the net". There was no real answer I'm afraid

[mundia]

I don't think there is an intention that if a setting has children starting at 3+, that they would complete this progress check, given that it has to be completed between 24-36 months, and is expected to be shared with health visitors at the health and development review (p.15). Perhaps this could have been stated more clearly, but that's how I understand it at the moment anyway.

 

We keep data on how many children do not attend any provision before stating reception, in our LA its very small, but in my previous one, it was quite a few. With the expansion of 2 year olds funding to 40% of the most disadvantaged by 2014, there is likely to be more 2 year olds in a setting than not, and wouldn't be surprised that this extends to more of the 2 year olds over time.

 

Some LAs, have been working on developing the relationships between early years and health and creating a shared format. I wonder if we have any members from those LAs willing to share how its going?

[catma]

I don't think there is an intention that if a setting has children starting at 3+, that they would complete this progress check, given that it has to be completed between 24-36 months, and is expected to be shared with health visitors at the health and development review (p.15). Perhaps this could have been stated more clearly, but that's how I understand it at the moment anyway.Some LAs, have been working on developing the relationships between early years and health and creating a shared format. I wonder if we have any members from those LAs willing to share how its going?

 

That's how I read it. If they go into EYFS provision after 36 months (which may be any EYFS provider until they are of statutory school age) then it's just not done for that child.

 

Health however sharing info will be a hard job I reckon. We are still trying to get a common agreement on what they will and will not share for Children's Centre data which is needed for Ofsted. If its not in their service level agreement they don't do it!

Cx

[eyfs1966]

And who do we give the report to? The parents? The HV? Does a copy stay on the child's file and move up to school with them?

[blondie]

hi - we take vulnerable two year olds who we observe and use observations to chart their progress against the eyfs and therefore their next steps - should we be doing this instead or as well as? the other children start at 2yr nine months so are officially still two and we do the same as above for these? we are a charity run pre-school.

any input / help / advise greatly appreciated = thank you x

[finleysmaid]

ok have been having a good read and a think about this....

We already do progress reports for parents in our feedback 3 times a year , these already include what the children are doing well and what we are working on (also info from parents and children) so i think with a little tweek these will probably fulfill the criteria. I do think think that perhaps not having a standard format is a bad idea as it would make transition from one setting to another easier. In my opinion the childminders in my area are going to be doing lots of these (and they are very nervous about it) as the majority of children start settings at around 3 .

so several questions arise

Why if this check is so important is it not going to be completed for +3's ( i suspect it will be deemed as good practise to do so though!)

Our area is one of those who do not promote 2 year old health visitor checks (though parents can request them) so how is this going to link up with health services.

What happens if a child already has a CAF in place....surely this would spercede the 2 year old check

i do have concerns about who is going to be held responsible if parents do not comply with our recommendations...what happens if i suggest SALT or Doctors and the parents do not follow up (i have experienced this)

and are the health services going to start taking us more seriously when we do send children to them!!

 

p.s. mundia when you said

"I don't think there is an intention that if a setting has children starting at 3+, that they would complete this progress check, given that it has to be completed between 24-36 months, and is expected to be shared with health visitors at the health and development review (p.15). Perhaps this could have been stated more clearly, but that's how I understand it at the moment anyway.

which document were you refering to?

sorry a bit of a random post...just thinking'out loud'

[Helen]

Thanks Mundia and Catma for the clarification on 3 year olds :1b

eyfs1966- I've heard/read somewhere that practitioners give the 2 year progress summary to the parents, to be kept with the Red Book, and then shared with the HV. Not at all sure where I got this from though!

 

Blondie- it sounds to me like you're doing this anyway. Do you make observations and assessments across all areas of learning at the moment? You'll only need to do it for the 3 prime areas for the 2 year check, but it's obviously more thorough if you extend it to the other new 4 areas too.

 

finleysmaid- Mundia was referring to the 'Know How' guide to the progress check: have you got that one?

[catma]

And who do we give the report to? The parents? The HV? Does a copy stay on the child's file and move up to school with them?

4.3 Timing

The EYFS requires that providers carry out a progress check when a child is age two..

The following factors may determine the timing of the progress check:

 The child’s entry point to the setting. Settings should consider a settling in period for a child to enable their key person and other practitioners to build up good knowledge of that child‟s development, abilities and interests before completing the progress check.

 Individual needs and circumstances. If a child has a period of ill health or a significant event in their family (e.g. family breakdown, bereavement or the arrival of a sibling) it may be appropriate to delay the check.

 Parental preferences. Practitioners should agree with parents when is the best time to provide the summary. Where possible, early years settings should consider carrying out the progress check in time for parents to share it with the health visitor at the two year old health and development review.

 Pattern of attendance. If a child has a period of non-attendance or irregular attendance then that may affect the timing of the review. Likewise, a practitioner may find it takes longer to build up a clear picture of a child who attends just a few hours per week.

 

4.4 Information sharing and parental consent

The progress check is a statutory requirement of the EYFS. Providers should seek the consent of parents to share information from the check directly with relevant professionals. Providers must have written policies and procedures in place to safeguard children, in line with the guidance and requirements of the relevant Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB).

[catma]

I think the implication may be that a child is not in a vacuum - they would be assessed by their health visitor at age 2 if not in a setting, or by the setting they may attend aligned with HV. In either case the report is for the parent to inform them about their child's development, as I read the documentation.

 

???

 

Cx

[mundia]

Not to good at doing the quote ting but:

 

Finleysmaid, I think many LAs will be making a standard format, although this may depend on how much their EY team has been cut. It certainly would make more sense if they are going to be shared with health visitors who would find it easier to get to grips with one format rather than many. Also, as you say, many children are shared with other providers.

If a child already has CAF, there are possibly other agencies already involved and I imagine you would consult with them just as you would for any other children.

 

Helen, if my tired memory serves me correct, the possibility of the report being put in the Red book was part of one of the consultations, but I cant remember which one.

 

Blondie, for your 2 year old funded children, this would provide a summary of the child's development, which it sounds like you would do anyway?

[Guest]

Sounds like we will need to write into our permission forms / registration packs information about the 2 year old check. It's a shame there is not a universal form /specimen in the guidance, instead of everyone having to guess at the requirements. I wonder what monitoring procedure is going to be put into place to say who has completed it ?

[Cait]

Thanks Helen, it's a good starting point

[HoneyPancakes]

Reading this has made me wonder about parents who do not permit their children to be formally observed. I know two childminders who mind children who's parents actively forbid notes to be taken about their child. Interestingly, both teaching families so not 'hard to reach', just not wanting their children 'labelled' at such a young age. My understanding was that two-year-old check should be carried out, 'at the request of parents', so some of them could be opting out anyway. How do we cover ourselves in this case? Could refusal ever be a 'safeguarding' issue?

 

Another point that worries me - I started childminding when my second child was one. This coincided with the current EYFS. My poor sleep-deprived, baby-brain just could not cope with all the information coming at me. With all the training I had at the time it still took ages for it all the different developmental areas and aspects to sink in. I could never have attributed all those areas to my own toddlers at the time and would have just nodded and smiled if confronted with such a list - in fact, I did when Nursery sent home folders for me to add to. Now, most of my minded children's parents aren't like I was, but some are a bit. I don't know what they're going to understand about what is being asked of them. Of course this isn't what I'm going to be writing about in my next OU assignment - I'm going to talk about the Reggio Emelia approach and the Thomas Conran Centre, and 'making every parent a practitioner'. Just not sure I am entirely convinced of its practicality.

 

Honey

[mundia]

Interesting points honeypancakes, and starts to show emerging 'grey areas' possibly?

My understanding is that the 2 year old progress summary is statutory and there doesn't appear to be anything in the new documents about exemptions. Parents could previously ask for exemption from some aspects of the EYFS, although I don't think they could ever ask for exemption from the statutory requirements, one of which is 'organization' and as such they couldn't ask registered settings to 'not observe' their children. In fact isn't it impossible to not observe even if you don't write anything down?

I think if the 2 year old progress includes a section for comments from parents, you might record a parents refusal to contribute? However, I don't think you can simply not do it because a parent doesn't want you to, but it will be interesting to see if any parents challenge this legally. I suppose, it would be like how you manage the situation where you are concerned about a child but the parent refuses support or involvement from other agencies?

 

I wonder if it is that situation whereby if a parents chooses childcare, they are effectively agreeing to the statutory requirements of it?

 

Interesting to see how it panns out though. You've certainly got me thinking!

[Guest]

Hi

I currently work with Health Visitors and carry out two year developmental checks on children. (I am a Community Nursery Nurse). Parent and child comes to surgery or I visit them at home and check the child's development. I observe/discuss diet, sleep, locomotion, fine manipulative skills, sight, hearing, potty training, speech and language, any health issues (which I pass to HV) etc. I also ask about and observe social skills and find out if child is attending/planning on attending Pre-School/Nursery/Childminder etc and look into funding if necessary (although this is often done earlier). Every child in our area is invited to check when they turn 2, or as close to 2 as possible, but not everyone turns up I'm afraid. We also carry out checks on 1 year olds but Health Visitor does these.

Hope this is helpful

mrsW.x

[Guest]

sorry still getting used to new format and missed posts from page 2. I hope my post is still in context...... mrsW.