Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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:
snozzlemaid · 04/07/2017 18:42

80smum What you're describing is charging a top up. You should be giving the hours free not deducting the amount paid by the LA from the parents' bill.
As someone has said, your LA should no way be allowing this to happen. They are going against the guidelines issued by the DfE.

I agree that this was a ridiculous scheme thought up by the Tories to win votes. Quite clearly not thought through at all. Administering it has and will cost a huge amount for LAs and providers are clearly going to struggle with the lower rate they will be paid now for 30 hours.
The maximum earning criteria is ridiculous. You could have two working parents who have an annual household income of £198,000 receiving 30 hours free childcare! This should have been set much lower to help the families who really need to benefit from it.
The whole system needs an overhaul, but I've not heard of any sensible options from any political party.

AcademicOwl · 04/07/2017 18:44

It's disingenuous to suggest that the cost to parents of childcare has risen due to the 15/30 hrs. It was bloody extortionate before that too (& I still have dc in preschool settings).

And as for the idea that this government want to get rid of independent providers to make schools provide childcare; seriously?!?! That seems vanishingly unlikely.

toffeeboffin · 04/07/2017 18:48

We live in Québec in Canada.

Daycare is government funded. We pay $160 per month for daycare, five days a week 7am-5pm.

Means people can go back to work and creates lots of daycare jobs.

No brainer for any government really.

Tanith · 04/07/2017 18:48

Yes, seriously Academicowl!

There's a lot of evidence, not least the Conservative Party manifesto, that points to exactly this being their intention.

They're certainly not at all bothered about the numerous settings being forced to close, are they?

Want2bSupermum · 04/07/2017 18:59

insancerre Its not meant to be patronizing. We have a requirement for all preK classes to have a qualified EY teacher in my town here in the US. They are paid about $35k a year with hours 8:25am-2:30pm. Honestly, the TAs who are on the whole unskilled are really passionate and the ones who have the most impact on the kids. For our eldest the teacher was out for 6 months and the two TAs followed the lesson plans for the rest of the year. I'm now involved in our towns educational provision for early years and the costs are huge. If we halved the number of teachers we could open up two additional classrooms for 32 DC. When you have 75 on the wait list you start looking at this with a different mindset.

If they forced all to have a degree the kids would really miss out. Personally I think experience and personality trumps qualifications for this age group. It also is an economic reality that highly qualified people need to get paid more. Here the qualified teachers have their student debt paid off after 10 years of public service. That isn't an option in the U.K. I also don't see many qualified teachers being happy with making barely over NMW.

WarklingSpit · 04/07/2017 20:30

I run a nursery and I explicitly charge top up fees. I don't know why our council allows it but my funding model was drawn up 4 years ago with the local authority early years business advisor so it definitely meets their approval.

The council ran business workshops about the 30 hours where you could meet with someone from the council early years team on a one on one basis to go through whatever queries you had about the funding. We plan on extending the way we deliver the 15 hours to the additional 15 (i.e. charging a top up) and I was a bit apprehensive in case they retrospectively decided it wasn't legitimate after all but despite seeing a copy of our proposed terms and conditions, a sample invoice, a copy of the letter intended for parents explaining how we were delivering the 30 hours, they had no objections to our proposals.

I get the sense that our local authority early years team is pragmatic and would prefer providers to stay open but it's very unfair that this isn't being allowed nationwide.

We would not be sustainable without the top ups, which makes it all too easy to believe the poster above that said that this is an easy way for the government to shrink the sector and expand school nursery provisions.

ClarkWGriswold · 04/07/2017 22:11

Tanith you haven't answered my question though.

Childcare costs are a massive problem in the U.K. At one point I was paying £1400 per month for two children to go to nursery for 3 days a week and one of them was receiving the funded 15 hours. My salary certainly is not a big one. Of course 'free' childcare is going to be a vote winner!

A lot of people think it's only a matter of time before Jeremy Corbyn is PM. My question is how will his idea of free childcare for ALL from the age of two be funded if nurseries and other providers are closing left right and centre with the current, less extreme model? Why shy away from answering?

Tanith · 04/07/2017 22:30

I prefer to look to Europe for excellent examples of how the Early Years should be: the Scandinavian countries and Italy and, yes until recently, the UK.

They value the Early Years and the staff working with our youngest children. They do not dismiss them as low paid plebs who deserve neither respect or renumeration.

Experience and personality are not incompatible with qualification.

Tanith · 04/07/2017 22:35

Clark, I don't intend to answer your question. I have no reason to do so since I am not a Labour party member, and this is not the place for that discussion.

If the Labour party manifesto and costings were not enough for you, then you need to go direct to the Labour party and ask them.

Right now, it is for the Government to explain how they intend to stop the haemorrhaging of Early Years settings and adequately fund their promise that they made in 2015. We are almost at September and no nearer to a workable solution.

oldtrees · 04/07/2017 23:17

as for the idea that this government want to get rid of independent providers to make schools provide childcare; seriously?!?! That seems vanishingly unlikely.

Really?

The 30 hours funding WILL be a huge struggle for nurseries to meet because of the way the Government has set it up. The Government know this. So why are they persisting in doing it? Let's look at the options:

Either the government are totally incompetent, as despite being told for YEARS that the new system they devised will mean nurseries - disproportionately nurseies not part of a school - will struggle and close, somehow they don't seem to be aware of this.

Or they are not incompetent fools. The know this plan will shut non-school nurseries, and that is what they WANT to happen.

Or they simply don't care what happens to nurseries. It was just about getting votes.

Which do you think it is?

I don't think the Tories politicians in power are stupid. Misguided, yes, morally corrupt - some of them, lacking empathy - lots of them, out of touch - most of them, driven by profit over people - almost all of them. But stupid? No. They know what they're doing.

Plus an OFSTED inspector spent a long time telling me about how this was their plan a good while back, and here it is coming to fruition. I forget why they wanted the nurseries as part of schools, but there was a reason she went to in some detail - my memory is rubbish though Sad

It may come back to me ....

oldtrees · 04/07/2017 23:20

@WarklingSpit I can't remember the reasons the OFSTED inspector gave me for the government wanting non-school nurseries to close.

Do you hav eany idea what it might be?

Is it simply because nutseries are cheaper to run if they'r part of a school, or are there likely other reasons?

user1497863568 · 05/07/2017 02:22

So don't do it? Are the government forcing your hand?

Want2bSupermum · 05/07/2017 02:46

Taneth Of course you can have someone with the right personality, the experience and qualifications but I don't agree those qualifications should be a degree. Here in the US you do a state run course or an associates degree to run a class for under 3s. The state run course is non profit and what nearly everyone does.

insancerre · 05/07/2017 07:22

Want2be
That's a cultural problem then, not a degree v unskilled issue
In my nursery everyone writes their own lesson plans, even my unqualified apprentice

80sMum · 05/07/2017 08:48

"80smumWhat you're describing is charging a top up. You should be giving the hours free not deducting the amount paid by the LA from the parents' bill"

No, it is not a top up! Our invoiced charges are only for hours that are not funded. As a private business, we are at liberty to set our own fees for the hours that are outside the free offer. We happen to have chosen to charge the difference between our full fees and the funding. As far as I am aware, the other nurseries in our area do the same. If they didn't, they would be bankrupt! I thought every nursery did this. How could any afford not to??

Queenofthedrivensnow · 05/07/2017 12:42

I think the system is flawed where we have a situation where pre school childcare is a for profit business. Extortionate fees but the staff are paid peanuts. The whole thing needs bringing back into the public sector imo

AcademicOwl · 05/07/2017 20:38

oldtrees I work in the Nhs. Do I think that the government just don't understand why/how systems cannot simply be manipulated to be magically 'more efficient' for less input. Yes. Absolutely. They simply don't 'get it' in healthcare.

Do I think a conservative free market ideology would push them towards the concept of schools being a single monopoly provider in preference to multiple smaller, private, companies? Nope. Still sounds very unlikely.

So I'd err towards this being lack of judgement with a dash of incompetence.

Call me cynical, if you like. :)

iMogster · 08/07/2017 18:49

So, OP you are the owner of the nursery and work 45 hours a week for £6,200 per annum and you're topping up the nursery with £6000 of your own money to keep it afloat. That means you are basically working your butt off for free. Surely you can't keep that up year after year while making £16,000 annual loss. What is your plan going forward?

Lucysky2017 · 08/07/2017 19:05

Nurseries do not charge extortionate fees. I have advised quite a few and they do not make much profit. In fact I'd advise most people not to eset up a nursery and pick something more profitable. Your biggest cost is wages although rents and rates can be high too and wages are hardly extortionate compared to nursery costs.

Plenty of we self employed have to work at a loss from time to time which is why it is annoying when the Government suggests we have an easy ride with very slghtly lower national insurance contributions but with fewer state funded benefits in return.

GingerAndTheBiscuits · 08/07/2017 20:31

My DD's nursery has always multiplied the amount they get from the council by 15, timesed it by the number of weeks in the term and divided it by 4 I think. They're planning to do the same with the 30 hours. We'll save about 50% on what we're paying now. Logically know it's a terrible policy but selfishly I can't wait until we're eligible.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page