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.

It wouldn’t even make sense for nurseries to do this. The amount they get for the funded places per hour is pittance, they wouldn’t turn down a chance to get some extra money (I’m not criticising, the funded places should be funded properly if that’s what they’re going to be called).

Possibly there are some nurseries out there who have misunderstood the rules - they can charge for extras but can’t charge a “top up” amount. Maybe some think they can’t charge any additional amount.

@Itsnotover

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.

It can get confusing with the funded hours, guessing you mean the 15 hours some children can get at 2 years old and and then the 15 (or 30 for some) every child is eligible for at 3? Most nurseries ask for a top up to cover the basics so seems weird if they're not giving the option to parents- but from that post it's not really clear what's going on.

I had to pay a top up fee ten years ago, this isn't a new thing.
The amount the government gives nurseries isn't enough to fund things like forest school.

Nurseries are private businesses so there is no, one rule that covers this.
I know of a couple of Nurseries that have their term time dc in one room and all year round dc in another. There is a pretty strong correlation, obviously between funded dc and term time only dc. It is logical for them, as they have 2 room fulls of preschool dc, and they then employ staff who want term time only contracts to work with the dc who attend term time only, and staff who want FT contracts working with the FT dc - giving consistency of staffing.
However, every Nursery is different and the way they try and balance their books is different. The buildings are different. The % of dc that are funded are different. The hours they are open is different. The finances of the parents they serve is different.
I know when my dc were little, paying out for childcare took a massive hit on our family budget, and the Nursery then saying we could pay extra for ballet or yoga or French would have tipped me over the edge. I would have hated that offer, as none of us like the idea of our dc being left out, but that is completely unnecessary and an extra expense we could ill afford. On that basis alone, I'd rather be in the room that wasn't offered.

The way the funding of those extra 15 hours plays out is unacceptably divisive.

At our LA maintained nursery, the children who were only eligible for fifteen hours were put in a separate Covid bubble from the 30 hours children. The bubbles were divided by a wall.

As far as I can tell the OP is saying that allegedly in some settings funded children are not receiving these extras HOWEVER their parents have not been advised that they are allowed to pay extra for these, so they have no idea that their child is being separated from the self-funded children and no choice to pay the extra so their child can join in. OP would like to be given a choice. I think this is fine; there will be self-funding parents who don’t want it (though it may be included in the cost already) and there may be funded parents who want to/are able to pay the extra for their children to be included.

@Itsnotover nurseries generally struggle to provide a reasonable level of service at the rate that the government pay for funded hours. There are nurseries that have no extras at all and only operate for 30 hours a week term time only. They tend to be quite basic.

The nurseries that offer a better level of service do so by charging fees to the people who want more than 30 hours a week and generally they structure the fees so that paying to upgrade from 30 hours to 40 hours per week actually also tops up the miserly allowance for the 30 hours to something that makes it economically viable. These nurseries do find it difficult to accommodate people who want to just use the free hours and no more, because they then make a loss on each child.

If you want the better service of a nursery that offers more, you need to be paying for more than just the free hours. Each nursery will have its own structure but they are hardy going to keep their prices secret, you just need to ask.

@Peasock tbh it wasn’t clear whether they were talking about 2 or 3 year olds. But hearing this has made me even more confused about which nursery we should choose. Also people send their children to nursery for different reasons.

@Sweetchillidumplings

As far as I can tell the OP is saying that allegedly in some settings funded children are not receiving these extras HOWEVER their parents have not been advised that they are allowed to pay extra for these, so they have no idea that their child is being separated from the self-funded children and no choice to pay the extra so their child can join in. OP would like to be given a choice. I think this is fine; there will be self-funding parents who don’t want it (though it may be included in the cost already) and there may be funded parents who want to/are able to pay the extra for their children to be included.

Thank you - yes, this is what I mean.

@Itsnotover nurseries generally struggle to provide a reasonable level of service at the rate that the government pay for funded hours. There are nurseries that have no extras at all and only operate for 30 hours a week term time only. They tend to be quite basic.

I completely understand this and sympathise. But I think we should all be aware what we sign up for. It’s a shame that it is so complicated. Whenever I’ve been given a form, asking to pay for something extra I always just did it. But if you don’t know that your child is being given cheaper quality food / teaching then how can you even know?

It is wrong that children are on the receiving end of two tier provision. Whoever’s fault it is, it’s not the child’s.

Op just ask the nursery if you can pay for additional activities thay are not included in the government funded childcare hours.

@Orchidsonthetable

Op just ask the nursery if you can pay for additional activities thay are not included in the government funded childcare hours.

Yes, that’s the best thing. It’s only by chance I discovered that this was an issue.

Our nursery does it by having all the costly activities (that are run by outside companies) and cooked meal in the morning. Then they only accept free hours for afternoon sessions, if you want your child to do the activities you have to pay to add on the morning session.

The government funding doesn't cover much, and I imagine some nurseries want to avoid the admin involved in working out who has and hasn't paid for the extra activities.

Our nursery has football lessons, ballet, music lessons and french that are payable extras. Surely you’d just ask when you enrolled whether there was anything extra you needed to pay for. There is a £2.50 difference per hour between funded children and non funded children so I assume they have to make it back somewhere. Dinners, nappies, consumables etc… are already an added extra for everyone.

@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.

The funding is only for 39 weeks of the year? Or at least it was when my kids went

Some nurseries let you take it spread across the year. Ours you can do term-time only or a 48-week model, with two weeks off when nursery is closed for Xmas and another two weeks of your choosing. Then we just pay the wraparound/top-up/extra fees.

Those on term-time model only don't go during school holidays.

The funding all children are entitled to from the term after their 3rd birthday, and the 2 yr funding, is for 15hours x 38 weeks (school terms).
Some Nurseries let parents then "stretch" that funding over the holidays too - so the child gets fewer hours each week, but over aa greater number of weeks. This suits some children with significant needs who struggle with not going to Nursery for 6 or 7 weeks over the Summer (or sometimes their families) and it suits a lot of families with working parents, in terms of budgeting.

But after three surely the vast majority of children are receiving funding, because their parents work but individually earn under 100k.

The majority of over 3’s will be getting some funding. I get it and pay a top-up for the full time place. I also pay extra for for swimming, drama and PE. There is no indication that some of the children are not offers this extra option.

OP just ask.

Virtually every 3 & 4 year old will have some funded hours.

My DD nursery (and I know off others) have a minimum number of days the child has to attend. So parents have to pay a top up. .

PPs have pointed out if the nursery has a different business model, so it is happy to take children who only do the funded hours, then those who don't pay the extra will find their child will be limited in what they do.

Yes, at dds nursery they were even in a seperate building which was basic and tiny! Non funded children had a huge garden, sandpit, gp-kart course etc

I think most nurseries do have minimum sessions? Apart from the finance side, how can a child benefit unless they do a reasonable number of sessions?

@pittameinhummus

Yes, at dds nursery they were even in a seperate building which was basic and tiny! Non funded children had a huge garden, sandpit, gp-kart course etc

See, this can’t be right.

@pittameinhummus

Yes, at dds nursery they were even in a seperate building which was basic and tiny! Non funded children had a huge garden, sandpit, gp-kart course etc

We're there really that many 3 and 4 year olds who didn't qualify for any funding at all that they had separate buildings?!

@pittameinhummus

Yes, at dds nursery they were even in a seperate building which was basic and tiny! Non funded children had a huge garden, sandpit, gp-kart course etc

Virtually all children are funded. Some parents just opt to pay a top up and for more hours.

Anyway I find that kind of economic segregation disgusting but then my DD nursery is run by a charity and the top is based on household income.

Likewise my CM is discrete on who she takes for only funded hours.