The Motley Fool Discussion Boards	Previous Page
Social Clubs / Imp This Ride
URL: https://boards.fool.com/so-many-id-figured-thanks-rj-that-it-wasnt-30621510.aspx
Subject: Re: Yeah, so	Date: 4/4/2013 9:54 AM
Author: impolite	Number: 36216 of 40295
So many? I'd figured (thanks RJ!) that it wasn't a 1:1 ratio but thought with 2s (please tell me LJ is not already older than that) and under it was a max of 3:1. So figuring babies would be a lower ratio and older children higher I'd settled on an average of 3 kids per employee (to include management/admin/sickness/training/etc). Babies (under 1 year) are 4:1. Over 1 year (and we are at 17 months) is 8:1 I think, and once it gets to the big kids' ages (10 and 8 I KNOW ALREADY CRAZY RIGHT?!) the ratio is much higher....think of how many kids are in a classroom per teacher! All of that is at a center: an in home provider can have 4 non-related-to them children full time in their care, in addition to their own children. His sitter was a stay-at-home mom. That equation is what worked best for them financially due to childcare costs...so the money I was giving her they used for "extras". impolite
Copyright 1996-2022 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us