Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

"We simply cannot afford to offer 30 hours of funded childcare"

70 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 03/07/2017 11:39

You're probably aware that all three and four-year-olds in England can access government-funded childcare for 15 hours per week. But you may not know that the money that the government pays providers – nurseries, pre-schools and childminders – to offer these places has, for many years, been far less than the cost of delivery, leaving those of us working in the sector struggling to stay afloat.

In fact, a few years ago, an independent report commissioned by early years organisation the Pre-school Learning Alliance found that government funding only covered the cost of four out of every five children accessing so-called free childcare – leaving providers to make up the shortfall. Often, that has meant higher fees for parents – which is why childcare costs in this country are so high.

When the 30-hour offer comes in this September, things are only going to get more difficult. According to a recent survey by the Alliance, as a result of this underfunding, less than half of providers are currently planning to offer the 30-hours, while a quarter fear that delivering 30-hours places could put them out of business.

I run a small, rural private daycare nursery in Somerset. We are purpose-built to meet all needs of children in our care, and run an on-site Forest School as well as caring for our own sheep and chickens. And we are not going to offer the 30 hours.

Our financial situation has become more and more difficult over recent years as we have had to negotiate an ever-dwindling funding pot. As a result of underfunding and government policy changes, since 2010, we have suffered losses of £16,000 per annum. So why would we sign up to the 30-hour scheme and risk making these losses even worse?

Our business costs do not remain static: we have to meet increases to minimum wage, to business rates, and to domestic services and overheads. Yet government funding has not risen to match this.

This means that our staff haven't had a real-term pay rise for four years, with three practitioners now on minimum wage (as this has risen to match their existing wages). Our manager is paid less than an unskilled labourer, while I, the owner, worked a 45-hour week until 2015/16 for just £6,200 – this amounts to £3.43 per hour.

We have now been forced to reduce what we can offer to retain quality, going from a 45-hour week, to just 24: three eight-hour days per week, term-time only. This is the only way we can reduce our overheads in the hope of rebuilding the business.

If we are to survive, the government needs to realise its monumental error in promoting the childcare offer as free - when in reality, providers are having to plug a huge funding gap.

If the 'free childcare' offer is truly free, then why am I, as the owner of a childcare business, having to put in £6000 of my own personal savings just to survive the autumn term? This is the only way I can ensure staff get paid, though often at minimum wage and less in my own case. This is the only way that I can cover the shortfall for parents so that they can access the 15 funded hours.

We simply cannot afford to offer 30 hours of funded childcare. If we did, we would close within two terms.

We have made every effort to fulfill the government's pledges to parents: quality staff, quality environment, home-cooked meals and an incredible outdoor learning provision. But now we are left feeling like the government has essentially high-jacked our business.

As members of the 'Champagne Nurseries on Lemonade Funding' group, we know that the majority of childcare providers are in a similar situation, and that for many, opting out is the only option.

How can this be allowed to happen?

This 30-hour 'free childcare' pledge played a huge role in the government winning the last election – and yet I believe they knew the promise would never be fulfilled. Instead, we have early-years providers being advised to charge parents for what the government has said is a free offer.

We have spoken directly to the parents at our nursery about our decision not to offer the 30 hours and all those that it will effect have stressed that it is more important that we stay open. At least they value us.

For us, supporting the Pre-school Learning Alliance's Fair Future Funding campaign is paramount to ensuring quality early-years provision continues: for sufficiency, for sustainability and, ultimately, for the economy.

The Pre-school Learning Alliance's Fair Future Funding campaign is calling for government to ensure that early-years funding matches rising delivery costs to ensure that the 'free childcare' offer is genuinely free for both parents and childcare providers.

Parents that want to support the campaign can sign up at www.pre-school.org.uk/fffparents.

For more information about the 30-hours free childcare offer, please click here.

OP posts:
katymac · 03/07/2017 23:08

The things is most chldren would thrice in smaller environments with vertical streaming of ages

I went to the council several times of the years with a way of doing this - for minimal outlay, creating small neighbourhood childcare settings in the areas that most need them & they would "prefer that the private sector increased their volume"

OFSTED were on the way to insisting that Nursery managers had a degree, then the goals posts were moved so they had to have an EYP

So I'm now an exnursery manager with a degree in systems analysis & change mangement and an EYP who work in a cafe serving coffee & doing dishes (well actually I'm unemployed atm but you know....)

katymac · 03/07/2017 23:09

thrice=thrive

goodness knows how many typos - I can't type when I get angry

BackforGood · 03/07/2017 23:26

80smum - I think most Nurseries and many, many parents would be happy with that arrangement, but I don't know how you / your council have got away with it, as it is part of the T&Cs of the 15hour EEE that is is free at the point of delivery and there must be NO top up charge for those hours. We are all aware many Nurseries have been a bit creative in charging for things that were previously included in the session / day fee or hourly rate, but they have had to do that as it has always been clear settings (be the CMs or PVIs) would not get their EEE funding if they were charging parents to 'top up'.

hfssecgui · 03/07/2017 23:33

I imagine this is all so expensive to administer that you would be better off just giving parents more money in child benefit for under 5's. They could then use it to pay for childcare. Alternatively If they want to ensure it goes on childcare tax relief more generous.

80sMum · 03/07/2017 23:48

"I think most Nurseries and many, many parents would be happy with that arrangement, but I don't know how you / your council have got away with it, as it is part of the T&Cs of the 15hour EEE that is is free at the point of delivery and there must be NO top up charge for those hours"

There is no top-up charge. The 15 hours are free of charge. What we charge for is the remaining hours that are not funded.

HopelesslydevotedtoGu · 04/07/2017 00:04

The things is most chldren would thrice in smaller environments with vertical streaming of ages
Do you mean mixed ages by vertical streaming? Isn't what you are describing a Childminder setting?

It's obvious that different settings can't provide "30 hours" for the same hourly rate. The preschool nurseries near me have a 1:8 ratio, whereas the childminders and private nurseries have 1:3, the different settings have very different resources and expenditures, it's clear that their hourly cost will vary. So frustrating to hear that apparently they can all provide a place for £X per hour with no top ups...

Sadly some settings will increase their hourly rate to compensate for the funded hours. So working parents who need more hours will pay more.

BackforGood · 04/07/2017 00:07

Oh, I apologise 80sMum. I read it as you charging the difference between the money you get from finding and the money you would normally charge as fees Blush.
So, in essence, the people who attend more than 15 hours are subsidising those who only do the 15 hours ?

80sMum · 04/07/2017 00:46

Nobody attends for just the funded hours, backforgood. They're charged for the other hours they attend that are not part of the free offer - and the amount they are charged for those other hours is the difference between what our fees would be for all the hours they attend, minus the funding we receive for the free hours.

Want2bSupermum · 04/07/2017 02:09

The whole scheme has been about waiting for it to fail. Only in the UK would you have 30 hours a week nursery care. How the heck is that supposed to help a working parent stay in work when it's for a 3 year old. Compound that with the ludicrous notion that you can pay less than £5 per child per hour for this and the policy is guaranteed to be a complete failure.

The only solution is to have the policy makers do the job for a month and insist they survive on the wages. They would soon change their tune.

AndNowItIsSeven · 04/07/2017 02:42

The other problem is that if an unemployed parent find work on September 1st thinking they can rely on the free childcare they are wrong. They would not be able to use their code until January. ( Also 1st Jan starting work would be after Easter etc)

strawberrygate · 04/07/2017 07:39

as a childcare provider, i currently offer the 15 hours. I times the 15 hours by the hourly rate the council give me and knock it off the parent's bill. i fail to see the problem Confused

( and yes, i can do this; I've asked the council funding person- he basically said as long as I can show I'm offerring the hours and not profiteering- as many nurseries seem to be doing- then it's fine)

oldtrees · 04/07/2017 07:48

I had a chat about this with an OFSTED Inspector (friend of a friend) at a party when they first proposed this.

She was absolutely convinced that the government are well aware that this will mean nursery closures and in fact that's what they WANT to happen.

She said there was a plan before to make every nursery be part of a school as then they can be funded as part of a school budget and cheaper to run. That was unpopular and shelved I think? (My memory is hazy on this - does anyone know about it?)

She said that, this way, the nurseries that cost more to run will close and this achieves the same end but without the government doing it openly.

She said excellence has been able to flourish in the nursery sector because - for a long time politicuans saw it as "just" women looking after babies and therefore unimportant and so they left it alone. But now they have their sights on the sector costs - and therefore quality - will plummet.

It's exactly the kind of nursery the OP describes that she said will suffer - small ones focussed on excellence, and that are not attached to schools.

This policy was always going to shut independent nurseries - but there's no point telling them that. The know and that's the point if it.

When are people going to stop voting for these charlatans? I'm so fed up with everything being a struggle. They are making life so much harder than it needs to be for everyone not on a really high wage.

MaroonPencil · 04/07/2017 08:59

Nurseries are absolutely not allowed to charge the difference between what the government gives them for the free hours and what they would normally charge, but I know some do. They are also definitely not allowed to charge for anything extra as a condition of getting the free hours - e.g. You can have the free hours but you must pay X for lunch and x for compulsory music hour etc. They can offer things at an additional charge, but they can't say "you can't have the free hours unless you pay for these things".

The nursery DS attended did both of the above, I only found out later they weren't supposed to!

MaroonPencil · 04/07/2017 09:00

I should add that I sympathise hugely with the situation nurseries are in with regards to funding.

MoreProseccoNow · 04/07/2017 09:10

Completely agree, OP - why should private businesses subsidise an ill-thought out government policy?

I'm in Scotland, where we have remained on 15 "free" hours; the council provide the nursery with just over £2k a year for these, which is then discounted off our bill. So the nursery are not short of money & can make up the shortfall.

The usual rate is £50ish per day for nursery care; so parents make up the shortfall. I'm happy to do so as nursery are so flexible in their opening hours. I would be unable to work if it wasn't for private nursery - the school nursery system doesn't work with my 9-5 job, commute etc.

I really hope nurseries don't have to shut down because of this; it's not their fault. They should be given the opportunity to cover their costs by charging top-up fees.

Lucysky2017 · 04/07/2017 11:46

I've wanted childcare costs to be deductible against your tax bill where both parents work full time for over 30 years. It never happens. It would be a lot simpler too.

Ineedacupofteadesperately · 04/07/2017 14:11

The only solution is to have the policy makers do the job for a month and insist they survive on the wages. They would soon change their tune.
Well said Want2be . Interesting how MPs got an 10% pay rise in 2015 and above the supposed 1% public sector pay cap this year (1.4%). One rule for them and another for the rest of us. Supposedly "free" nursery places that drive wages and quality down and cause providers to shut will have the opposite effect to that intended if they want to get people back to work. Can't go back to work if there's nowhere left to leave your child (and where you would be happy to do so).

ClarkWGriswold · 04/07/2017 14:29

I've asked this before but never received a reply; so what is the general consensus on Jeremy Corbyn's plan to offer 30 hours a week of funded care from the age of 2 to ALL children (not means tested as the current 30 hour are). How would this be funded? I presume there would also be a shortfall for nurseries but on a much larger scale because many more children would be involved.

The nursery my DC goes to is offering the 30 hours but with conditions; they have to have been attending the nursery since they were babies and the children will need to be attending nursery for 3 or more full days per week and attending 50 weeks of the year, not just term time.

Awwlookatmybabyspider · 04/07/2017 14:38

The idiots don't live in the real world. They never have done. Never will to. Will never have to.
They must think they're playing a game of monopoly

Want2bSupermum · 04/07/2017 15:41

It's interesting that here is another thread going talking about families not having both parents in FT work. It's no wonder 70% of families are in poverty.

I also look at the people putting the policy together. Most have a parent at home not working, family helping them or no DC. Quite frankly I think less is more with early years care. You don't need a degree. You need the patience of a saint and a love of children. Honestly my experience has been that unskilled people are better at early years than semiskilled people or those with an early years degree.

It's interesting here in the US they don't want early years in schools because of the diseases. What is a bit of a cold for a 5 year old is life threatening for a one year old.

NerdyBird · 04/07/2017 17:25

I think a pp said their nursery cost £33 per day? My dd's nursery (SE) charges more than twice this amount. However, if both were getting the same hourly rate from the government you can see that there would be disparity. A v quick google seems to suggest £4.30 per hour is the govt funding minimum, so people have to hope their LA will pay more.

maudeismyfavouritepony · 04/07/2017 17:51

I don't agree with the principle of free childcare at all. I do believe in more tax breaks to fund childcare.

I also believe if its free, it isn't valued. I am a childminder and it is hard enough being value in this profession.

Suffice to say, I'm not offering the 30 hours. I'll take 0-3 and then they have to go elsewhere.

NeverTwerkNaked · 04/07/2017 18:28

What I find puzzling is that some private nurseries are managing to make it work. Ours is offering us the 30
hours and hasn't put charges up outside of that, although admittedly it runs all year round so we do have to pay in holidays. I know quite a lot friends who are going to be able
to claim the hours too. I don't really understand why some can, and others will go under? Are those that can sharing their best practice and tips etc?
(I would rather see the 30 hours dropped than see quality of care compromised. I don't mind paying through the nose through decent care, it is only for the first few years. When my daughter starts school it will be a big relief though!)

insancerre · 04/07/2017 18:30

Want2be
Sorry, but I find your post patronizing to those with degrees
Early years is not just about wiping noses and changing nappies
A highly qualified workforce obviously means better outcomes for children

Tanith · 04/07/2017 18:41

Clarkwgriswold Jeremy Corbyn isn't prime minister and his party isn't in government.

What matters here and now is that the current Government has twice been elected on a promise to deliver 30 hours of free childcare while simultaneously ignoring the providers who have told them right from the start that it's not funded adequately.

Now we have desperate settings giving accounts of how they are going out of business because of this refusal to listen to experts and we have someone on this thread saying what we suspected all along - that this is yet another policy designed to save the Government money and to hell with everyone else!!