BroadOaks Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 Well i have a meeting on Monday, well a workshop with our LA so should find out more myself. It is the LA that is going to making the applications for all the settings in in the region who expressed interest and depending on demand i guess if they are allowed. Due to the LA actually needing to know how much extra funding they require in order to pass it on to settings. I am hoping a lot of local settings go along to this workshop and we can jointly express our concerns over lack of funding atm and then see what the LA can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueJ Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Has anyone else read this? The cynic in me tells me that the "increase" in rates due to be announced next week is unlikely to be anything substantial - the subtext seems to suggest that providers are at fault for their financial woes and for not managing on existing funding rates by staffing our settings the way we do! "Gyimah said the government has “no plans” to alter child-to-adult ratios in order to deliver the promised 30 hours.“But we need to face up to something,” he said, “that ratios are not the only hallmark of quality in early years settings.”“It’s time to stop using the childcare ratio as a convenient stick with which to beat government, and focus on other factors needed to deliver and improve quality,” he said." The full article can be read here: http://www.cypnow.co.uk/cyp/news/1154738/childcare-funding-rate-to-be-announced-at-spending-review?utm_content=&utm_campaign=171115_EarlyYears_JR&utm_source=Children%20%26%20Young%20People%20Now&utm_medium=adestra_email&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cypnow.co.uk%2Fcyp%2Fnews%2F1154738%2Fchildcare-funding-rate-to-be-announced-at-spending-review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyfs1966 Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 perhaps its about time to stop using insufficient funding as a stick with which to beat hardworking nurseries....... I am certainly not holding my breath..I think Neil Leitch's response sums it up “Tinkering around the edges and telling providers to be more ‘innovative’ and ‘creative’ in order to cut costs is not enough – it is the government that made this pledge and so it is the government that must ensure that it is deliverable.” 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inge Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 It really saddens me that they do not see the best resource and way to deliver good quality is by having sufficient staff to work with the children, to be able to give them all the care and time they deserve to develop at their own pace.. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narnia Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Ok, Mr G ............we have no rent increases, no heating cost increases, no insurance increases, no Ofsted payments to make ( and at wildly different rates), no VAT ( you know, in line with schools?), no wage increases, no pension fund to pay for..............and all at pretty much the same pitiful rates that have existed for the last five years. Tell me, Mr G..............how do you maintain the quality of YOUR life, with no funding/wage increase??? 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Has anyone else read this? The cynic in me tells me that the "increase" in rates due to be announced next week is unlikely to be anything substantial I'm certainly not holding my breath........ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I'm certainly not holding my breath........ Well I am Sunnyday.......to stop me saying something very rude to Mr Gymiah!!! I continue to be very exasperated at the total ignorance of our politicians - I know what I would like to do with 'the stick'..............and it doesnt involve beating........ 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueJ Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 I was reading through this article on Fairer Schools Funding on the BBC website and came across this bit right at the bottom - no idea where this idea has come from but the BBC must have got this "leak" from somewhere!!! Spending on early years is vulnerable too, despite a commitment to increase the free childcare for working parents to 30 hours. It is possible these will not be funded at the same level of staffing as the existing 15 hours offered to parents in England. The whole article is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-34891689 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Not sure I understand..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panders Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Doesn't surprise me, there has been a suggestion that we must not "hide" behind our ratios and that there are plenty of ways we can save money in early years - I am not expecting great things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsp Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 You are not alone Sunny! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finleysmaid Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 so what do we think we are in for 1:13 for 3 and above and 1;6 or 1:8 for the 2's ????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsp Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 1:12 and 1:6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Who would be prepared to operate like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finleysmaid Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Who would be prepared to operate like that? will we honestly have a choice? The issue is they know they have us over a barrel really we cant afford to opt out of their funding as parents will not want to pay for 30 hours when they can get it free. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 I'd guess 1:13 (with an add on that you need a higher level practitioner eg EYT, EYP - 'as soon as'....' Thought Mr G said he wouldnt change ratios.....another famous U turn? Dont think they'll mess with Under 3s as they dont get the extra hours anyway. Do think they might only give extra funding for the extra hours though eg anything over 15 SO, only 2 days to the great unveil of the new funding levels!! Anyone like to open the betting on how much.......??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsp Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 It's difficult to call as we know we all get different amounts from our LA. Do they all get the same from government and if so what is the hourly rate before their 'expenses'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finleysmaid Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 now I reckon at full funding level from the government x 13 children is just about the equivalent of one member of staff on London living wage..........HUMMMMM :angry: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 will we honestly have a choice? The issue is they know they have us over a barrel really we cant afford to opt out of their funding as parents will not want to pay for 30 hours when they can get it free. I hear what you're saying.......s'pose we shouldn't 'jump the gun' here......... Working 1:12 or whatever figure they might conjure up goes against everything I believe in 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I'd guess 1:13 (with an add on that you need a higher level practitioner eg EYT, EYP - 'as soon as'....' Thought Mr G said he wouldnt change ratios.....another famous U turn? Have always maintained that having EYT or whatever status doesn't mean that you grow an extra pair of eyes, hands........... 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finleysmaid Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Have always maintained that having EYT or whatever status doesn't mean that you grow an extra pair of eyes, hands........... absolutely agree ...the building we work in requires a certain number in order to ensure safety...nothing really to do with the amount of children...just our requirements . Ideally I like to work 2 inside 2 outside and one to float (usually kitchen/loos door etc etc) but we are already running often with 4 or even 3 if numbers are low. I now have limited the number of 2 year olds again next year to 4 so that I don't have to staff at my higher level just can't find ANY decent staff out there! With the quantity of children with eal and send we have I have no idea how we would cope with these levels. I have several who need 1-1 at the moment but no hope of that and with no additional funding it is these children who will suffer the most :( 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueJ Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 It would be quite interesting to know how many EYP/EYTs actually work with the children all session everyday and are counted in ratios. I know I don't - I did my EYP back in the day when the government were going to make it a statutory requirement for every setting (offering over 20 hours) to have an EYP. In the back of my mind I always thought that there was never going to be enough £s to pay a graduate a graduate's wage and also by the same token I wasn't prepared to be held to ransom (so to speak) by a graduate who was a requirement for keeping the setting operating. As the owner/manager of my setting and a sole trader I was the only one "prepared" to be a graduate working for peanuts - LOL - (would do a cynical smiley face but they still aren't working). Whilst SG will not be tinkering with ratios it is already in the guidance that 1:13 is an acceptable ratio for the 3 & 4 year olds so I suspect that this will be the road he travels. As for amounts it's anyone's guess but little clue's may have been left that point to a different rate for the additional 15 hours. Interestingly the latest Ofsted Childcare Inspections report is out showing a decrease in the number of providers (4017 since March 2014 - a significant number of which are childminders) but a slight increase in the number of childcare places ??? https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/443529/02_Childcare_inspections_and_outcomes_key_findings_as_at_31_March_2015.pdf I suspect that there will be a huge drop in the number of providers when the double whammy of pensions and the living wage start impacting - I still find myself talking to providers who don't realise that this will impact them !!!! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsp Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Dark days ahead!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I:13 is deemed, in statutory guidance, to be okay for 3/4 yr olds BUT with a higher level practitioner. As Sunnyday says, they dont come with extra eyes and hands so it would be - quality out of the window, for quantity! Also how many EYPs or EYT are there to go around if its still a requirement? Be really interested to see how this will work in preschool settings? If at all? You would also need to know you would have at least 13 parents taking up the offer to make it financially viable wouldnt you? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Be really interested to see how this will work in preschool settings? If at all? You would also need to know you would have at least 13 parents taking up the offer to make it financially viable wouldnt you? I don't want to offer 30 hours - but in addition I know there just wouldn't be a demand for this - the majority of my families have a stay at home mum or dad or a mum and/or dad who work part time only......those that don't and I can only think of two have their childcare arrangements well and truly sorted out...... I only have two children taking all of their 15 funded hours........ I thank all that is holy that I have parents who actually want to spend time with their children....... 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LKeyteach Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Was talking to two of my practitioners this morning both have degrees in non-EY subjects but have L3. Suggested they should start to look at doing EYTS (have spoken to them previously) one quite rightly pointed out that if she was going to do the programme/course she would be better doing PGCE and going onto teaching where she could earn more money! The only incentive to do achieve the status is because it means to something to us personally. Money as reward does not work for Early Years leaders! However we do still have rent/mortgages to pay, food to buy and clothes to wear so we do require some monetary reward for what we do. the only way is through payment of fees. Now whether this comes from government funding or directly from parents or even a mixture of both it has to be enough. I have not done the calculation but if we go to 1:13 it would mean me halving my team of staff. I would have to find redundancy money to pay them and I would not do the job of two for the same salary so would expect more. I would like to think that these financial whizz kids who work out and advise government spending have thought this one through. BTW I am not saying I would go to 1:13 because I believe adults have the most important role in being with the children and guiding, supporting and nurturing their learning. 1:13 will be crowd control! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I thank all that is holy that I have parents who actually want to spend time with their children....... .......and Amen to that! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Was talking to two of my practitioners this morning both have degrees in non-EY subjects but have L3. Suggested they should start to look at doing EYTS (have spoken to them previously) one quite rightly pointed out that if she was going to do the programme/course she would be better doing PGCE and going onto teaching where she could earn more money! The only incentive to do achieve the status is because it means to something to us personally. Money as reward does not work for Early Years leaders! However we do still have rent/mortgages to pay, food to buy and clothes to wear so we do require some monetary reward for what we do. the only way is through payment of fees. Now whether this comes from government funding or directly from parents or even a mixture of both it has to be enough. I have not done the calculation but if we go to 1:13 it would mean me halving my team of staff. I would have to find redundancy money to pay them and I would not do the job of two for the same salary so would expect more. I would like to think that these financial whizz kids who work out and advise government spending have thought this one through. BTW I am not saying I would go to 1:13 because I believe adults have the most important role in being with the children and guiding, supporting and nurturing their learning. 1:13 will be crowd control! Too right LKeyteach! I couldnt possibly imagine just 2 staff in our setting!! Its sometimes mad enough with 5 of us!! Well, if thats going to be the option (and we're only prempting - the worst here) cant see it working for many! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiptonpreschool Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I honestly can't see this having a happy ending at all!! We are a setting that takes vulnerable 2 year olds at present; however, if we had to compromise our ratio's we would no longer we able to do this-which leads me to ask where will they go? We are a very rural setting and the only one in the village, so parents would have to travel to get their child a funded place...bearing in mind the majority of them would not be able to do this, hence the reason they are entitled to the 2 year old funding. So all these families that have benefited/would benefit are going to be hit hard. The government have emphasised that all settings should be of a high standard of quality to ensure all children reach their full potential and are ready for the next step in their education; this would definitely NOT be achieved with a ratio of 1:13, especially in the format that we all work to at present. Freeflow would be compromised; children who need help toileting would not be able to receive it; children requiring medical attention would take up 1 adult leaving the other person to crowd control 25 children...I could go on but I know you will all have exactly the same fears as me. had an LA provider briefing last week to be told our funding for 2016 has not increased, yet my outgoings have risen dramatically. I have had to opt out of the pensions scheme because if I opted in then I would be personally responsible for bankrupting the preschool and I certainly don't want that to be my legacy or indeed on my conscience. I look forward to hearing what the government has to say; but I do fear that my time in preschool is coming to an end, and that makes me very sad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnyday Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I honestly can't see this having a happy ending at all!! We are a setting that takes vulnerable 2 year olds at present; however, if we had to compromise our ratio's we would no longer we able to do this-which leads me to ask where will they go? We are a very rural setting and the only one in the village, so parents would have to travel to get their child a funded place...bearing in mind the majority of them would not be able to do this, hence the reason they are entitled to the 2 year old funding. So all these families that have benefited/would benefit are going to be hit hard. The government have emphasised that all settings should be of a high standard of quality to ensure all children reach their full potential and are ready for the next step in their education; this would definitely NOT be achieved with a ratio of 1:13, especially in the format that we all work to at present. Freeflow would be compromised; children who need help toileting would not be able to receive it; children requiring medical attention would take up 1 adult leaving the other person to crowd control 25 children...I could go on but I know you will all have exactly the same fears as me. had an LA provider briefing last week to be told our funding for 2016 has not increased, yet my outgoings have risen dramatically. I have had to opt out of the pensions scheme because if I opted in then I would be personally responsible for bankrupting the preschool and I certainly don't want that to be my legacy or indeed on my conscience. I look forward to hearing what the government has to say; but I do fear that my time in preschool is coming to an end, and that makes me very sad. It is all very worrying isn't it....... But let's try hard to not 'jump the gun' - the wait is nearly over and it may not be as bad as we are all thinking - she says hopefully :blink: :rolleyes: :1b 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts