How many toddlers 12-24mths do you normally care for, and feel comfortable handling?

[momof4inpink]

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

[Inspired by Reggio]

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.

[Momof4]

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.

[Bookworm]

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

[playfelt]

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.

[Momof4]

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.

[playfelt]

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.

[Inspired by Reggio]

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

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'

[playfelt]

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.

[Momof4]

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.