Ofsted to overturn the grading of “Inadequate” at Cherubs Pre-school,

[Guest]

Ofsted to overturn the grading of “Inadequate” at Cherubs Pre-school, Linton

 

https://www.change.org/p/ofsted-ofsted-to-overturn-the-grading-of-inadequate-at-cherubs-pre-school-linton

 

It is up to each and everyone to decide to sign or not to sign. We are lucky as we do not have the internet on site and similar scenario is highly unlikely. However, almost every parent would give a consent in my setting to post their child's photo to them if I could.

 

I signed this petition with a comment:

I am both an Early Years provider and a parent of three children. Statutory framework does not state that nurseries or pre-schools should implement NO mobile phone policy, it states that settings' safeguarding policy should cove the use of mobile phones and cameras. It should be up to us managing bodies and PARENTS to decide what is acceptable use. There should be a common sense and each case can differ depending on the uniqueness of each setting. If Ofsted wants all of us to follow the same rules then please provide us with the same purposely built buildings, the same staff that attended the same college or university and attended the same trainings, the same parents and PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE the same CHILDREN!

Edited February 8, 2016 by Oksana1975

[finleysmaid]

Oksana have you read their ofsted report?

this is NOT just an issue about phones...it is about outside provision and the disposition and attitude of the manager. I'm afraid I won't be signing as ofsted have already investigated the complaint and found the report sound.....the owner only appears (and I say appears!) to have kicked up a fuss since she has realised the funding will be cut.

[Rea]

I didnt read the report Finleysmaid, shocking really because I never take Facebook on face value so I should have applied the same forethought.

 

I have signed it however mostly because we were given RI last year based on a childs behaviour and this year were told, it should never have been a judgement.

 

So I'm still smarting

[Guest]

I read about outside provision but I doubt it could push to inadequate. However, I did not know that the complaint has already been submitted.

 

The report states "The organisation of outdoor playtimes sometimes leaves children waiting before they can begin to play and learn" but it links to the DM' statement which is "can usually tolerate delay when needs are not immediately met, and understands wishes may not always be met"

 

OK I welcome rotten tomatoes here, but either Ofsted report needs to be more specific with details or I'd rather stay for my colleague. They want to see our observations and reports descriptive, good a sound, then why they do not produce their reports the same way?

[finleysmaid]

 

 

OK I welcome rotten tomatoes here, but either Ofsted report needs to be more specific with details or I'd rather stay for my colleague. They want to see our observations and reports descriptive, good a sound, then why they do not produce their reports the same way?

The reports are VERY detailed but not the ones produced for public consumption....our report was pages and pages long but the published one is 2 pages!

 

 

Having had issues with ofsted before (and yes I am really aware of some of the twits they have working for them!!) sometimes it is about dispositions...the inspector was obviously concerned that this manager seemed unconcerned about the serious case review and was (or appears) to have been unable to say how she protected the children through these photos (password protected/ICO registered/understanding of issue etc etc) photos taken on any mobile phone can be emailed to any account...how was this dealt with? why couldn't they just ring the parents ...did they have to send a photo???

[zigzag]

I will not be signing this as I think this setting have been completly ignorant in their actions. I do accept that they only acted with good intentions but in this day and age this is not the right way to go about it.

[Fredbear]

What's almost ironic is that this poor child's photo has now been publicised everywhere now.

I have read the report and agree it appears and I state too that it appears their were other considerations for the judgement made.

[Guest]

Where do you find the full report? I can read the only one that is available on Ofsted website. Maybe I read something different?

finleysmaid, where is the detailed report?

[finleysmaid]

 

Where do you find the full report? I can read the only one that is available on Ofsted website. Maybe I read something different?

finleysmaid, where is the detailed report?

 

sorry Oksana I didn't make myself very clear...what I mean is that in our recent inspection the inspector wrote for ages and ages ...pages of the stuff but this is held on their systems...it's not available for public consumption ...would be very interesting to get hold of it

[Pimms o'clock?]

I'm with Finleysmaid and Zigzag on this one, 'staff use their personal mobile phones...' the manager has absolutely no control over what happens to those phones or the photos that could still be on them once they have left the building. Two words 'Vanessa George' lessons must be learnt from Serious Case Reviews. I won't be signing this

[green hippo]

Although I understand her intentions, I think with modern technology, there are so many more controlled ways of doing this e.g. Tapestry. Using mobile phones at all in settings around the children is a dodgy subject. And if you ever do e-safety training, you'll probably want to burn all your devices when you hear of recent cases!!

Green Hippo xxx

[lsp]

If you have no other option, eg no landline, you put procedures in place to protect everyone - children, staff and visitors. Exactly the same as with everything else - risk assessments and vigilance.

[Guest]

why couldn't they just ring the parents ...did they have to send a photo???

Yes I totally agree on this, but the point is that the same procedures were during the previous inspection and at that time they were graded 'Outstanding', so why this inspection is suddenly 'inadequate'. There should be consistency.

 

I am scared to use a mobile phone on the premises but I have no other options as we do not have a landline. We do not have the internet and to be able to maintain good signal reception our phone is set to 2G. Unfortunately, the phone we are using has a camera on it. Previously we had a business contract which I paid £22 +VAT monthly. Due to financial difficulty I needed to cut expenses to the minimum and one of the option was to switch to a personal contract which is currently costs me £10.50 including VAT per month. Technically I am using a personal phone on the premises (even though it is a completely separate account). I am very worried that Ofsted can pick on it but I have no other options as I am not going deliberately drive myself into debts. I have contacted Ofsted in the past on several occasions with regards to different issues and always received the reply from them within a couple of days. Strangely enough I have contacted them with regard to this particular matter but received no reply.

 

I would like to make it clear that we are not taking photos of the children in our care. We also trying to communicate with the parents via texts (logs of the texts are stored and can be retrieved if needed for reference) and using the phone only in emergencies. We do not have 'blind spot' areas in the room and even we keep the toilet door half-way open. Any advice will be appreciated.

 

How those settings with CCTV in place can make sure that parents do not take images of other children and distribute them further?

 

I have lots of why, how and what if questions. We live in a fast growing technology world and I cannot judge everyone as "guilty until proved innocent", otherwise I can become suspicious and paranoid. I attended several e-Safety trainings, Social Media for Managers or Designated Person, Safer recruitment in Education, and other in depth safeguarding trainings and I am trying my best on a daily bases monitor that the care we provide is safe. I definitely do not want to nurture an unsafe culture within the setting.

[mundia]

hi Oksana.

in terms of this particular case, its difficult to really comment as we, via the press, have only really heard one side of the story, and there are lots of things we, probably most of us have an opinion or view on.

but one thing I will pass comment on is the fact tgat in the 6 years since the previous inspection, the bar has been significantly raised especially on safeguarding so it really isnt that unusual for a setting getting outstanding 6 years ago to get a lower grading now, and this is one reason that policies and procedures need regular reviewing to ensure they are still fit for purpose.

In terms of your own situation, I think its just worth going through your policy and processes, how you ensure staff all understand and can articulate them, and that you are clear about how you monitor and what you would do in the event that a member of staff was breaking your policies.

[Rafa]

Whenever things like this crop up in the press it makes us all think and review our own practice - which is a very good thing!

 

This provider was obviously not on top of safeguarding as everyone who pays attention, knows the use of mobile phones in childcare is a very emotive subject - we certainly know NOT to take photos on them! So justifiably pulled up on it. As mundia comments Safeguarding Children is paramount.

 

Mistakes continue to be made by organisations all over the country, despite 'lessons being learnt' from serious past and present cases. And 'heads still fail to roll' because of it - no one appears to be found accountable.

 

The best lesson we can learn from it is, as mundia says - make sure your SP is reviewed, understood and a working document!

 

I'm on to mine..........

[green hippo]

This is why the Pre-school where my children went is closing down. There were other issues but the 2 which were non-negotiable were both Safeguarding - documents being out of date, 1 of which was the mobile phone policy. The owner actually said to the inspector that she could up-date them there and then but the inspector was not interested.

It's very sad but such an important issue.

Green Hippo x

[FootprintsMacc]

Although I understand her intentions, I think with modern technology, there are so many more controlled ways of doing this e.g. Tapestry. Using mobile phones at all in settings around the children is a dodgy subject. And if you ever do e-safety training, you'll probably want to burn all your devices when you hear of recent cases!!

Green Hippo xxx

Totally agree, there are lots of other methods like LearningBook that even remove all other apps like facebook, browsers and emails from the tablets to avoid the temptation to post a nice photo, completely innocent but a safeguarding issue! They have a parent portal for sharing pictures.

Edited April 20, 2016 by FootprintsMacc

[manor]

Looks like it's all over now.

 

 

Cherubs re-graded as "Good" in all areas by Ofsted !!

Chantelle Bourne

United Kingdom

23 MAR 2016 — On Thursday 3 March Cherubs Pre-school got re-inspected by Ofsted and have been re-graded as "Good" in all areas. This is fantastic news for the pre-school, as they will now receive their funding from the local authority and remain open.

I would like to thank everyone who has supported this petition and Cherubs Pre-school. Your support has been incredible and we are truly thankful.

Chantelle Bourne

[narnia]

..........and lessons learned,I presume?

[lsp]

Was this just a routine re-inspection rather than as a result of the petition?????

 

As Narnia said - lessons learnt and also a reminder to remain vigilant and not become complacent.

[FSFRebecca]

It would have been a routine inspection within the 6 month window that is set for the re-inspection of settings judged as inadequate (Inspection handbook p5, para 6)

[Pimms o'clock?]

Was this just a routine re-inspection rather than as a result of the petition?????

 

As Narnia said - lessons learnt and also a reminder to remain vigilant and not become complacent.

It was a re-inspection, as is normally the case, within six months of original inspection. I guess the recent inspection results reflect that lessons have been learnt