29 July 2023
Dear NZ ECE colleagues
We are writing this as a humble request for support from you and fellow colleagues who teach, lead, manage or own an ECE centre, especially if you have experienced something similar.
Last month, MOE randomly visited all our centres for a spot license check. They approved our brand new Gaia (Earth) Forest Preschool with a full licence, but found several different things across our three other sister services (that Gaia was copied and modelled from) and have reduced them to provisional status. The combined reasons are as follows:
- Fresh air vs 18C: MOE was not satisfied with the balance we have in our open rooms between ventilation and being above 18C at 500mm off floor in every corner of the room, in a south facing wall that does not receive sunshine and in locations immediately near the open doors and windows. They measured temperatures next to the open doors and windows on a cold and windy winter’s day where the temperature outside was 7 degrees C ! MOE deemed a violation of the regulations and a review was required, which was completed in which we sought advice from industry experts, architects and university academics. We installed CO2 and temperature monitors that send alerts via wifi to all our managers and team leaders. We had also been reviewing our sickness patterns over the previous years and were considering installing UV light inside all heat pumps in our three sister centres as we have installed at our new Gaia Forest centre at an investment of over $50,000. For one centre (Chrysalis), MOE found nothing wrong with any of the practices and observations, so they simply cut and pasted this one violation from another centre into Chrysalis to bring it down to Provisional. We believe that was unfairly and unjustly done, especially to Chrysalis which is one of the most awarded ECE centres in NZ for spacial designs and environments for nurturing and learning.
- Table top activity: At one of our services, MOE observed that “there were tabletop activities pre-determined by Kaiako and these resources were not able to be used in different areas of the service. For example, the dinosaurs were all stood on the table, there were no other resources with these, and children were expected to explore these at the table”. MOE did not factor in that these were intended to be a provocation for children to use as they chose, move where they wished and add resources which are readily available to children as their play evolved. Furthermore, our ERO report for the centre 12 months ago stated: “…Children actively participate in the programme and make choices about their play. Learning environments are well resourced, and they offer age-appropriate experiences that support children’s learning and development…”. If anything, we believe we have continuously improved to be even better as there are even more resources than when ERO visited.
- MOE deemed this a violation and a review was required to create more extension in learning, which was completed.
- Children seated too long: During the site visit at one service, “(MOE) observed that all children (both under 2 and over 2) were seated at the table for an unreasonable length of time while waiting for all children to join the table. They did not take into consideration children’s transitions and waiting times, nor specific events that day that were causing a slight delay”.
- MOE deemed this a violation and a review was required, which was completed.
- Incorrect Expiry: In one service, the incorrect date of first aid expiry was placed by new admin and system into our SMS (i.e. the 3 month extension/grace period date was mistakenly entered, not the actual expiry date). Admittedly, this clerical error by us, for the first time in over a decade, caused 7 out of 9 Kaiako to be not first aid refreshed at the time of the MOE visit. Our normal practice is all staff are first aid trained. We fixed this over the weekend with first aid refresher courses for all Kaiako.
- MOE kept this on their list as a violation and a review was required, which was completed.
- Medicine: One of our services had three instances of parent’s signatures that were missing at pick up time out of our year-long record register. MOE understood that this was not our usual practice.
- Nevertheless, MOE placed this on the list as a violation and a review and teacher re-training was required, which had already been completed.
- More meaningful interactions: Although for 13 years, all our centres have operated and continue to run at 20% higher adult:child ratios (i.e. 1:4 for under 2s, and 1:8 for over 2s), MOE noticed in one service, “supervision more than meaningful interactions” during their brief observation. Our team explained that this was during a period of child-led and unstructured free play which is part of our programme.
- MOE deemed this a violation and a review was required to balance this which was completed, including engaging external PLD support too to guide our Kaiako.
- Wet weather situation: At one of our services MOE observed table set ups indoors & restrictions to moving equipment around. A curved barrier is used to encourage and guide children indoors during wet/windy/cold weather in the under 2s despite the playground area being partially undercover.
- MOE deemed this to be a violation and a review was required to allow children more choices in this winter weather situation which was completed, and we would greatly appreciate other ideas please from other ECE centres for how you currently manage this.
- Procedure for sick and soiled children: At one of our services, a newly inducted relieving teacher on her first week was randomly questioned about the location of aprons and she froze (later informing how nervous she was) and stated she did not know. Our induction process includes this, but also includes that centre policy states relieve teachers do NOT perform nappy duties.
- MOE assumed that the reliever’s responses applied to the rest of the staff and deemed a violation, and so a review was required for all teachers which was completed within the week.
- Accident, incident and Illness Policy: At one of our services (but not our other audited centres who have the same policy), the policy and procedure does not provide examples of when Kaiako would seek further external medical assistance (e.g. when to dial 111).
- MOE deemed this to be a violation in only one centre, and a review has already taken place to add in the detail and examples of when to call 111.
- Cloth nappies: At one of our services (but not our other audited services which also share this policy), the nappy change procedure includes that parents can use cloth nappies, but it does not adequately stipulate how staff are to hygienically treat cloth nappies.
- MOE deemed this to be a violation in only one centre, and a review was completed to add more detail about that.
- Time to administer: At one service, a medicine chart showed an entry of a parent writing “administer at morning tea” instead of the specific time of “10:30am”. This is a violation, which we realise too, had been missed by our collegaues and the review has already happened.
- Bodies of water: At one of our services (but not our other audited centres who have the same policy), MOE stated that we only check for bodies of water outside, but not inside.
- MOE deemed this to be a violation in only one centre, and a review was required to show checks are being done inside too.
- Stretcher bed storage: At one service, MOE was not satisfied that these were being stored under our cots, or positioned in front of an unused cot (we have 1:1 cots for our U2’s at our Tauranga centre which is twice as many as required by regulation). No storage is allowed under cots due to lack of ventilation, yet our one bunk cot is acceptable and you can buy cots with draws built in underneath for storage.
- MOE deemed this to be a violation in only one centre, and a review was required.
Following queries to these, MOE had verbally stated to our manager that just because our policy and practice is the same as it was when we obtained a full license 18 months ago, they are now using a “different lens to interpret these”. We asked for a reference to a MOE Early Learning Bulletin or change in MOE Licence Regulations that could have alerted us to their new lens approach. We were given an outline of their complaints procedure to follow, which was not our priority at the time, as the teams were focused on clearing the provisional standings as soon as possible. MOE accepted all changes and upgrades and all centres were restored to FULL licenses within 3 months.
When we shared the provisional notices by MOE with our parents and community, we received overwhelming support as attached below.
However, our Kaiako and Leadership are naturally still processing this traumatic experience and their feelings of being “judged unfairly” and “observed without full context” and with a “harsh microscopic lens”. Within days our team had all come together as a family and reflected and accepted the findings and rulings of MOE to lower three of our centres to provisional because of the variety of reasons as all combined and stated above. Our focus and commitment was on getting it right ASAP to maintain high quality practices that support our children’s learning and well-being as we have been doing for over 13 years.
But because of the nature of their findings, we still feel that we need collegial support from the sector including tips and advice on how others in the sector have resolved or are meeting these points above.
We are therefore openly asking if anyone else has gone through a similar issue as any one of our points above and how did you remedy this? With the ever-dwindling and weakening state of our ECE sector as the weeks and months go by, we are ever hopeful that we can support each other to rise above the challenges that we all sometimes get faced with.
Gratefully yours
Nikeeta and Darius and all our Management, Leadership and Kaiako teams at Fern Garden, Magic Kingdom, Chrysalis, and Gaia Earth Forest Preschool
IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK RECEIVED FROM PARENTS:
