Nanny employers: would you use a service half way between a nanny and a nursery?

[limonchik]

I've been thinking about this lately, and have wondered if there'd be any call for it or if it exists already. Basically a small nursery setting with much smaller adult:child ratios than a traditional nursery (1:1 for under 18 months, 1:2 for 18 months to 3 years, 1:4 for 3 to 5 years for example). The baby room might have 4 adults and 4 babies, and the adults move with the babies to the next room ensuring continuity of care. A set up like this would obviously have similar costs to employing a nanny, but with the advantages of not having to be an employer. There would be the one to one care of a nanny, but the benefits of a nursery in that there would be multiple adults around, socialising and structured play for the child, sickness/holiday wouldn't be a problem.

Would anyone use a setting like this? Or are the nanny and nursery markets very separate?

limonchick,

I wouldn't use this for all the reasons others have suggested and tbh (wiht my accountant hat on) I seriously doubt it would be financially viable.

People who want the benefits of both will (I think) do what I do and use a normal-priced nursery one or two days a week, and a nanny the other times. Simples.

If you want to rake in the money and provide superior service, look at 'forest schools' and rolling this out into the nursery setting. There's a goldmine there.

Well I hope it works out. Home-based childcare seems to be on the wane with wraparound school care and nurseries on the increase. It doesn't give parents a lot of choice if they are not keen on institutional-based childcare and can't afford a nanny.

That was to navy.

thanks hocuspontas, oh and weirdly inline with what squiffy has said we are very "forest school-ey" in our aims and ideals!