Discrimination of children who receive funding?

[Anon778833]

On some Facebook groups that I am in, people are complaining that some nurseries put children who receive funding in a separate group from the children who don’t receive any funding and the children with funded places don’t get to do activities such as Forrest school or ballet.

I don’t think it’s very fair that parents are enrolling their children in provisions which do this without knowing the full facts or that their child might receive 2nd class provision.

Does anyone know if this is a widespread thing? I don’t even fully understand how government funding works but certainly want to avoid a situation where my daughter gets left out of activities.

Is it a case that things like Forest school and ballet are chargeable separately?

Well on these groups the people are not allowed to name the nurseries who do this.

No, the whole point is that parents are not told that they could have the option of paying extra. Patents are not going to know how much they government is giving the nursery for their child per hour.

Parents*

I have wondered this about the nursery we use - in theory you don't have to pay the top-up to the funding, but there's a long list of extras you don't get, including things like this built into the nursery day, and there are other highly impractical things, like you have to send all food for the day - not just lunch, but also snacks and tea - but none of it can require refrigeration or reheating. It's obviously there to put anyone off trying to not pay the top-up but I do wonder if anyone ever doesn't, as it seems completely unworkable.

The government give eyfs an absolute pittance. For example my daughters old setting used to get £3.96 an hour for the funded hours. How can people expect that to cover all the stuff that they do in childcare on that pittance. They used to charge a £1.10 per hour consumables charge (a top up in all but name).

The government get out of the shitty funding by saying it is just meant to cover the staff costs nothing else but then refuse settings to charge a top up as then the government couldn't advertise it as "free hours".

If you don't like it, kick off at your local mp. Get the funding changed. Settings are already closing in record numbers as they cannot be financially viable anymore.

The government may be giving a shit amount of money per hour but that doesn’t mean the children should be treated differently when their parents weren’t given an option to top up the funding, surely! If a parent doesn’t know how the funding works, how can they have that choice?

All children are funded for 15 hours from the term after the term in which they are 3. Some are eligible for 30 funded hours.

There are unlikely to be any children over 3 who dont receive any funding?

@Itsnotover

Well on these groups the people are not allowed to name the nurseries who do this.

No, the whole point is that parents are not told that they could have the option of paying extra. Patents are not going to know how much they government is giving the nursery for their child per hour.

Of course they are allowed to name The fact that don't has to raise questions about wether what they are saying is wholly accurate.

I guess it could be difficult, particularly with the two year old funding - if you know the parents receive this because they're on benefits is it really appropriate to ask them whether they'd like to take the option of paying a top-up?

All groups have their own rules and the person who owns this group said that people who name and shame will be kicked out of the group.

I personally think that parents have a right to know that if they choose to accept government funding, their child may have substandard provision.

@HardbackWriter

I guess it could be difficult, particularly with the two year old funding - if you know the parents receive this because they're on benefits is it really appropriate to ask them whether they'd like to take the option of paying a top-up?

Nobody should ever assume that because someone’s on benefits they won’t care if their child gets left out of things. Or that they would be unwilling to top up certain costs.

@Itsnotover

All groups have their own rules and the person who owns this group said that people who name and shame will be kicked out of the group.

I personally think that parents have a right to know that if they choose to accept government funding, their child may have substandard provision.

But you don't have any evidence that this is happening? Almost all areas have a provision choice, choose a provision that doesn't ask for top up funding such as a school nursery.

Our nursery mainly goes on trips that are free, like the playground, local library or church.

I very much doubt some nurseries segregate those who get free funding and those who don’t. By 3/the term after 3 all kids get at least 15 free hours any way

@TheHoptimist about 6 people came forward and said that this was happening at their child’s nursery. A few of them said that is was only a recent thing and did not happen with their older children. What evidence does anyone need?

I don’t think that nurseries should be expected to be out of pocket because the Tories are a-holes (don’t blame me, I didn’t vote for them). But I think it’s only fair that parents get an honest and transparent understanding of what their child will be able to have in terms of provision.

If the nursery is told it can't do ballet etc for paying customers, do you think they will
A) provide it for free
B) stop providing it
C) stop offering funded places

With A, the money has to come from somewhere
With B, it will annoy their paying customers, which make the setting financially viable
C will reduce the funded places

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

If the nursery is told it can't do ballet etc for paying customers, do you think they will A) provide it for free B) stop providing it C) stop offering funded places

With A, the money has to come from somewhere
With B, it will annoy their paying customers, which make the setting financially viable
C will reduce the funded places

A, b and c are not the only options are they 🙄

I would bet the majority of parents have no idea that this is going on. So they have no opportunity to pay the shortfall.

Patents are not going to know how much they government is giving the nursery for their child per hour.

I could be wrong but I’m almost certain you can just look this up. It varies by area of the country but there’s just a list.

OP is your issue that the nursery doesn't advertise that there are extra costs over the basic provision? Or that you think the nurseries shouldn't offer extras in order to recoup their overheads?

@TheHoptimist

All children are funded for 15 hours from the term after the term in which they are 3. Some are eligible for 30 funded hours.

There are unlikely to be any children over 3 who dont receive any funding?

Some 2 yo do

I wondered about this too.
Over half term and xmas holidays there was a sign saying nursery is only open for paying parents or working parents only. - does this mean those parents that use the 30 hours but then might pay on top don't count?

I was afraid to ask but when I start using the 30 hours, I will.

Are you just talking about 2 year olds who receive 15hrs free?

From age 3 all children are eligible for free hours and the children with the highest amount of funding are those with parents in work so its a mistake to conflate funded hours with a low income.

It sounds like you're complaining about something you don't understand on the basis of hearsay. Why would a nursery not give a parent a choice to top-up if it means they make more money?

Forest schools are massively over subscribed in most places so it may be that there just isn't a place for the child.

There’s a bigger push from OFSTED as far as I’m aware for schools to support disadvantaged learners, so children with funding at nursery and who will later receive free school meals and pupil premium money, and show that they are doing something to ‘close the gap.’ They also need to show what they are doing with the money. Separate groups are unlikely to be all day but may be part of some extra provision. I know that in my DS school they get first dibs on clubs and things like that. They received an extra free book on world book day, that kind of thing.
These children receive extra provision for a reason - in many cases they are missing out on things at home because parents can’t afford what you can OP. E.g. ballet club like you mentioned - many children do extra activities like this outside of school, disadvantaged learners who receive pupil premium often can’t so schools are providing something for them with the extra funding they get. It is more than fair in my opinion.

@Rosesareyellow

You can’t compare schools and nurseries those as schools gets more money for PP kids whereas nurseries get less than what they usually charge full paying parents

@Danikm151

I wondered about this too. Over half term and xmas holidays there was a sign saying nursery is only open for paying parents or working parents only. - does this mean those parents that use the 30 hours but then might pay on top don't count?

I was afraid to ask but when I start using the 30 hours, I will.

It's because funded hours only cover term times. Most nurseries allow you to spread this out as 22 hours over the year instead. It's all made very clear when you sign up because of all the forms the govt requires to claim the funding - I'm sure the sign didn't cause any concern to parents actually claiming the hours (ie probably 90% of parents of 3 year olds) because they'd have already chosen how to spend their hours.

I’m not complaining about anything. All I’m saying is that I’ve seen others complaining about it and I want to make sure my child doesn’t miss out because of funded hours I unwittingly signed up for.

I can’t remember this sort of thing ever being talked about when my older children were younger although one of them didn’t get any funding at all - I had to pay fully for that place.