30 Hours "Free"

[sunnyday]

 

btw have you informed Parents yet?

 

No need yet - these big 'plans for change' are for September 2016 not this year :1b .........I have a full list for this September which includes several 2.5s........but I intend to make these the last that I take - will just have to let those booking for Sept. '16 and beyond that their children will get a place at 3 years....it is a 'risky' idea - they might all 'toddle off' elsewhere at 2.5 but that said they could do that at age 2 if that was what they wanted......think/hope I might 'get away with it'! :1b

 

I have always resisted signed up for 'free for twos' - much to the dismay of my LA :rolleyes: who have their own 'boxes to tick'.......

 

At the moment funding for 'free for twos' is more than the hourly rate that I charge - however I am old enough to remember when this was the case with funding for 3/4 year olds and look how that turned out!

[Mouseketeer]

No offence taken or intended, I don't see how the higher 2 yr funding rate (for the few entitled) has helped anyone financially if you can fill your spaces with 3&4 yr olds, 4 funded 2 yr olds @ £5 per hr = £20 /1 staff approx £8 hr = profit £12 hr, 8 x 3/4 yr olds @ £4 hr = £32 /1 staff approx £8 = profit £24 ....I just know which I'd rather have

[finleysmaid]

Anne1...no offence taken but in reply i would say that to make yourself the same as everyone in order to compete is not always what is needed....i have stayed away from full day care/open all year hours as my parents often work for education establishments and they actually only want term time. As for the not taking two year olds...it is still a choice that we make and in this area there are lots of settings who do not feel that their premises or set up is right for two's. They are sensible enough to put the needs of the child first and therefore do not take them (of course they also have to be above good to be accepted on to the scheme!)

(note to sunnyday....you would not be unusual in this area....if you can fill with three year olds why not????!!!!)

 

Also i have to make a note about the 2 year old funding ...each two year old takes up the place of 2 3 year olds (essentially) to my knowledge none of us are getting twice as much pay for the two year olds as yet ....so in effect they cost us more . It is not a particularly good financial decision in this case and probably should only be taken on if you are trying to fill places

 

As to the comments regarding full day care settings ....they are canny enough to have worked out their supply costs and know how much they have to charge in order to make a profit. Parents are often persuaded to take up over their funded hours in order that they can be charged the 'make up'. If the funding is for 30 hours then parents will of course be required to take up more than this in order that they can charge them. Unfortunately we too will have to follow suit as i suspect not many of us will be able to survive on the rates that the government will pay us (if the proposals are to be believed this would be £4.40 /hour ....less the slices that the LEA's will charge)

The funding needs to be seriously looked in to....i really think that when it comes to consultation that should be where we lay our hats...not arguing about 15 vs 30 hours!

[Fredbear]

I think you can say it and should if your premises are not appropriate to do so.

Surely this should be up to every provider to determine whether this is the case or not, or in fact required in your particular area.

I cannot see the comparison with a child with additional needs, this is a completely different scenario.

We are registered to take from 2, but take from 2.5 as a minimum, unless in exceptional circumstances.

I remember the days when we only took from 3 to 5 years. It was far less stressful and easier to plan for.

[sunnyday]

Without meaning to offend anyone here.

I would like to know how you survive?

As nice as it sounds being able to choose the hours you open and the children you want to take.

We are a Pre-School opening 8am-6pm Monday to Friday taking children 2-5 years and school children 5-11years. Without this we would have folded many years ago because we would not have been able to compete wtih other settings in our area.

As for taking 2 year olds we have done this for the past 12 years and we only have one playroom.

If I was to say I don't take autistic children everyone would be saying that I was not inclusive so how can you say you will not take 2 year olds? yes they have different needs but you staff and adjust to meet them. This was recognised with the higher rate of funding for 2 year olds.

If you are a non profit making Pre-School like us I would think that the 30 free hours funding could be a positive one as many day nurseries say that the funding does not cover their hourly rate so may well pull out of taking funded children. Would this not be a business opportunity for Pre-Schools to take these children? Yes I can see that the plan is to have them in schools but until the infrastructure is there we could reap the benefits.

Maybe our area is different but I do have many children that take their 15 hours and more because mums work. We are in an affluent area where many of our mums and dads are professionals so do need the 30 hours childcare.

So I will be very interested in seeing the results of the 30 hours funding being introduced.

 

Hello Anne - sorry - somehow or other I completely missed your post :blink: I had to trawl back to try and understand what finleysmaid was referring to......

 

So.... anyway - I am not 'offended' in the slightest - this forum is a great place to have an open and frank discussion! :1b

 

As a PVI I think it's completely up to me and my staff team to make decisions regarding our opening pattern and the ages of children that we will take.........perfectly 'inclusive' really can't be compared to saying that you wouldn't take a child with SEN - that is not the same thing at all.......

 

As to 'how we will survive' - all I can say is that I have been 'surviving' for 30+ years who knows my new 'plan' might be my 'undoing' - but it will all be carefully worked out and costed before I go ahead - perhaps that is how I have 'survived' for this long

 

I think an awful lot depends on where you are situated and your parents needs and to some extent the local competition.......

[louby loo]

Without meaning to offend anyone here.

I would like to know how you survive?

As nice as it sounds being able to choose the hours you open and the children you want to take.

We are a Pre-School opening 8am-6pm Monday to Friday taking children 2-5 years and school children 5-11years. Without this we would have folded many years ago because we would not have been able to compete wtih other settings in our area.

As for taking 2 year olds we have done this for the past 12 years and we only have one playroom.

If I was to say I don't take autistic children everyone would be saying that I was not inclusive so how can you say you will not take 2 year olds? yes they have different needs but you staff and adjust to meet them. This was recognised with the higher rate of funding for 2 year olds.

If you are a non profit making Pre-School like us I would think that the 30 free hours funding could be a positive one as many day nurseries say that the funding does not cover their hourly rate so may well pull out of taking funded children. Would this not be a business opportunity for Pre-Schools to take these children? Yes I can see that the plan is to have them in schools but until the infrastructure is there we could reap the benefits.

Maybe our area is different but I do have many children that take their 15 hours and more because mums work. We are in an affluent area where many of our mums and dads are professionals so do need the 30 hours childcare.

So I will be very interested in seeing the results of the 30 hours funding being introduced.

No offence taken :1b

But this illustrates how every setting if different. - if we did you hours we'd be closed in a week :wacko:

We are in a mainly affluent area, and we are the only setting that takes 2yr funded children. Our area is well provided for with a full range of different provisions, many with fantastic outdoor areas, whilst all we have is an 'one out - all out' public playing field.[very public, very well used- with a major walkway through the middle]

We are a pack away setting, and actually thinking about it ... quite a few of our children come to once they are funded at three- from the local day-care. I think this because our setting is far more suited to the slightly older range- as that age group on the whole fully understand the outside rules of not running off, what equipment we can use in the play areas etc. When we have two year olds in the mix this changes the whole dynamics of outdoor play- and we can't go out as freely as we used to.

Also we would never get staff for 30 hours, most of our staff want convenient hours that fit in with their own family life, and although I hate the term 'pin-money' for most of ours that's just what it is, and if they 'need' to work they tend to for something that pays more - cleaning around here pays at £14 hour upwards Still a least I know my staff are committed to the role and not in it for the money

[Guest]

Another thing to consider...if the 30 hours is for two working parents only then exactly who is going to determine who is entitled to it? Like the two year old funding will it be the lea?

We will be unable to offer more than 15 hrs as the hall is used by others so hope our lea does not make it a condition of funding!

[Guest]

I fear for many PVI settings if it does go through, because unless they start paying the funding properly, a lot of settings will close as they'll not be financially able to run.

[Fredbear]

In the current market I cannot see how they can enforce the 30 hr rule for funding in our area. There isn't enough placements with 15 hrs let alone 30. Long term who knows though.

[thumperrabbit]

I know what's going to happen in my area ... schools are going to expand at great rates I understand lots of you have schools that can't.

Around here it is quite normal for classes to be over 30 - totally wrong in my humble opinion

With the removal of the requirement for schools having to register to take 2 year olds happening at the end of this month, isn't this all about getting children into school even earlier?

Schools will be able to offer the 30 hours

[Fredbear]

Well all us PVI's are doomed then. Unless we come together and fight our rightful place too.

[SueJ]

We are currently experiencing a baby boom - our primaries have already expanded to cope with the need to provide sufficient reception spaces and do not have the land or existing space to expand much further - we already have two 5 form intake primaries e.g., 150 children per year group / 1050 children in the school.

 

It is possible that we could extend from our current 5 hour session to a 6 hour session to offer 30 hours - HOWEVER - as this is not going to be a universal offer to all 3 and 4 year olds it might not be worth it as it could be a 1 hour extension for just a couple of children.

 

Somewhere along the line the government need to be persuaded that they are buying a service from the early years sector to offer to parents and as such the government should be paying what we charge them rather than us like meek little lambs accepting the crumbs that are thrown our way but that would in effect mean that the whole sector would have to stand together as one and refuse to accept funded children until funding meets costs - UP THE REVOLUTION! :unsure:

[sunnyday]

 

 

Somewhere along the line the government need to be persuaded that they are buying a service from the early years sector to offer to parents and as such the government should be paying what we charge them rather than us like meek little lambs accepting the crumbs that are thrown our way but that would in effect mean that the whole sector would have to stand together as one and refuse to accept funded children until funding meets costs - UP THE REVOLUTION! :unsure:

 

I'm with you sister!

[lsp]

I fear for many PVI settings if it does go through, because unless they start paying the funding properly, a lot of settings will close as they'll not be financially able to run.

As others have already said, it is the unique setting as much as the unique child. There is a shortage of childcare in our area. Most of the primary schools were over subscribed this year. We are one of the PVI who actually make our money from the funded places, although I am not sure for how much longer, as our fees are curently lower than the 3 and 4 year funding rates. We own our building and pay peppercorn rent for the plot. We could open for longer hours - if we could get more good, reliable, flexible staff. We change of opening hours in line with parental demand and the hours being financially viable. We open for a minimum of 15 hours per week always trying to keep at least one full day 9 - 3pm. This works for us as we do not have many working parents.

Saying all of that though, I think having most of the children in for 30 hours a week (most of our parents would!) could change the 'feel' of our group. Would we have to think of ourselves as 'daycare'?? More fees for Ofsted??? Give with one hand and take back with the other <_< :angry:

[Mouseketeer]

We are classed full day care but only pay £35 (think this came up before) but with so many more hours this 'stretched' care could impact on term time only settings, the couple of hours people might not use at the moment doesn't make it worth while.

[lynned55]

We are open for 26.5 hours per week. Like most of you we make our money on those children who do over 15 hours, luckily most of ours do- with the majority doing 17-20 hours per week. Our fees are currently £4.50 per hour, funding is £3.60, with £5.50 for the (very) few funded 2 year olds. If/when the 30 hour funding comes in, it will probably finish us as I honestly cannot see how we can function on £3.60 per hour. It will also mean that the numbers of children we off to drop dramatically. We currently have between 25/30 children each morning (depends on ages) and 18/22 in the afternoons. Some are there all day across the two sessions others go home at the end of the morning session but around 10/12 children come in from the start of the afternoon session. If we are to offer 30 hours then those 25/30 children the morning session will have to do all day therefore we will not be able to offer to the 10 or 12 that come in the afternoon. I'm sure this will be the case for a lot of settings.

 

One other thing, I do wonder where this extra money to pay for the funding is going to come from, IMHO I think it is going to take them a few years to fully implement this.

[Fredbear]

Yes and by then I may well have retired.

[lynned55]

I've just seen an article that has comments from PSLA, Daycare & PACEY, leaders to David Cameron re this. Both parents working over 8 hours per week is stated also all of them are urging the minister (Sam ?) to carry out his promise to review the funding and completely engage with childcare providers before making any decisions.

So watch that space!!

 

Oh, to come in for 2017 (April - no doubt as it is the start of financial year but the probably worst time for us)

[lsp]

I am struggling to see how it will work. Maybe I am thinking too deeply and too early!! :wacko: Two parents working - funded childcare. One parent loses job - when will funding cease or will it be in place for full term? What about the old 'zero hours contracts? What about lone parents? The list goes on!! I need to lie down!!!!

[louby loo]

Not being funny here but 8 hours???? Isn't that amount already covered by the existing 15 then? :unsure: :unsure:

[lynned55]

I cant see the relevance of the 8 hours either and what about those on jobseekers allowance or those classed as 'deprived' Who is going to check out how many hours parents are working. Questions, Questions- I wonder who will be giving out the answers!!

[finleysmaid]

Not being funny here but 8 hours????

is this to do with benefit allowances being 16 hours or under?? just a thought

[louby loo]

is this to do with benefit allowances being 16 hours or under?? just a thought

I have to be totally honest- I really haven't a clue how the benefit systems actually work.

Does that mean two parents can work up to a total of 16 hours if on benefits, without benefits being affected? (or one parent 16 hours) But even if that is so, then surely 30 hours of childcare is still not really needed- especially if the country needs to make cutbacks.

And - if it is 30 hours 'childcare' as apposed to FEE (free early education) do you think there maybe a massive change to all the paperwork/planning, and we can just play and have fun with the children without the hassle?

[Guest]

Many of my parents do not work but ALL take their 15 hours!

[Guest]

It does concern me that young children may well be taking a cut in hours when they enter Reception - my school day gives children 5 hours 15 mins 'tuition time' each day, so 26 hours 15 mins a week if you take lunch times out. Seems bizarre to me.

[thumperrabbit]

I have to be totally honest- I really haven't a clue how the benefit systems actually work.

 

And - if it is 30 hours 'childcare' as apposed to FEE (free early education) do you think there maybe a massive change to all the paperwork/planning, and we can just play and have fun with the children without the hassle?

 

Glad it's not just me loubyloo I don't understand benefits either, all I know is we personally don't get anything!

 

Think your other point childcare/education, less paperwork is in our wildest dreams :lol:

[Inge]

It does concern me that young children may well be taking a cut in hours when they enter Reception - my school day gives children 5 hours 15 mins 'tuition time' each day, so 26 hours 15 mins a week if you take lunch times out. Seems bizarre to me.

But the plan is to change the school hours too..

Children face 9 hour day at school

 

saw it reported in several places .. now lets see if they decide to actually do anything about it.. this was before the election..

Edited May 14, 2015 by Inge

[sunnyday]

But the plan is to change the school hours too..

Children face 9 hour day at school

 

saw it reported in several places .. now lets see if they decide to actually do anything about it.. this was before the election..

Oh my goodness - I had totally missed that proposal words fail me........

[hali]

wow - poor little mites

[Littlesparklesnursery]

Reading with much interest ?