If State Education is for all and all are equal - how come people get 'priority' places?

[Fridayfeeling]

My DS2 has not got a place at the local nursery school because he does not meet the criteria. Most of which I can accept - children in danger at home etc. BUT.... I find it hard to accept that children are prioritised because they come from a family on income support and job seekers allowance - what does this have to do with a place at a nursery school? Is a child not a child? I thought state education provided for all equally?

I think you may be confusing state education with daycare.

Reception places are generally allocated by some variation of:

1. kids in care
2. kids with SN (generally a statement or specific medical issues)
3. distance of child's home from the school.

I've never encountered school admissions criteria that took into account the family's economic situation.

Preschool provision is much more variable with regard to what they offer and what their criteria are. If your child is 3 and over you should be offered a nursery place of some description, but may only be part time. It's not unusual for proper local authority day nurseries to prioritise children from families who can't afford commercial daycare.

Do you have a copy of the admissions criteria for the school/LEA. I have never known financial status come into it.

Ah, frogs sems to have more info. I hadn't realised that was the case for state nurseries.

The criteria are this:

Priority criteria

Please read the following information before completing the application form and tick any boxes on the form that apply to your child. You can also tell us about any other reasons your child should have a place on a separate sheet of paper.

1. The highest priority for admission to Council settings will be given to:

(i) children on the Child Protection Register or thought to be at serious risk of abuse or neglect;
(ii) children who have learning difficulties or a disability greater than most other children and will benefit from early integration;
(iii) children in need as defined in the Authority?s procedures for implementing the Children Act.

1. Lower Priority will then be given to children where:

(i) there is a person in the household with a serious medical condition or disability;
(ii) the child has poorly developed language skills;
(iii) English is not spoken at home;
(iv) twin or triplet applications or where there are four or more children under 7 in the home;
(v) housing conditions significantly affect the child?s well being and development;
(vi) the family is in receipt of ;

• income support/income-based job seeker?s allowance;
• working tax credit

Hula, our local (very good) LEA pre-school day nursery had predominantly free places, which were presumably allocated according to social need, or some such. Then they had some open (but still subsidised) places (never quite worked out what you had to do to get one of those, putting your child's name down at 3 days old was not enough, lol) and some commercial rate places where the parents paid full whack. The latter presumably to increase the mix of kids and improve the nursery's income stream. There are some semi-funded (community) nurseries that also prioritise families with greater levels of need.

Statutory state education only kicks in at Reception level (rising 5) and is administered by the LEA. i would be more than surprised if any LEA had criteria that included benefits etc. for Reception places, though they might for pre- and after-school care, I guess.

Friday, is this for Reception places? Which LEA is it?

Ah, right ok. Never went down that route as we were already using private day nursery and DD's school didn;t have a nursery attached at that time.

DD's day nursery accepted nursery vouchers fortunately.

This is not for reception no - school setting nursery school. I have other DC in the school and if he doesn't go there can't go anywhere for pre-school. As I said in OP, I don't see why this provision is judged to be only for certain categories of family. Either it is for all or don't bother.

Pre-school is a non-statutory service, ie. schools don't have to offer it and don't have to use the same admissions criteria as the main school. I guess the principle is to try and level the playing field for kids who are disadvantaged, just as at primary and secondary admissions priority goes to kids in care and kids with a statement. I don't really have an issue with that, even though I might be annoyed that my child can't get into certain schools -- some kids have the odds so stacked against them, that it only seems fair to try and level the playing field for them.

At reception your ds should stand the same chance as anybody else.

It is for those most in need of it, of course. And for those least able to pay for alternative provision. Not everyone can have a council house, you need to be poor and omeless or poor and in need. Not everyone can access a children's ward in hospital, you need to have a sick child for that. Not everyone can get a speech therapist on the NHS, your child needs to have a speech difficulty. Should we 'not bother' providing those things as they are not 'for everyone'?It's not a wonderful life on benefits, and parents on benefits cannot afford private nursery fees, which often keeps them trapped without being able to work, and also their children wouldn't be able to access the social and educational benefits of nursery, which are available to those able to pay.

Um Homeless, of course.

I think most of the criteria are fair enought, but I do take issue with the income support priority - is it saying that EVERY family on income support are bad parents and the government need to 'stimulate' them and get them out of this environment? That is pretty presumptuous and I am sure if most in these situations thought about it they would be quite offended. As are parents, like me, who are not given any priority because we are deemed 'normal'.

I still think that these free nursery places were billed as being for all...........when in fact they really are not for all. They are for those deemed worthy! My son is not.

Sorry I don't get why he can't go elsewhere, not all his contemporaries will go to this particular one, there are probably others locally. Some of the other children who have got places would not have any alternative opportunity for nursery education or even perhaps to learn English as a second language due to circumstances beyond their control. If there are more applications than places someone gets disappointed and unfortunatley this time it is you. However you can still claim the LEA 3+ nursery vouchers for another preschool or nursery then apply for Reception place for next year, which is a separate process and where havign siblings will give you a notch up the criteria, there are more palces and the socially disadvantaged criteria is lessened.

I don't think the places for those on Income Support/Jobsekeers would be because they are expected to need extra stimulation, but rather that parents out of work need a break too. I can vouch for that personally, as my 17 month old is driving me spare at the moment, and working would actually seem like a break! (yes i know that is silly, but 24 hour parenting wears you down after so long)

My options are pretty limited......I don't have a car at mo and by the time I walk to another place it will be very late, DH works away Mon-Fri and I have a college course which is 2 days a week and the school has wraparound care and therefore can accommodate (the other in a half hour walk does not have this so 2.5 hours only). The only option is the creche at the uni but it is not a pre school, it is a creche and don't see why he should have to be put in a shite creche.

As you can see, what constitutes 'normal' is not straightforward and is why I say that if you are going to make criteria based on social circumstances using judgements, people are gonna get pissed off. And I am !

Who can really decide who is most worthy? A child should be a child.

I think that families on income support have less money to to spend on books and interesting activites for their children. Their children do need simulation. Also a lot of people who are on long term beneftis have disablities or learning difficulties which make parenting harder.

If you want your child to have pre school education there are ways. Does your school have a breakfast club your older children could go to? Private nurseries are fairly flexible about what time your drop your child off.

Perhaps you should have a look at the creche it may not be as you assume and should certainly be Ofsted and LEA approved for vouchers and follow the same curriculum . What do you do now to cover your course times ? Are there really no private nurseries or childminders to do pick up/drop off (both should take vouchers too)?

Sorry - but that assumption from RT is what I mean about how people on income support are viewed and how these priorities given make it even worse and everyone just accepts it as being real -

" ...have less money to to spend on books and interesting activites for their children. Their children do need simulation "

That is just really prejudice and by giving people priority it perpetuates the belief that people on income support are crap parents. And in doing that pisses people like me off too !

I don't believe that people on income support are bad parents, and therefore I don't think they should be given priority.

Well, should everyone have access to the college creche then? I bet it has criteria for admission too. Have you even looked at it? Free nursery places are usually only for 2.5 hours anyway.
And nobody has said parents on income support are bad parents. But they are obviously less able to afford private provision than others who have more money, so why should their children suffer because their parents are poorer?

The day nurseries are gonna cost a fortune because I will be over the 2.5 hours....they don't do it by the hour and the school facility is cheap as chips. I know I am being slightly spoilt/ toys out the pram about this, but I really do not like this unlevel playing field especially when I see it as being patronising and prejudice!

Actually i agree there, Friday, as i know many people who are working are getting less/equal income as benefit recipients. the disability point can't be dismissed as easily though.

And nursery is different from state education which is for all. There are not enough state nursery places for everyone, but you will get a school place.
I don't suppose you would like to be poorer than you are?

Chances are those for whom this eligibilty has been applied have not only ticked the IS/JS box but probably have supporting documentation from HV, SW, GP etc. Is there a waiting list should they not all take up their allocated plces ?

Don't you see that it is levelling the playing field to offer the cheaper provision to the poorest people! That's exactly what it is about.

Godzilla, the places are also for working parents on low incomes as you can see from the criteria.