Just curious to see what other dayhome providers have in regards to the number of toddlers they care for. I currently run a "Private" dayhome which is in Alberta. I have well over 20yrs childcare experience. I used to run under the whole 6 or 7 child ratio (including your own) regulations that fall under the liscenced dayhomes.,:rolleyes: I feel that I no longer need or want to include my 8 & 9 year olds. I also have a 2yr old
Just would like to hear some feedback and experiences please:)
2 under 2 for me!
I will only do one child that isn't walking yet. At one point last year, I had 4 under 2 in my care, but all were walking and most had good vocabulary for little ones. They were also not all full time, only one was and the rest were part timers.
Admittedly, though; those days were crazy!! :p I would likely stick to two under two also. And I am like you, I have a hard time "counting" my older boys. They are 8 and 10, and really don't need me unless the house burns down, LoL.
Between the one year mat leave and full day JK all of my kids fall into the aged 1-3 catagory. The under age 2 rule is a misnomer in a sense that to me if you want to pin point infant to toddler it would be between 15-18 months. By then they walk, follow simple instructions sometimes such as come here, sit down. I have 4 kids of my own although they are all out of the house now except our youngest who has special needs and will always be a "toddler" in our midst. I have always taken on my allowable 5 daycare and any age mix works for me.
When I was living in London I cared for a toddler that would have turned 2 in November and her mom gave birth to triplets in early August. So for that span of time she had 4 kids under 2 and 3 under a year. She sent most of her help away except for a bit of feeding help. Left the older one with me till Christmas mostly till she got her strength back and then she took care of all 4 of them herself. I visited often - always enough babies to go around - and saw her setup and routine and that showed me that it can be done. It isnt' so much the age of the children as much as it is the needs of each age group and how you are set up to handle them. An efficient diaper changing place makes it go a lot smoother than having to grab each child's bag and set them up etc. Feeding the same. If they are all eating the same foods then you make batches of food not having to cook three different things or prepare it three ways - puree, chopped, whole depending on group.
My point is don't discount any child just because of their age. As far as safety goes in an emergency any child under 5 isn't going to react they way you need them to so again a child that sits and waits for me or someone to get them can be safer than one that runs and hides and ignores my pleas to come.
Also realize they develop quickly so a non walking child might be walking within weeks of starting and that can vary as some walk at 9 months and others 16 months.
I would prefer to have them all as close together as possible but do try to watch my birth dates so there are at least two groups leaving for school a year apart - some summer/fall birthdays and some with winter/spring birthdates which means they don't all leave the same year.
I am losing three this summer either moving or school and anticipate filling the spaces with one year olds (ideally starting a month apart between July and October) and I will have two left in care - turning 2 end of Sept and turning 3 beginning of Nov.
I am in Ontario as well. Currently I have 2-18 mth olds, 1- 2 yr old, 1- 22 mth old (only comes 2 days a week) and an almost four year old. I love the little ones.
I'm in Ontario and I have 2 eighteen month olds and 1 one year old.
Right now I have 1 who is 16 months and in two months I will have a 1 year old starting. I know the first few months will be tough with two under 2 but once the one year old turns 15 months or so it will be smooth sailing.
when I started (2 years ago) I had 3 under 2 and they were all only a month or two apart in age. It was craaaaazy busy some days
Right now I have 4 under 2. 2 of them are walking and 2 are not. In Sept. I will have 5 that are 2 years and under. I like this age group!
I'm private as well and I have a 12 mth old, a 14mth old, a 16 mth old, and a 20 mth old, and an occasional 3.5 yr old. plus my own two kids, 2 and 3yrs old. I don't take care of them all on my own though! I have two assistants-one for the morning, and one for the afternoon so that they don't burn out themselves! I didn't go the registered route because I prefer having all the ages close together....it actually runs smoother for me and makes more sense in catering the toys, activities and schedule to fit that age groups development (i had previously had more varied age groups and felt SO exhausted trying to cater to all the different mentalities and developmental stages!) and its the age group I know best so I feel most confident about dealing with them. It has also been a crazy year transitioning a new munchkin in what seems like almost every month since January when I felt I was ready to fill my spaces up. My plan was to take in an amount of kids that I could be able to handle on my own if need be, should my assistant be unable to make it, and I have had to a few times and it makes for a very hectic day because of the youngest one who does not walk yet. I find that once they are walking though, it makes it so much easier. Just another month or two away for this littlest one....I feel that I could handle it but just choose not to as I don't want to personally be that busy every day on my own. I'm all about the quality of life. Which makes me have to sacrifice a big chunk of my money to my assistants but I have an easier day because of it and I'm happier for it so I feel its totally worth it.
I agree with the others who have said it is managable to have many kids under 2. Mine are all under 3 (4 daycare kids and my own daughter who is almost 2). In September I will start the fifth daycare child who will be 11 months (the others will then be between 18 months and 3 years). I agree with what Playfelt said...there is a big difference between a 12 month old and an 18 month old. I am more likely to draw a distinction there instead of at 2. By 18 months they are walking well (usually), able to follow some intructions, understand a lot if not most of what you say and can talk a bit (or a lot depending on the child). I had three 12 month olds at the same time this past winter and they are all becoming toddlers now...it is easier in some ways but harder in others. I have to say having three 15-16 month olds at the park keeps me hopping...teaching them to stay in one area, not to climb play structures that are too tall, etc is tiring, but I know that a couple of months from now they will know the rules and it will settle down a bit. It is nice having them all close in age.
It is nice to hear everyones experiences. I do agree with having them all in the same age group, as I too find it more managable.I am currently re-structuring my dayhome and eliminating all my part time clients and only accepting fulltime. This fall I will have 3.5yrs & 18mths sisters starting in Sept, 2 @ 12mths,(one of them only for 4mths) and an 18mth leaving in Dec for maternity leave and a new 12 mth relacing him. Which will make the first 2 @ 12mths, 15mths by then, with the possibility of one of them leaving at the same time the maternity client is being replaced. All with my 2yr old girl. I am confident I can manage it, just wondering if others were as crazy as I :blink:
I try to keep my ratio at only two under the age of 2 ... mostly because I have a back injury and am not suppose to repetitively lift/bend and well that age group requires the most bending/lifting.
I'm in Ontario and not licenced so I currently have 2 who are eighteen months, 1 two year old & 2 four year olds.
However, when my four year old children started at about 10 months of age I already had one other child exactly the same age and two children just reaching age 2. That was really hard work.
But then when they reached age 2 & 3 and we were able to get out and about to the parks we started having such a great time and they were all so easy to take care of because they had similar interests.
I prefer having a group where they are all close in age. Next Feb. I have another 10 month old joining us again, and by then the other 3 will all be two and the oldest will be a part time J-K-er.
I currently have three children in my care plus my own two children. All three dck's are 15 months old, as is my son. My daughter just turned 3. I am also currently interviewing for my last two spots and I keep getting requests for 8-12month olds. If I want to be full, I'm going to have all 5 of my kids under 2, as well as my son. :) If I felt I couldn't handle, I wouldn't take them on, but I find it pretty easy since they are all at the same stage, so wanting to do the same activities and eat the same types of food. It just sucks when they are all teething at the same time! lol
What I like about having the kids all at the same level no matter what it is is that the playroom can reflect that. Sometimes it looks like a giant playpen with infant stuff all over the place and not a barbie doll or hotwheels car in sight. Other times there is a segregated area for the infant stuff and the rest is up and away and cars and trucks abound.
The other advantage of all under twos is that your programming is less so there is less prep work involved meaning you can spend your time on other things - more washing down high chairs and stuff like that. Compared to preparing lessons for the older kids I did find that while my days were busy with the babies my evenings were more relaxed since I didn't have as much prep work to do. And some still did a morning nap so I only rarely had all 5 up at the same time and during those times they were generally in their high chairs for meals, etc.
I agree with you playfelt. Right now with 3 children 2 and under and only 2 four year olds I keep preparing crafts for 5, duh! Then I start with the oldest children and see how the 2 year old copes with the craft before deciding if the babies can or can't do them. And when my oldest children graduated and I brought in the babies last year I had all of the infant toys packed away and had to bring them all back out again. It was a whole changeover, put away cots and bring back playpens. My room seems much more cluttered with baby things, but when you have a large age gap you have to keep everything out all the time.
The two under two rule has been around long before we went to the year long mat leave and it is a rule that needs to be updated if agencies intend to stay competitive especially in provinces like Ontario. Traditionally the two under two were infants because the daycare centres - many agencies were affiliated with a daycare centre - did not take infants till they were 15-18 months old because of ratios. So those in home care were literally babies. Now since you rarely have a child under 12 months starting care they reach toddlerhood almost immediately. In other words the two under two rule doesn't mean what it did.
I agree Playfelt ... if they do not adjust the home childcare ratios for 'licensed agency model' it is going to be VERY hard for agencies to attract providers ... because you can only have three children under 3 and of those only two can be under 2 .... and well if all the 4 and 5 year olds are in SCHOOL FULL TIME it is going to mean providers in agency based programs will only be having THREE children enrolled cause it will be limited to find enough 'over 3' children from the remaining pool ... and well not sure about other providers but the agency model already results in a lower income because the agency is taking a 'cut' and add throwing in issues with not being able to be full due to the loss of the 4 and 5 year old age group to full day early learning in schools :no:
The introduction of the Full Day Early Learning has placed 'licensed daycare in Ontario' in huge peril either way ... cause centre models are faring even WORSE than agencies because centres have all that much more 'overhead' and they lost their 'profitable age groups' :(
And don't forget about the rule that the providers own kids under 6 count in those ratios too so a mom who wants to stay home with her toddler and infant can only care for one more child. That is certainly not attractive to anyone.
Playfelt, that rule is only if you are licenced though - the 2 under 2 rule. When you are unlicenced you can have all 5 under 2 if you want. I just found out today that I'm losing my 2 year old due to a move out of town, so I'll most likely be bringing in a new baby and that will make 3 under 2 for me.
Yes that is why most of us are unlicensed. We had been comparing the two systems and what the changes mean for licensed care and it isn't looking good as Reggio said. I have always based my age mix on ability and not age. An 11 month old that walks, feeds himself with a spoon and entertains himself in play is a lot less work than a whiney three year old diva that can not be placated no how. My biggest complaint with an agency is their arbitrary rules. I understand why they do it but when talking about kids under 5 and especially under age 3 there is no set pattern and allowances need to be made.
I only take kids under age 3 so looking to fill three spaces between now and Oct so that will be babies and then I will have a 2 year old and an almost 3 year old. So far from the contacts I have it has been for all girls. My two that are staying are girls and all three that are leaving are boys. I do like to have a mix but so could use a year of dollies and dressup and less ram it bam it cars. Figure with starting three babies someone is bound to go on mat leave and then maybe I can add a couple boys to the mix after I have had my break. Not to sound sexist or anything but this last group was so cut and dried boys things girls things it drove me crazy - think it was dad inspired but I tried my best to make circletime and planned activities so they got to do what they didn't do in playtime.