Hi all, Got this info today from "Children & Young People" daily bulletin email

HERE

Peggy

That's a very interesting link Peggy and I shall watch this with interest. I did know something was coming up, and I think it will have far reaching consequences, especially for maintained settings, where I can see very serious implications for some schools. Equality of funding is a big issue for everyone. Lots to think about!

we have already had this implemented in our area - settings that are more flexible eg offering extended hours/lunch club etc are now given more funding money per hour than those who dont - think this is very unfair as we work in a school that has an after school club so we rush to gt out before they come in -there is no way we could offer any more than the three hours we do

I would love to think that this would finally be something that works in favour of PVI's, but I'm afraid I just can't see it. We all know that the PVI sector has been effectively propping up the free nursery place system, and I can sadly not believe that we are going to get an improved outcome here. I have been reading the single formula guidlines very carefully, and there seem to be a lot of concessionary terms in there, that I am sure will allow LEA's to do as they damn well please. I just fear for the education of all our young people if we can't get this right for once and for all.

There is a simple message that the Government needs to understand...if you want PVI's then work WITH us. If you don't want us....Fine, but find your own free places for parents. I am sick and tired of trying to run a setting with my hands effectively tied behind my back. I feel I am between a rock and a hard place, and frankly am sick and tired of being taken advantage of by central and local government just because I actually care about young children, and hence will work all hours for peanuts to ensure they recieve a high quality education, that the government and LEA then want to take all the credit for!!. This is a mad, mad sector, and one that is increasingly alienating both parents and staff and not working for the good of the children.
Sorry for the rant.... but it makes me feel a bit better!!!

Absolutely! The single funding formula will hit maintained nurseries which historically have been funded on the number of registered places rather than the number of children who actually attend, so from this respect they will be funded in the same way as we in the PVI sector are funded at present.

However, I don't suppose this will provide the level playing field it is intended to, since I very much doubt that maintained nurseries will have their maintenance budgets cut substantially ahead of the implementation of the new formula, so buildings, caretakers etc won't be funded out of the nursery education funding. Unless of course I've got that wrong. But if £8.45 a session isn't meeting my hourly costs I don't see how it will meet the hourly costs of a huge building with ancillary services required to run the nursery.

I know that maintained nurseries and schools who have nurseries attached will probably be hit by the single funding formula since only reception aged children will be entitled to a fully funded day. So previously where settings have offered children a full, funded day in nursery this will no longer be possible so I'm not sure how this will affect either the school's numbers, or the numbers of the pre-school settings that feed into the nursery/school.

There are so many variables and issues yet to iron out - but really April isn't that far away is it?

From my perspective I obviously won't be complaining about the offer of extra funding for having an EYP (which is how our Borough is planning to interpret 'quality provision'), however this does seem unfair on those settings who could not access graduate leadership fund to 'grow their own' graduate/EYP because they didn't fulfill the number of children/number of hours criteria of the GLF.

As you say, JacquieL - so much to think about!

Maz

I'm going to pinch this topic to add to my poll if I can find the right way to express it. Either that or slot it into the general EYFS discussion - either way, I think it needs to be brought up at the Capita conference, so it would be good to get some detailed discussion here - with specifics if possible. Blondie I'm very interested in your experience!

We are getting the 15 hours from September, and my letter from County says that maintained classes and nursery schools 'Will be paid at the same hourly rate as the AWPU and this will be paid to you half termly. You will be paid for actual pupils attending and this amount will be adjusted with the termly intake.'

whereas PVI 'Will be paid the normal PVI hourly rate based on pupil numbers and attendance'

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but that doesn't sound a very level playing field to me - it suggests that AWPU and our hourly rate are not the same amount of money ..........

What does AWPU mean?

Perhaps the difference in rate is to acknowledge their higher running costs than (some) PVI settings - upkeep of buildings etc? Is it worth a call to your local authority to check that you've got the right end of the stick, and to find out the reasoning behind it?

Maz

We've also been implementing this since September but are working in partnership with a PVI setting in the attached CC.

All interesting stuff........

Is everyone aware of the 'Save our Nurseries' campaign - started in sunny Kent.....

http://www.saveournurseries.org

Age Weighted Pupil Unit I think. children are 'worth' more at different ages

So what have been the challenges you and the PVI setting have faced, Marion? What has your experience been?

Maz

I think this depends - in my LA the full time nursery places are being allocated depending on the level of deprivation based on idaci and other measures of social need. Schools with nursery classes will be told they have x no of full time places. If they get say 1 or 2 under the formula they can put them back into the pot for other settings to take up if they feel they need more.

From memory School pupil funding for school aged children is always based on the AWPU which is varied depending on the age range the pupil is in. It provides the basis for the overall school budget which is based on the headcounts. Most funding the LA receives is devolved - there is very little we are allowed to hold at the centre these days.

Cx

That's interesting, catma - perhaps its just the way our LA is operating things. Two nursery heads (one whose nursery is attached to a school) have said recently at network meetings that they will no longer be able to offer full time places (and this is compounded by the fact that we're moving from a three-point to a two-point entry to primary school).

Oh, and the other thing in the small print is that LAs are now able to make a charge for the training it provides, whereas before it was free at the point of delivery. Wonder how much that will equate to?

Maz

Hmm, I wonder if that's why they've been so keen on the EYQISP things - to target the training we need to make us pay for it?

Again I think it is depending on your LA - we have charged for schools to attend training for a while now anyway! I think it was just the PVIs who got it free.

Through the formula for full time places some of our schools also won't have them funded but could still offer them if they wanted - just at the additional cost to the school. Half the day would be funded.
We're calling them additional hours rather than full time places. (Have to keep reminding myself!)
Cx

Might be semantics, but important to use the right terminology, I'd have said. Interesting that PVIs got training free but schools didn't - what is going to happen post single funding formula?

Maz

When I was working in a school it was the LINSET courses that were free at the point of delivery, any others could be charged for.

Because of the change in funding we now start children each half term instead of as we did previously the Tuesday after their third birthday. This means in theory children can receive up to half a term less time in nursery.

We are offering flexible hours - the 15 hours free provision for 3 year olds in the school nursery and 12.5 hours free provision for 2 year olds in the PVI setting

I'm refering to training here.

LA's are given the money to pay for and to provide PVI training, nothing is free its our money; schools are given a training budget from LA and are free to choose how they spend it that is why they have to pay for what PVI's think they are getting free.

I am "Chair" of my countys' Early Years Sub Group consulting with LA on single funding formula.

Still on training here-
We're PVI and have to pay for all our training...with only the odd free one here and there.

We don't pay for any + we get supply cover paid for most but not all training

We also pay for training. It is only a nominal fee of about £15 - £20, we are reminded regularly that it costs more than this and our EY team pay the extra. It is a way of making sure places are taken up and used, if you fail to turn up without good reason the setting can be charged the full amount.

Slightly off track but still training - I was shocked at how much the first aid course has increased over the year since my last staff member went on it!! £27 increase since January 2009. It is up to £108 times that by 7 members of staff, that is big bucks!!

yes I got a shock too! There's no reason for it either, and we HAVE to have the training! There's never enough courses being run either!

We are a maintained (school) setting and pay for our training.

With regard to training, we have a set amount of 'free funding' towards priority courses eg. child protection, SENCo, for which we are also offered funding for cover. Of course these courses often take place in the afternoon or evening so we do not get funding for cover, transport costs and staff wages all of which have to be covered by the setting (PVI). More often than not staff attend the courses in their own time for half pay as the setting cannot afford to pay staff wages and course costs. As we all know this is one of the many things we do in our own time, someone somewhere must be getting the glory......

This is because we want to keep up to date with our training so that it can be passed on to the children and families in our care and keep the various powers that be happy. It's a good job that we don't do this job for money!! I can't think of many people who would put up with some of the c**p we have to on the money we get paid.....perhaps I am being too blunt hmmm - I have to say I love my job and there are not many who can say that - must be a plus!! Can't find a smiley face with a halo so will just go with a wink... ;-)

This is interesting
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6018445