To think this is not a great way of doing nursery admissions

[MummytoKatie]

Dd is nearly 3 and after Easter wevwill find out what classes she will get for school nursery for the year before she starts school.

Basically there is a 9 - 12 class and a 12 - 3 class for up to 5 days a week depending on what you want and what is available at the time. 9 - 12 is a lot more popular plus it is likely that (due to space) not all children will be offered 5 days.

Anyway, the method used for offering is by age. So September born kids get completely free choice and by August born you get what is left.

This seems a terrible idea to me as surely the September kids are advantaged enough by being so much older. Should it be the other way round? Or random? Or some other method?

I don't have a horse in this race as dd is a March birthday so slap bang in the middle whatever but I just wondered what other schools did?

strictly speaking i dont think you have to start full time education until the term in which you are 5 so most schools do a staggered entry for the first year of main stream schooling. Ours takes Sept - Dec first term then adds in Jan - Easter in January and finally the remainders come in after Easter. i suspect they are staggering it like this because the school might too. why not ask?

That was what I thought and it used to be that way but now they will all start on the same day in September 2014. (Strange mix of emotion between hearty cheer and heart-wrenching sob emoticon needed.)

I'm guessing it is a hangover from the old system but I don't want to query too much in case I become that mother before poor dd even starts.

There are different child care ratios for under 3s and over 3s. So our preschool did exactly what you're describing, simply because as the older ones hit 3, then they could take on another younger one.

I had 2 winter babies who had 2 full years of preschool, and 1 summer born who only had one year.

True. But the our school nursery doesn't take them until the September after they turn 3 so they will all be over 3. But some will be 3 years 364 days and some 3 years and 1 day. And the 364 days ones get the most choice and availability of the nursery.

I'm explaining this really badly aren't I?

You can send them earlier but you would pay - it is only the funding that is staggered. I think if you were already "in" you would be guaranteed your place.

You could also do 2.5 days to use your hours so would only need 3 of the more popular mornings as 2 sessions would be in the afternoon.

It is pants but there has to be cut offs I guess.

Check out start ages of other preschools - mine starts from 2 but you have to fund yourself.

I agree, a completely pants way of doing it! No way is ideal, but to focus on age seems really unfair. They should either do it randomly, or by date of application.

The reason is financial. Let's assume that if sessions were shared out fairly then there are enough slots for all children to have 4 sessions each. If child A starts in September 2013 and wants 5 morning sessions then nursery will get money for those sessions from September until the end of the summer term. Child B, starting at Easter 2014 wants 5 sessions. If you gave them 5 then you only get money from Easter until Summer. So they give child A all the sessions they want, and child B only gets 3 sessions as there is no space left. Basically they want as many sessions filled as early on in the year as possible. No one leaves at Easter so basically you 'reserve' a space from September to Easter without paying.

All their overheads will be the same each month but they are only getting maximum income from Easter to Xmas once all the spaces are filled. I suspect preschools would prefer to take only September to December birthday children if they could and be full the whole year.

Did I explain that clearly?

And yes it does favour the children that already have an extra advantage from being oldest in the year. The only way around is to pay to reserve the sessions you want from September until you actually start.

hi cakebar think you have misunderstood what OP is saying (either that or I have).

All the children are already 3 when they start in September 2013 so will all be entitled to their 15 hours from September 2013 rather than at various points throughout the year so the financial reasons for allocating places the way they are doing makes no sense.

So there is just one intake in September for all children?

In which case that is an awful way to do admissions

The pre school DS will be starting in September does a "first come first served" basis for applications with the only priority being given to those with siblings in the school.

I think the logic is that older children should have the opportunity for more sessions, which I think is fair.And I guess the only way to ensure that there are sufficient spaces for them to do the maximum amount is to give them first choice.

Why should older children get more sessions though bangwhizz - I don't see the logic in that at all.

I can't see the logic in the older children being allowed more sessions either. They will all be in the same year group when they start school. So if a Sept born child gets allocated 5 sessions then they will keep all of these sessions until they go to school the following Sept. If an Aug born child only gets allocated say two sessions they will never have the chance of increasing as by the time the older children leave to start school the August born child will also be leaving to start school. Makes no sense.

Incidently my DS started pre school last sept, his pre school take children from 2 and he is not 3 until this May. His pre school leader allocated the older children first. I can see the logic in doing this for 2year olds as there are different ratios for 2 and 3 year old and the older 2 year olds will turn 3 earlier in the year so they will be able to take more children in total

I'm a governor for a Local Authority nursery school. The way every LA nursery is funded across England (including those attached to schools) is through the EYSFF (Early Years Single Funding Formula). Basically you only get money in your budget based on the termly attending head count. The sum you get obviously varies by term as you can only offer a funded place from the beginning of a term AFTER a child turns 3. In order for maximum funding we would have to have all places filled each September.
Currently we have about 75% of places filled each September, with the remaining 25% filled in the January intake. This consequently leaves no spaces remaining for an Easter intake.
We can't afford for this to change. If we got less children in September we would have to make staff redundant as the total budget across the year would be less than our running costs.
Hope this helps clarify the situation.

Pinkcanary in the OPs case all the children will already be 3 at the September intake (some will have just turned 3 and some will be nearly 4) so all will be entitled to funding regardless.

People really aren't reading this properly, are they?!
This is a nursery for only 1 year, ALL the children are already 3, they are ALL fully funded as they are 3. There is no need for a January intake as they are ALL 3......

Ahh, sorry. I was assuming it was termly intake based on when a child was 3.
In that case, yes. It's bad.
Our admissions policy reflects much the same as a primary, with SEN taking first priority, sibling attendance and then catchment by walking distance from home (as verified by google maps). Birthdate is totally irrelevant in single year entry.

If it is a school nursery, is there not an LA admissions policy? Ours gives priority to parents requesting 5 sessions, then they are allocated according to admission criteria (catchment siblings, catchment etc).

Age still comes into it though, because it accepts children the term after their third birthday.

Thanks everyone for your replies.

Just to confirm - it is defined as FS1 where reception is FS2. It runs from the September after your third birthday to the September after your fourth. There is no way of joining earlier than that - even if you have your 15 free hours (which dd will have as of 1 April), are willing to pay (we would be) or offer to sleep with the headmaster. (Although that might be just me as I'm 7 months pregnant so maybe I should get one of my more slender friends to pretend to be dd's mum and offer!)

The website states that children can go on e waiting list from the day they turn 2 and they are placed in chronological age order. If 2 children have the same d.o.b. then preference us given to the one who joined the waiting list earlier. I think that catchment area children go above non catchment children (details are not fully given on the website - you have to contact them and ask - but I had a friend who is non catchment who tried to get her child in) but other than that it is just about age.

It just seems a bit strange to me.