Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks for the clarification Marcia and Cortney!

Clarification of what?

OP here. Thanks for the clarification Marcia and Cortney!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marcia Hall hear again to answer the question that was posed. FYI, I do not live in the DC area, so this forum is not a place I visit regularly. Again, if you need direct answers about something, I will need you to email me at inanoty2011@hotmail.com

To the issue of blacklisting. I have no idea what this is. In my career as a nanny, I have never experienced it. In my interactions with agencies, I have never heard of such a thing.

To the issue of agencies being in the INA. The INA was founded by not only nannies but also agency owners and nanny training programs. It is the reason we call ourselves the umbrella organization. INA's purpose is to bring together the entire industry and have a place for everyone at the table. To tell agencies that they do not deserve a place at that table would be pretty undemocratic of a non-profit organization that exists to connect us all.

Furthermore, agency members pay 6 times (sometimes more) the amount in membership dues than nannies do. Honestly, if we did not have agencies in our association, we would not be able to exist. We would not be able to pay for office staff, our website or our membership platform. This does not make nannies any less a member and I say this only to point out our need for agencies. We have about 4 times as many nanny members as we do agency owners. Years ago, it was about $100 for a nanny to be a member. But about 6 years ago, the Board recognized that $100 a year for a nanny was proving to be too big of an investment for some and reduced the rate that individual nannies would pay. We did not reduce the cost for businesses to be members. $45 a year is an investment but it is one that almost all nannies can afford.







Again, I personally would LOVE to see more nannies involved in committees and be nominated for the Board of Directors! If you are interested, let me know. But the fact remains that currently we have more businesses willing to serve on the Board. However, I would like to point out that both Cortney (the president) and myself (the 1st VP) as well as 3 other current Board members all identify themselves as caregivers at least in part. So 5 out of our 11 person Board of Directors are caregivers in one form or another.

Also, INA strongly supports both local nanny support groups as well as nanny only groups. We encourage the participation in Nannypalooza, National Nanny Training Day, National Nanny Recognition Week and Domestic Estate Managers Association. We often sponsor aspects of all of these groups. However, INA's purpose is to be inclusive. It never has been the goal to gather nannies only. Now, maybe this means that INA is not the place for some nannies and that is fine. I am not saying that they have to be a member of INA to be a quality, professional nanny. There have been other groups formed for that purpose. However, to rebuke an association because they are following their original mission and purpose, seems counter-productive to the industry to me.

As I said before, from my perspective, the nanny career and industry will never gain the respect and status it deserves in public opinion if we do not all work together. Agencies need quality nannies and nannies need quality agencies. I truly want us to be able to all work together. Call me an optimist, but I think we can do it.

Thanks for listening and let me know via email if you have further questios.
Marcia Hall

Thank you for the explanation, so my question would be if INA is for everyone why did the agencies feel they needed to start their own club that would exclude nannies. The agencies decided they wanted their own thing and IMO when that happened that is when INA should have done the same thing sense it is International Nanny Association and not International Nanny Agencies. Perhaps you do not have more nanny involvement because the agencies have too much a hold on the INA and many of us do not like it. Nanny agencies need us but these days nannies do not need agencies, we can get our own jobs. I am not saying there are not good agencies but for the most of them they have a superiority complex because they think they hold our career futures and again these days that is not

I am another nanny who is waiting to hear Marcia's or Courtney's response.

If INA wants to be for everyone, then APNA (the EXclusive nanny agency association) must either fold, OR allow nannies to join at an affordable price and be eligible to sit on the board.

But we all know, they will do neither. They want to continue with their unscrupulous practices. Not 100% of them are bad, but unfortunately the bad ones have been allowed to dominate the industry.

Anonymous wrote:Marcia Hall hear again to answer the question that was posed. FYI, I do not live in the DC area, so this forum is not a place I visit regularly. Again, if you need direct answers about something, I will need you to email me at inanoty2011@hotmail.com

To the issue of blacklisting. I have no idea what this is. In my career as a nanny, I have never experienced it. In my interactions with agencies, I have never heard of such a thing.

To the issue of agencies being in the INA. The INA was founded by not only nannies but also agency owners and nanny training programs. It is the reason we call ourselves the umbrella organization. INA's purpose is to bring together the entire industry and have a place for everyone at the table. To tell agencies that they do not deserve a place at that table would be pretty undemocratic of a non-profit organization that exists to connect us all.

Furthermore, agency members pay 6 times (sometimes more) the amount in membership dues than nannies do. Honestly, if we did not have agencies in our association, we would not be able to exist. We would not be able to pay for office staff, our website or our membership platform. This does not make nannies any less a member and I say this only to point out our need for agencies. We have about 4 times as many nanny members as we do agency owners. Years ago, it was about $100 for a nanny to be a member. But about 6 years ago, the Board recognized that $100 a year for a nanny was proving to be too big of an investment for some and reduced the rate that individual nannies would pay. We did not reduce the cost for businesses to be members. $45 a year is an investment but it is one that almost all nannies can afford.







Again, I personally would LOVE to see more nannies involved in committees and be nominated for the Board of Directors! If you are interested, let me know. But the fact remains that currently we have more businesses willing to serve on the Board. However, I would like to point out that both Cortney (the president) and myself (the 1st VP) as well as 3 other current Board members all identify themselves as caregivers at least in part. So 5 out of our 11 person Board of Directors are caregivers in one form or another.

Also, INA strongly supports both local nanny support groups as well as nanny only groups. We encourage the participation in Nannypalooza, National Nanny Training Day, National Nanny Recognition Week and Domestic Estate Managers Association. We often sponsor aspects of all of these groups. However, INA's purpose is to be inclusive. It never has been the goal to gather nannies only. Now, maybe this means that INA is not the place for some nannies and that is fine. I am not saying that they have to be a member of INA to be a quality, professional nanny. There have been other groups formed for that purpose. However, to rebuke an association because they are following their original mission and purpose, seems counter-productive to the industry to me.

As I said before, from my perspective, the nanny career and industry will never gain the respect and status it deserves in public opinion if we do not all work together. Agencies need quality nannies and nannies need quality agencies. I truly want us to be able to all work together. Call me an optimist, but I think we can do it.

Thanks for listening and let me know via email if you have further questios.
Marcia Hall

Thank you for the explanation, so my question would be if INA is for everyone why did the agencies feel they needed to start their own club that would exclude nannies. The agencies decided they wanted their own thing and IMO when that happened that is when INA should have done the same thing sense it is International Nanny Association and not International Nanny Agencies. Perhaps you do not have more nanny involvement because the agencies have too much a hold on the INA and many of us do not like it. Nanny agencies need us but these days nannies do not need agencies, we can get our own jobs. I am not saying there are not good agencies but for the most of them they have a superiority complex because they think they hold our career futures and again these days that is not

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would also like to thank both ladies from INA board for responding. I dought few nannies would join a town hall in fear of black listing. One of the overwhelming critiques of INA is that nannies do not think agencies should be a part of INA and especially as they have their own organization which nannies cannot be part of, a bit of a double standard. Blacklisting is mostly done by agencies and I am afraid very much goes on. Agencies drop nannies who quit jobs because employers do not want to pay a nanny legally/taxes. Why is this not a regulation for agencies and why, would would let them be on the INA board? Agencies often have attitudes. NOTY has also become uncomfortable to watch. Many of us are nannies for the love of children and each of those kids eyes I would hope they have their own best nanny of the world. I see agencies post to families that if they love their nanny should show their nanny how much they love them by nominating to be NOTY. I know I loved INA when it started but am not happy to see where it is going.

I think if INA is serious to change for the better it should really take take a strong consideration in at least getting agencies off the board, let the nannies run INA.

Well said. If INA wants to become a respectable nanny association, it absolutely cannot have non-nannies on the board. That's a given.

The nanny agencies have their own exclusive club that forbids nanny membership. How do these agencies justify that?

Thank you for the explanation, so my question would be if INA is for everyone why did the agencies feel they needed to start their own club that would exclude nannies. The agencies decided they wanted their own thing and IMO when that happened that is when INA should have done the same thing sense it is International Nanny Association and not International Nanny Agencies. Perhaps you do not have more nanny involvement because the agencies have too much a hold on the INA and many of us do not like it. Nanny agencies need us but these days nannies do not need agencies, we can get our own jobs. I am not saying there are not good agencies but for the most of them they have a superiority complex because they think they hold our career futures and again these days that is not the case.

Marcia Hall hear again to answer the question that was posed. FYI, I do not live in the DC area, so this forum is not a place I visit regularly. Again, if you need direct answers about something, I will need you to email me at inanoty2011@hotmail.com

To the issue of blacklisting. I have no idea what this is. In my career as a nanny, I have never experienced it. In my interactions with agencies, I have never heard of such a thing.

To the issue of agencies being in the INA. The INA was founded by not only nannies but also agency owners and nanny training programs. It is the reason we call ourselves the umbrella organization. INA's purpose is to bring together the entire industry and have a place for everyone at the table. To tell agencies that they do not deserve a place at that table would be pretty undemocratic of a non-profit organization that exists to connect us all.

Furthermore, agency members pay 6 times (sometimes more) the amount in membership dues than nannies do. Honestly, if we did not have agencies in our association, we would not be able to exist. We would not be able to pay for office staff, our website or our membership platform. This does not make nannies any less a member and I say this only to point out our need for agencies. We have about 4 times as many nanny members as we do agency owners. Years ago, it was about $100 for a nanny to be a member. But about 6 years ago, the Board recognized that $100 a year for a nanny was proving to be too big of an investment for some and reduced the rate that individual nannies would pay. We did not reduce the cost for businesses to be members. $45 a year is an investment but it is one that almost all nannies can afford.

Again, I personally would LOVE to see more nannies involved in committees and be nominated for the Board of Directors! If you are interested, let me know. But the fact remains that currently we have more businesses willing to serve on the Board. However, I would like to point out that both Cortney (the president) and myself (the 1st VP) as well as 3 other current Board members all identify themselves as caregivers at least in part. So 5 out of our 11 person Board of Directors are caregivers in one form or another.

Also, INA strongly supports both local nanny support groups as well as nanny only groups. We encourage the participation in Nannypalooza, National Nanny Training Day, National Nanny Recognition Week and Domestic Estate Managers Association. We often sponsor aspects of all of these groups. However, INA's purpose is to be inclusive. It never has been the goal to gather nannies only. Now, maybe this means that INA is not the place for some nannies and that is fine. I am not saying that they have to be a member of INA to be a quality, professional nanny. There have been other groups formed for that purpose. However, to rebuke an association because they are following their original mission and purpose, seems counter-productive to the industry to me.

As I said before, from my perspective, the nanny career and industry will never gain the respect and status it deserves in public opinion if we do not all work together. Agencies need quality nannies and nannies need quality agencies. I truly want us to be able to all work together. Call me an optimist, but I think we can do it.

Thanks for listening and let me know via email if you have further questios.
Marcia Hall

Anonymous wrote:Would also like to thank both ladies from INA board for responding. I dought few nannies would join a town hall in fear of black listing. One of the overwhelming critiques of INA is that nannies do not think agencies should be a part of INA and especially as they have their own organization which nannies cannot be part of, a bit of a double standard. Blacklisting is mostly done by agencies and I am afraid very much goes on. Agencies drop nannies who quit jobs because employers do not want to pay a nanny legally/taxes. Why is this not a regulation for agencies and why, would would let them be on the INA board? Agencies often have attitudes. NOTY has also become uncomfortable to watch. Many of us are nannies for the love of children and each of those kids eyes I would hope they have their own best nanny of the world. I see agencies post to families that if they love their nanny should show their nanny how much they love them by nominating to be NOTY. I know I loved INA when it started but am not happy to see where it is going.

I think if INA is serious to change for the better it should really take take a strong consideration in at least getting agencies off the board, let the nannies run INA.

Well said. If INA wants to become a respectable nanny association, it absolutely cannot have non-nannies on the board. That's a given.

The nanny agencies have their own exclusive club that forbids nanny membership. How do these agencies justify that?

Would also like to thank both ladies from INA board for responding. I dought few nannies would join a town hall in fear of black listing. One of the overwhelming critiques of INA is that nannies do not think agencies should be a part of INA and especially as they have their own organization which nannies cannot be part of, a bit of a double standard. Blacklisting is mostly done by agencies and I am afraid very much goes on. Agencies drop nannies who quit jobs because employers do not want to pay a nanny legally/taxes. Why is this not a regulation for agencies and why, would would let them be on the INA board? Agencies often have attitudes. NOTY has also become uncomfortable to watch. Many of us are nannies for the love of children and each of those kids eyes I would hope they have their own best nanny of the world. I see agencies post to families that if they love their nanny should show their nanny how much they love them by nominating to be NOTY. I know I loved INA when it started but am not happy to see where it is going.

I think if INA is serious to change for the better it should really take take a strong consideration in at least getting agencies off the board, let the nannies run INA.

Anonymous wrote:Thank you to Courtney and Marcia for introducing yourselves. Because so many of us have had disappointing experiences with INA, would you consider addressing our concerns on this forum? We tend to feel safe here.

INA hosts Facebook Town Halls 3 - 4 times a year also FYI - Great way to foster communication. It was the brain child of Marcia Hall FYI

Thank you to Courtney and Marcia for introducing yourselves. Because so many of us have had disappointing experiences with INA, would you consider addressing our concerns on this forum? We tend to feel safe here.

Marcia Hall here, 1st VP for the INA,
Wow, everyone sure has a lot to say about the INA. I have been a member since 2005, but did not get actively involved until 2009. I have been on the Board of Directors since 2011.

So I cannot really speak to the first 25 years or so of the association but I can speak to what is currently going on. Granted as a Board member, you might think that my opinion is biased, but the reality is that the only reason I am a Board member is because I have a desire to improve this industry. I truly hope that some of you who do not like what you see in the INA, reach out to us in person and get involved. We need people - especially more caregivers, to invest in the industry with us.

Since this whole thread started from someone posting the email that Cortney and I wrote, and is based on a topic I have been working hard over the past few months to research, I thought I might chime in.

Throughout my time on the INA Board, I have heard many nannies express their desire for there to be a widely recognized nanny certification. INA of course has the Basic Skills Assessment which is really meant to be a tool for agency owners to weed out candidates who do not know the basics of taking care of children. We also have the Credential Exam which we hired a professional educator to create many years ago, long before my time. It has recently been updated and will continue to be used as a tool to assess the knowledge of caregivers who work with children in their home.

However, the caregivers I have talked with have said that assessing the knowledge people have does not address the bigger topic of assessing the competency people have to care for children long term. So, last summer, I began to investigate what it would look like for INA to produce something that did more than just assess knowledge. Over the last 10 months, I have spent dozens of hours researching how similar organizations do this. I have looked into organizations from nurses to family daycare providers. I have spoken on the phone to 6 different companies that specialize in helping organizations like ours, develop, promote and organize certification programs.

I have learned some interesting things.

There are special accrediting bodies in the US that will comb though our records of how certification programs are developed, organized and run to determine if they meet the requirements for accreditation. This is a long and expensive process and if the program was not developed according to their specifications, it does not pass.

US, organizations are not required by law to have their certification programs pass an accreditation process, however, certification programs which are not accredited do not have any accountability and therefore are not widely recognized by those who would need professionals from that career.

The process to create an accredited certification program is long and VERY expensive. Like hundreds of thousands of dollars – not exaggerating. However, the current INA Board of Directors has a very big desire to see the industry grow. We have heard from nannies for many years that this is something that is worth doing. So, because the INA is NOT flushed with cash (we take in every year what we need to exist) we wanted to get a feel for how important and accredited program would be to the industry. Hence the survey sent out a few weeks ago that will end on March 20th.

While I respect the opinions of those of you that do not seem to care for INA, I would also respectfully ask you to give us another chance. I don't know what happened in the past that frustrated you but I am asking you to look to the future with us. I do know that the current Board has a great desire to see the industry gain the respect and status that it deserves. The only way that can happen is if we all work together.


Divided, we will all surely fail. United, we just might get some amazing things done. I am not asking you to be a member of the INA, only to recognize that we work hard to do the right thing by the industry as a whole. I have spent countless hours every week to do what I can for the nanny industry though the INA. I know a lot of others also volunteer their time to make a difference in the industry. Some through INA and some through local support groups, Nannypalooza, National Nanny Training Day or just being and outstanding caregiver to the family you are with. Every person working hard to provide excellent care for their NK's sends a huge message to the world. Just imagine what we could do if we all worked together to send THAT message.

Thanks for listening and I ALWAYS welcome personal emails. inanoty2011@hotmail.com If you have a suggestion for us, complaint or just want to know more about what we do, please reach out.

Marcia Hall
Nanny Coach and mom of 3 – but always a nanny at heart.

Hi everyone. I'm Cortney Gibson, INA president. A friend just sent me the link to this conversation and I've read through all your comments. The reason you see my name at the bottom of the original post is because someone copied and pasted an email that went out to our database with a request to complete the survey. INA board members did not start this thread and it's only come to my attention this morning because it was sent to me. I'll try to address your concerns.

INA is not a greedy organization. We are a non-profit organization that is not loaded. We scrape by every year, continuing to operate with one employee and a volunteer board. Producing the credential exam was not free, nor is managing and grading it. The cost of the exam pays for those things and it helps support other initiatives too. For example, we support other nanny and agency organizations, which is an expense. Yes, we have a few things "for sale", but we are responsible for keeping the doors open. Like any non-profit oganization, we survive on donations and membership, as well as the few items we offer for sale. It costs a lot of money to run an organization like ours. As members, you have the right to attend our annual meeting and see our financial statement.

The INA is not slanted toward agencies or nannies. It is supportive of all aspects of the nanny industry. We represent all parties, which is why the board of directors is made up of nannies, NCS, agency owners, educators and industry service providers. The president is an NCS and business owner, the VP is a nanny and parent coach. If you'd like to see more nannies involved on the board, encourage others to go through the nomination process. We would be happy to have more passionate, dedicated board members who want to make a difference. The ONLY reason there aren't more nannies on the board is because they didn't volunteer. In past years, there have been more nannies than agency owners. To us, the board members, we're all equal. We all want to help move INA forward.

To give an accredited certification, the INA can't also teach a required course. There are educational opportunities through INA, but they can't be required for certification. If you've taken a class that gives you a certification, it's NOT accredited. The accreditation exam will be different from the credential exam, this is also a requirement. We aren't promising you'll make more, we're ASKING if you think that's a reason you'd want a certification. It's a survey, friends. We want to know what you think.

Blacklisting - I've never heard of such a thing in the INA. I have many friends who are top notch nannies who don't use agencies. I know many who use online job sites. They are still my friends and I have no less respect for them because of how they choose to get jobs. If someone has evidence of this and wants to file an ethics complaint, I'd be happy to take a look.

If you have further questions or I missed one (I'm in bed with a fever and fighting a virus, so I may have missed something), feel free to email me at cortneygibsonINA@gmail.com.

Anonymous wrote:This board is full of INA haters, so don't feel bad OP.

This board is full of very caring people who are disappointed in what ina has become, an agency marketing venue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is "blacklisted"?!

They don't like you anymore. Maybe you said the wrong thing. Or questioned what they're doing. Or asked who they're really serving. You know....

chances are if you say to an INA board member, that you prefer finding positions on your own or through online, the agency members will not like you


You are not an elite nanny if you consider yourself capable of getting yourself hired on your own

True.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is "blacklisted"?!

They don't like you anymore. Maybe you said the wrong thing. Or questioned what they're doing. Or asked who they're really serving. You know....

chances are if you say to an INA board member, that you prefer finding positions on your own or through online, the agency members will not like you


You are not an elite nanny if you consider yourself capable of getting yourself hired on your own