![]() ![]() On the 8 November 2013, the Appellant submitted an appeal to the Tribunal against the decision to cancel. ![]() October 2013 under section 68 of the Childcare Act 2006.ġ3. Her objections were considered and a notice of cancellation issued on theĢ. Inspections by Ofsted following the incident on the 21 June 2013 led to the service of a notice of intention to cancel dated 6 August 2013, which the Appellant opposed. ![]() They were not therefore members of the committee at the material time, and having initially been joined as a party in the appeal, were removed as a party following a preliminary decision by Judge John Aitken issued on the 24 March 2014.ġ2. They had agreed, but joined the committee after the date of the action taken by Ofsted in respect of the incident. The Appellant had subsequently enlisted the support of three members of the current parental cohort to join the committee. The Appellant did not significantly dispute the facts but maintained that the incident was not one which should lead to the cancellation of her registration.ġ1. The alarm was raised and the group returned to the Chatterbox Preschool to find the child locked inside and asleep on some cushions.ġ0. The child’s absence was not discovered until a student on work placement enquired of the whereabouts of the child of a member of staff. On 21 June 2013, a child was left in the Chatterbox Preschool when all of the staff and other pupils went on an outing to a nearby park. Since 2006, the Appellant has been the nominated person for the Chatterbox Preschool and accepted that she was operating without the support of a committee as required by the constitution since that time.ĩ. Minutes of the committee were produced in evidence up to December 2006, but there were no minutes produced then until 2013.Ĩ. The constitution identifies that the organisation has the power to employ and pay staff but specifies that staff cannot be members of the committee. The constitution of the Chatterbox Preschool states that it was adopted in May 1984, but was signed by the Chairperson, Secretary and Treasurer as adopted in July 2007 and November 2008. She had been involved with the organisation since 1999.ħ. The Appellant was employed as a Playgroup Pre-school Leader from the 2 September 2002 by the Chatterbox Management Committee. Section 68(2) of the Childcare Act 2006 provides that the Chief Inspector may cancel the registration of a person if it appears that the prescribed requirements for registration have ceased or will cease to be satisfied. The individual is referred to as “the nominated individual” and in the appeal, the Appellant was at all material times, both the nominated individual and was the sole member of the Chatterbox Preschool Committee.ĥ. Where the applicant for registration is an unincorporated association, the applicant must nominate an individual who is a member of the governing body of the applicant to be responsible for dealing with matters relating to the applicant’s application for registration and subsequent registration and oversee the management of the early years provision. Schedule 2, Part 1, paragraph 1 of the Childcare (Early Years Register) Regulations 2008 requires that applicants for registration be suitable to provide early years provision, that the applicant will secure that the proposed early years provision meets the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) learning and development requirements, will comply with the EYFS welfare requirements and has carried out an assessment to identify any risks to the health or safety of children for whom provision is to be provided and has appointed an individual to manage the provision which is suitable to care for young children.Ĥ. Section 34(1) of the Childcare Act 2006 provides that a person may not provide early years provision on premises in England which are not domestic premises unless he is registered in the early years register in respect of the premises.ģ. The Appellant appeals under section 74 of the Childcare Act 2006 against the decision of Ofsted (the Respondent) made on the 26 October 2013 to cancel the registration of the Chatterbox Preschool Committee under section 68 of the Childcare Act 2006. The Tribunal also heard oral evidence from Ms Shannon Headd, Ms H Stanciu, Ms Julie Whitelaw, Reverend Trevor Stevenson and Jacqueline Reed APPEALġ. Mr Gordon Reed, solicitor, represented the Respondent. Judge Meleri Tudur, Ms Bridget Graham, Specialist Member Ms Wendy Stafford, Specialist Member Mr Ronald Bostwick, counsel, represented the Appellant, Ms Sylvester. ![]() The Chatterbox Pre-school Committee (which at the material date comprised Petrona Sylvester as a committee of one) Appellant v Ofsted Respondent Care Standards The Tribunal Procedure Rules (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care) Rules 2008 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |