FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: val on July 08, 2007, 04:05:22 PM
-
I would welcome views on the application of the FSO to childminder's premises.
Whatever the legal position, I do not advocate Part 1 AFD and emergency lighting plus a fire engineeered solution to the unprotected stairway!
If the premises are still considered domestic premises then the Order doesn't apply. If however you consider the childminder to be running a business and their home to be their place of work, then the Order does apply. Could the number of children be significant?
I believe that the Order applies in full, although the risk assessment process would generally be very simple. There are, of course, also fire safety requirements in the National Minimum Standards, which complicates matters.
I could do with some re-assurance.
-
I don't think there is an easy answer Val. If I look after one child in my home, surely that is a domestic premises and the Order does not apply
........... but what if I look after 10 children, for the time that they are there my house is clearly not being used just as a domestic premises and the Order would, in my opinion apply.
Not much help I know!
-
Val,
I know from working with the play-school that hires my local church's hall that OFSTED and others have strict upper limits on the numbers of children per person that such workers can look after. Generally the younger the children the fewer of them can be looked after by one person. Would this automatically limit the number of children a single childminder could look after in their own home?
Personally I would have thought that if the childminder was being paid then they are working and therefore their residence is their place of work and not a domestic residence, at least while the children are there?
-
Thank you Phil and John,
I believe that a childminder can be registered for EIGHT children as long as they are over a certain age (2 I think but don't quote me).
H&S legislation seems to apply which suggests that their home is considered a workplace.
I assume that if the childminder employs an assistant then the argument is more straightforward.
I don't imagine much enforcement going on but it is nice to know...just in case.
-
This is an issue which is reliant upon a protocol or memorandum of understanding inplace between the FRS and its Regional OFSTED office. It is likely that general fire safety precautions will be enforced by the FRS.
If there isn't such a protocol in place OFSTED could require fire safety inspections of domestic premises before approval of registration - nice work if you can get it, but hardly worthwhile use of an FSO's skills. They have better things to do !
I believe that a national protocol between OFSTED and CFOA is close to agreement. I presume that the applicant wil be required to comply with National Standard 6 (OFSTED) for safety, and OFSTED will notify FRS if they have 'significant concerns for fire safety' but will nevertheless register applications unless they have 'serious fire safety concerns'.
Yet to be agreed - but hopeful.
-
Val I would agree with your understanding of the legal aspects but I would consider it a point of law and it would need to be tested in the courts to be certain.
For guidance CACFOA produced three leaflets which was split into,
a) Recommended protocol between Ofsted and fire authorities and suitability of premises for the provision of care for young children.
b)Guide No. 1 - Fire Precautions for Childcare Facilities that are Places of Work.
c)Guide No. 2 - Fire Precautions for Domestic Dwellings used for Child minding Activities.
However the new CFOA and APFO have no mention of the leaflets but I do have copies if of any use.
-
Is this not covered by Article 43? If subject to legal challenge, would OFSTED/CSCI be able to include fire safety provision on a registration (see Art 42(3)(b) or require a fire service inspection?
-
You are right - Fire Safety can only be dealt with under the Order, licensing and registration bodies cannot impose conditions that relate to fire safety.
-
You are right - Fire Safety can only be dealt with under the Order, licensing and registration bodies cannot impose conditions that relate to fire safety.
Oh really ?
If - as a condition of registration - the applicant if required to comply with the following (extract from OFSTED Standard 6 - Safety) then it looks to me as if OFSTED have a fire safety enforcement role
Fire safety
6.11 A fire blanket, which conforms to BS EN safety standards, is provided
in the kitchen.
6.12 Smoke alarms, which conform to BS EN safety standards, are provided
at every level of the house and are maintained in working condition.
6.13 The childminder has devised and practised an emergency escape plan.
6.14 If a local fire safety officer has visited, the childminder complies with, and
keeps records of, any recommendations he has made.
-
Fred, that is okay. However, the only enfoceable part is that the enforcing authority deals with. No licensing, registration or certification authority can impose conditions on those documents. If they do they will not be enforceable in law because of Article 43.
-
I agree with Fred some other regulaltions do impose duties relating to fire safety and quite rightly so.
Another example is the Care Home Regulations made under CSA.
Article 43 says that conditions imposed have no effect in so far as it relates to any matter in relation to which requirements or prohibitions are or could be imposed by or under this Order.
That does not mean that no conditions can be imposed by other authorities, it just means they would have no effect if they could be dealt with using the Fire Safety Order. Nearly identical to the old section 31(I think!) of the 71 Act.
Some of the dinosaurs on here will remember that that section meant that FP Act was the principle fire safety law but it did not stop for example licensing authorities requiring maintained lighting as a condition of a liquor license. FRS howwever would not show that necessarily as a condition of the fire cerificate.
-
Fred, that is okay. However, the only enfoceable part is that the enforcing authority deals with. No licensing, registration or certification authority can impose conditions on those documents. If they do they will not be enforceable in law because of Article 43.
I understand the legislation, but I don't quite follow your drift Jokar - if at the application stage, the applicant hasn't provided the fire safety requirements I posted earlier - OFSTED won't register them. The OFSTED inspector is quite capable of identfying if the prescribed fire safety requirements have been met. If they have 'serious fire safety concerns' then they can ask FRS to go in - otherwise they can deal with it themselvesl.
-
I recall some Local Authorities who licence at moment have some specific extra reqmt's if children staying overnight eg interlinked alarms.
-
Fred, as far as I am aware and please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption, is that only an enforcing authority under the RR(FS)O can impose conditions on a Responsible Person through the enforcement process. Whilst I understand that Ofsted will want the premises to meet certain criteria, surely it is down to the RP to ensure that the Fire safety Duties have been met through the use of a FRA.
-
As Fred said the legal niceties are immaterial if Ofsted is satisfied that the applicant has not met their conditions they will not register them end of story. The legal point first raised was, is a domestic premises used for child minding subject to the RR(FS)O?
-
Won't the determining question be whether the persons operating the facility within the domestic premises are operating as a business or are simply licensed persons looking after a few more children in the family home?
-
TW Sutton, Thank you for the offer but I understand that these guides and the protocol are being re-written at the moment.
Ken, You are right about the question to ask. I think one of the definitions used by Ofsted about whether childminders register is "looking after children for reward". As this would cover most, if not all childminders, (even religous groups who are doing it for reward in a future place). If this is so then they are running a business and presumably the full might of the Fire Safety Order must apply.
Ofsted do still believe that they have a duty to enforce the minimun national standards, including those from fire. Most agencies are reluctant to accept that one piece of legislation, about which they have little intimate knowledge can overrule thier own dedicated, and familiar legislation.
-
Fred, as far as I am aware and please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption, is that only an enforcing authority under the RR(FS)O can impose conditions on a Responsible Person through the enforcement process. Whilst I understand that Ofsted will want the premises to meet certain criteria, surely it is down to the RP to ensure that the Fire safety Duties have been met through the use of a FRA.
Yes of course - but you have to take into consideration the nature of the business. It is completely unreasonable to expect FRS's to inspect every bog standard semi-detached premises where an application for a childminding registration is made. It would be a complete waste of tax payers money, a waste of an FSO skills - and not very productive. A good working relationship between OFSTED and the FRS as described in earlier postings relieves the FRS of unnecessary inspections; relieves the applicant from two separate inspections, and reduces the bureaucracy by about 50% - and the premises are still safe.
HMG is already developing in some areas of the country Agency partnerships comprising Environmental Health, Trading Standards, Licensing and Fire with a view that each has a lead role in a particular business and that department does the visit. An inspector from the lead agency carries out the inspection covering their own particular field but also completes simple check sheets (but with key questions) for each of the other disciplines. Those check sheets are sent to the other relevant Agencies who can quickly determine (based on the answers to the key questions) if a further visit (for that particular discipline) needs to be made.
It reduces the number of inspections the occupier has to endure per annum, reduces bureacracy, and allows each enforcer to concentrate their resources on their high risk premises. Which is exactly what is being proposed between OFSTED and the FRS.
-
You're right Fred. Even in the pre-RRO days, my local authority used to inspect the premises of childminding applicants - including fire safety MoE, etc as well as a host of other health and safety considerations.
-
I will go along with that fred sounds very sensible to me however, it appears the consensus of opinion is that the RR(FS)O applies to this situation therefore the applicant being the RP is required to conduct a FRA, then where does she/he get the necessary guidance, as in my opinion none of the existing guidance is relevant.
-
Fred,
I understand the DTI Pilot as I was involved a little with it. The creation of massive amounts of paper from inspections will affect the FRS and whilst it could stop multiple inspections often FRS personnel will have to go back. With a question like, " Does the premises have an FRA?'' the answer may leave a lot to be desired. The tick box answer is yes or no. I understand the logic and reasoning behind not dealing with childminder premises as they can be considered low risk, the point I was attempting to make in a laboured way was that Ofsted want the FRS to agree to their perspective but that may not be the outcome for each individual premises. Like it or not the enforcing authrities have increased powers under RR(FS)O but with that comes a great deal of accountability and responsibility.
-
Fred,
Like it or not the enforcing authrities have increased powers under RR(FS)O but with that comes a great deal of accountability and responsibility.
Yes I agree - but with limited resources the FRS's also have to be sensible in how they deploy their enforcing officers. A key feature of the RRO (together with the IRMP) is that it gives FRS's control of what they do - get on and deal with high risk premises - and stops the tail from wagging the dog.
-
I would welcome views on the application of the FSO to childminder's premises
Back to the original question, the guidance just published by CFOA appears to make it clear that childminding in the home does fall under the Fire Safety Order.
Unfortunately, my brigade issued guidance telling me that that wasn`t the case. Never mind, I`ve only told about 20 childminders so far. Link below if interested
http://www.cfoa.org.uk/docimages/3117.pdf
-
I believe that the above link is in essence the new protocol with ofsted that is currently in the proses of being discussed and agreed nationaly.
-
Is there a difference between someone building a purpose built premises to provide day care for persons because of their age or someone, during the day time, using their private house for the same purpose?
Is there also a sleeping risk?
-
The first sounds like a daycare centre business and the second someone looking after other peoples children for a while at home with registration from the local authority to do so. I seem to recall that childminders were expected to provide rest facilities for children in their care.