The FSO and childminders

[Ken Taylor]

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?

[val]

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]

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.

[Ken Taylor]

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.

[Tom Sutton]

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.

[jokar]

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]

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.

[Dinnertime Dave]

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

[firelawmac]

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.

[nearlythere]

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?

[Ken Taylor]

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.