To receive a list of daycare providers which have been inspected since the last meeting and the judgements awarded and to consider the main themes arising from the inspections.

The Subgroup received a list of all Manchester daycare providers which had been inspected since the last meeting and the judgements awarded.

The Early Years Quality Assurance Lead provided Members with an overview of the inspections which had taken place since the last meeting, stating that there were a few additional ones which the Scrutiny Support Officer would circulate after the meeting.  She reported that 94% of Manchester daycare settings were judged to be good or outstanding.  She highlighted the recruitment and retention issues that many early years settings were struggling with and the impact of not having a consistent workforce in terms of training, having a key person for each child and meeting the specific needs of individual children.

She reported that the main themes from reports about outstanding settings were that the children’s independence was supported well, children’s needs were understood, with the curriculum being built around that, and that staff read regularly to children and encouraged a love of reading.  For settings which were judged to be less than good, she advised that some of the key themes related to staffing, including lack of stability in the workforce, the need for a more robust staff induction and continuing professional development, safer recruitment practices, which training would be rolled out on, as well as issues related to the curriculum.  In relation to recommendations concerning safeguarding, she stated that there had been a reduction in the number of recommendations related to risk assessments and hygiene practices since the last meeting, although there had been one report where hygiene practices had been raised as an area of concern.  She stated that work was taking place to promote better hygiene practices in settings and that this was improving.  She informed the Subgroup about the support available to settings, which included a wide range of training, including the Department for Education (DfE) Experts and Mentors programme, the professional development programme and training on supporting children with SEND.  She expressed concern that some settings were unable to attend development forum meetings due to staffing issues; however, she advised that information was also sent out to settings and discussed during visits to individual settings.

In response to Members’ questions, the Early Years Quality Assurance Lead reported that the settings which had been judged as inadequate were still operating, that they were having at least a monthly visit from her team, who were providing support and feedback, and that they could continue to care for existing children who were eligible for the two-year-old and three-year-old offer but could not take on any additional eligible children.  In response to further questions about the two settings judged as inadequate, she advised that Little Angels was a very new setting, which her team was providing support to, while Building Blocks Blackley was an established setting.  She advised that, following the departure of Building Blocks Blackley’s manager, the area manager was now running this setting, they were working closely with her team and it was expected that they would potentially be judged as good by the time of their next inspection.  She supported a Member’s comments about settings learning from other settings in the area which were judged as outstanding and outlined the support being provided to settings judged as inadequate, including peer support.

The Early Years Quality Assurance Lead outlined some of the changes that the government was proposing in relation to early years staff, including removing the requirement for Level 3 practitioners to hold a GCSE in mathematics and changes relating to staff to child ratios.  The Chair requested that Members be provided with information on these changes, including the consultation.  A Member asked whether Ward Councillors were informed when a setting in their ward was judged as inadequate.  The Early Years Quality Assurance Lead reported that the Executive Member for Early Years, Children and Young People was informed but that she did not know whether he passed this on to Ward Councillors.  The Member stated that she would discuss this with him.

Decision

To note the reports.