56 replies to this topic

[julie 12]

Hello,

Currently our local authority are consulting providers on Single Formula Funding, we have been asked to comment on funding that offers a base rate and then ‘supplements’ for quality, deprivation and flexibility.

One of the issues is that the base rate varies according to the number of funded children at each setting, under the new proposals , settings who offer a small number of NEG funded places will receive a much higher hourly rate per child than settings offering more NEG places.

The rates vary from £4.43 per hour for 8 funded children and decrease on a sliding scale to £3.38per hour for those settings offering up to 65 funded places. Therefore the more funded places you offer, the less per head you receive, it is not based on the registered number of children attending, just the past 2 years early years census of NEG uptake.

Therefore some providers will receive less funding than in the past should this way of calculating funding be adopted.

It affects all settings, although the base rates are different for PVI, nursery schools, and nursery classes to reflect their different costs.

Does anyone else have this system and are providers in your area going to receive different amounts according to what kind of setting they are?
Julie

[Panders]

Haven't heard any more than they are "consulting" on the formula funding. As per usual I suspect we will hear only when decisions have been made and it is too late to do anything about it. As only certain individuals are not being consulted we must hope that those who are being asked remember their responsibilities in acting for all of us.

[blondie]

we have different rates of funding which take into account deprivation,flexibility and quality -
however we are based in a school and share a room with an after school club so cant be flexible regarding times etc
we also take in some children from areas that are deemed to be deprived but not enough to change our funding rate.however we also have children who are deemed not to be in a deprived area although their circumstances would show that they are deprived but we get no extra funding for these children
this means that we are on the basic rate(sorry cant remember what it is) and do not get any extra "top ups" which i feel is very unfair.
we were not consulted on this just received a letter then a meeting telling us .

[holly35]

I believe that the premium payments based on the three factors you mention are going to be applied across the country on guidance from central government. I am not sure how I feel about them as we cannot for example do anything about the deprivation level of the area we live in but might actually be accepting children with additional needs and family circumstances which require more intense support. That is an issue, I know, whenever funding is discussed which comes from central government, hence different areas have different funded rates even now.

What confuses/worries me more is the idea that settings will get a different amount based on previous uptake of NEF places. This seems to encourage some settings to limit the number of funded places they offer, when I though the whole push was that the powers that be wanted a 100% uptake on the funded entitlement. I will be interested to hear if this is being repeated across the country.

[Deb]

Hi

In our county we are being consulted on this and I am going to a meeting shortly. We will have a basic rate which will be 90% of the NEG plus a percentage according to deprivation, quality and sustainability. It looks like there will be winners and losers.

[anju]

our base rate will vary between PVI and maintained settings then there will be supplements for deprivation and quality but not for flexibility although there will be a one-off grant for flexibility at the start of the scheme.

I have not heard about different base rates for people offering less funded places but there is a one-off proposed for smaller providers (not those offering less funded places - this would be different) as their costs per head are higher due to economies of scale.

I agree, that will encourage people to offer fewer free places and more funded by parents (if they can afford it!)

[sadiesmith]

Still not heard anything about how it is going to be worked out. Day care network meetings have been cancelled????? and nothing now till Oct 09. I have noticed our head count dates have changed, much earlier than usual. I have read about surplus for the other things but nothing discussed yet. I will post back in October. No doubt everything will have been decided anyway and we will just be told what is happening

[SueJ]

What a coincidence - meeting I was going to attend this week about SFF has also been re-organised for October!!!

Just a general query at the moment though if 12.5 hours/15 hours is meant to be free at source and SSF is going to mean different rates for different settings with added percentages here and there any clues on costing out fees?

Is an hourly rate going to be the best way forward?

I know that a lot of settings already do this but most sessional groups tend to price for the session.

[sunnyday]

SueJ, on Sep 14 2009, 17:09, said:

Is an hourly rate going to be the best way forward?

I know that a lot of settings already do this but most sessional groups tend to price for the session.

Hi Sue - I have just introduced this.......hmmm........for once I was thinking ahead!

[holly35]

We are sessional and thinking of moving to an hourly rate for fee payers, especially as we will be possibly extending our hours slightly. I don't know if it will be better or just more tricky for me to calculate!

[Panders]

i was a "sessional" pre-school, we are still only open 12.50 hours per week - to the children that is - I have never had any problems calculating hours it's just as simple.

There is only one draw back, if you have children attending an hourly fee setting and a sessional calculated setting, you need to talk to each other to make sure you don't exeed the correct amount of hours allowed.

On two occasions I have left this to parents to tell the other setting and they have not done so or not been able to explain things and between us and the other setting we went over by an hour or so. Our county would not pay either setting until the end of the term as their computer system could not cope with it!! We were lucky that on each occasion it was only one child, but if there were two or three children - that would have been a huge amount of money for us to have to wait for.

[holly35]

Thanks for that Panders - I wouldn't have thought of that although our LA ask for the headcount to be completed in hours so I might be reminded that way. Calculating hourly rates might be easy for you but I can ever find the blinking calculator!

[lynned55]

We have today just been sent a 'consultation' form to complete for our borough. I've only skimmed it but so far they are suggesting a 'basic' hourly rate for all. Off the top of my head, and it is only a rough calculation, the suggested figure appears to be around 7p an hour less than we are paid now. Unfortunately in real terms for groups like us that are already doing 3 hours and charging for the additional 30 minutes it will mean around 30 pence per session, per child less, they are offering suggested additional amounts for settings with a L4/5 or 6 Leader. Additional funding for those with children living in areas of deprivation, this will be decided by postcode of child. From what I have seen I am not very happy with it but I have only roughly read it and it is only a 'consultation' I don’t like the deprivation being decided by postcode or the qualification thing either. There seems to be no account of QA schemes or the like. There is also some mention in there of taking into account the mainstream schools having to employ a head teacher and factoring in PPA time for teachers but not for PVI sector as we obviously have to do this in our own time!! Anyway, will read it fully and let you know

Edited by lynned55, 14 September 2009 - 09:18 PM.

[SueJ]

This is all going to be a nightmare isn't it - if you charge hourly and you get / don't get different premiums or god forbid you lose a premium if you got it your rates are going to be all over the place and do these premiums mean different rates for different children depending on deprivation?

How are you then meant to calcuate for hours over and above funding - I so wish i'd done a phd in maths, applied maths, sums, calculus, trigonometry etc. etc. etc. at this rate I may even end up using log tables and a slide rule again....................RANT RANT RANT

V. interesting about maintained settings additional factors - it's bad enough that we can't have inset days within the funded year as it is.

Must stop now getting overly wound up!!!!

[lynned55]

Ooh Sue, you sound just like myself and my deputy this morning!! I've looked at it a bit more properly now and iby being paid just the base rate it is going to cost us 28 pence per child per morning, at current rates, bearing in mind our fees would normally rise next year then in real terms it will be more. I want to know how they can justify giving us less then we get now.