Integrated Inspection by the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education of Abbey Nursery Paisley
14 April 2004
The Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act, 2001, requires that the Care Commission inspect all care services covered by the Act every year to monitor the quality of care provided. In accordance with the Act, the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education carry out integrated inspections of the quality of care and education. In doing this, inspection teams take account of National Care Standards, Early Education and Childcare up to the age of 16, and The Child at the Centre. The following standards and related quality indicators were used in the recent inspection.
National Care Standard
Child at the Centre Quality Indicator
Standard 2 - A Safe Environment
Resources
Standard 4 - Engaging with Children
Development and learning through play
Standard 5 - Quality of Experience
Curriculum
Children’s development and learning
Standard 6 - Support and Development
Support for children and families
Standard 14 - Well-managed Service
Management, Leadership and Quality
Assurance
Evaluations made using HMIE quality indicators use the following scale, and these words are used in the report to describe the team’s judgements:
Very good
: major strengths
Good
: strengths outweigh weaknesses
Fair
: some important weaknesses
Unsatisfactory
: major weaknesses
Reports contain Recommendations which are intended to support improvements in the quality of service.
Any Requirements refer to actions which must be taken by service providers to ensure that regulations are met and there is compliance with relevant legislation. In these cases the regulation(s) to which requirements refer will be noted clearly and timescales given.
HOW TO CONTACT US
Copies of this report have been sent to the head of service, staff and the Director of Education and Leisure. Copies are also available on the Care Commission website: www.carecommission.com and HMIE website: www.hmie.gov.uk .
Should you wish to comment on or make a complaint about any aspect of the inspection or about this report you should write either to the Care Commission or to HM Inspectorate of Education at the address below. If you are still dissatisfied with our services, you can contact your member of the Scottish Parliament (or, if you prefer, any other MSP). You can also contact the Scottish Parliamentary Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and Agencies.
Complaints Co-ordinator
Headquarters
Care Commission
Compass House
Riverside Drive
Dundee
DD1 4NY
Hazel Dewart
HM Inspectorate of Education
Saughton House
Broomhouse Drive
EDINBURGH
EH11 3XD
Crown Copyright 2004
Care Commission
HM Inspectorate of Education
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.
Integrated Inspection by the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education of Abbey Nursery Paisley
Introduction
Abbey Nursery was inspected in January 2004 as part of the integrated inspection programme by the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education. The nursery catered for children from babies to five years of age. At the time of the inspection the roll was 79.
The environment
The nursery provided a safe, secure and welcoming environment. The accommodation was in a good state of repair. Both playrooms were bright, clean and well organised. The layout of both playrooms allowed the children to play independently and to meet in small or larger groups. Babies could rest and play in a spacious, comfortable and stimulating environment. Children’s work was displayed attractively throughout.
A very small, enclosed outdoor play area was used for babies but there was no outdoor play area for older children. The outdoor play area was not appropriate for energetic outdoor physical play for either babies or older children. Staff had correctly identified the need to improve this aspect of provision.
There was a good range of resources, and equipment was clean and well maintained. Appropriate procedures were in place to control the spread of infection.
Quality of children’s experience
Staff in both playrooms interacted very well with children to extend their learning. They encouraged and valued children’s contributions. In the baby and toddler room, staff provided a range of suitably stimulating activities which were well matched to the developmental needs of individual children. Their progress was monitored carefully. Babies and toddlers enjoyed good opportunities to rest and play. Staff had established effective arrangements to keep parents informed of their child’s daily progress.
In the two to five year old playroom, staff had developed good arrangements for observing, assessing and recording children’s progress. Staff made good use of opportunities to discuss each child’s progress with their parents and carers. Planning set out clearly what staff expected children to learn and made good use of assessment information to plan next steps in learning.
Most older children concentrated well on their chosen activities. However, staff did not offer sufficiently challenging activities to meet the needs of some children.
The programme for emotional, personal and social development was very good. Staff used praise very well to motivate and encourage children’s self confidence and independence. Children were making friends and co-operated well with each other and staff during play. They showed a good awareness of simple rules of personal hygiene and safety.
The programme for communication and language was fair. Children had many opportunities to talk and listen in small and larger groups. They talked with confidence to adults and to each other. Staff needed to encourage children to use the book corner independently. While some older children could recognise their own name in print and a few were able to write their names, staff needed to encourage and develop further children’s early reading and writing skills.
The programme for knowledge and understanding of the world was good. Staff planned a range of interesting themes and topics and provided opportunities for children to learn about their environment through regular visits to places of interest locally. Children were developing a good understanding of colour, numbers and shapes. They were encouraged to observe and investigate but these opportunities, along with problem solving, should be extended further.
The programme for expressive and aesthetic development was very good. Children had very good opportunities to express themselves through a wide variety of art and craft activities and role-play. They had opportunities to listen and respond to songs, and experiment with a variety of musical instruments.
The programme for physical development and movement was good overall. Staff provided an appropriate range of small and large construction toys and tools to develop children’s hand control. A teacher of dance visited regularly. Staff made good use of the gym in the primary school opposite and the local park to encourage energetic physical play. Children needed a wider range of opportunities for energetic outdoor play.
Support for children and families
Staff knew children well and provided effective support for them and their families. They responded appropriately and sensitively to children’s individual circumstances. Parents who responded to the pre-inspection questionnaire were very satisfied with the nursery. They had regular opportunities to talk informally with staff who responded positively to any concerns raised.
Staff and management were aware of the need to develop a clearer knowledge and understanding of relevant legislation and procedures related to children with additional needs. They had begun to address some of the issues but had not yet developed individualised educational programmes for children who required extra support in their learning. The manager needed to build closer liaison with support services to improve access for children.
Management
The manager provided sound leadership and was strongly committed to the further development of the nursery. She was well organised, approachable and highly respected by parents and staff.
Appropriate up-to-date policies and procedures were in place for all aspects of the management of the nursery. These were shared with staff and parents.
The manager took an active role in monitoring and evaluating the work of the nursery, including working alongside staff in playrooms. She held regular staff meetings to discuss the quality of the service.
Staff were either fully qualified or working towards an appropriate qualification. They were developing their knowledge, skills and experiences further through attendance at a range of training courses. The nursery was staffed with the appropriate number of adults to children. Procedures for the safe recruitment of staff were in place but these should be developed further and implemented fully.
Key strengths
The strong leadership of the nursery manager and the commitment of the staff team.
The very good interaction between staff and children.
The very good programme for expressive and aesthetic development.
Recommendations for improvement
The programme for communication and language should be improved.
The nursery should ensure that children are given a wide ranging experience of energetic outdoor play.
Procedures for the safe recruitment of staff should be developed further and implemented fully.
Care Commission Officers and HM Inspectors have asked the pre-school centre and Education Authority to prepare an action plan indicating how they will address the main findings of the report. Where requirements are made, the action plan should include timescales to deal with these. The plan will be available to parents and carers. In liaison with the pre-school centre and Education Authority, Care Commission Officers and HM Inspectors will monitor progress to ensure improvements are in line with the main findings of the report.
