Ceeda research team calculate £500 million shortfall in early years funding

[FSFRebecca]

Following the treasury select committee's damning comments on the early years funding calculations Ceeda have calculated that there will be a £500 million shortfall in early years funding. You can read the Ceeda report here.

This, from the Pre-school Learning Alliance news site explains the headlines clearly "Accurate hourly costs: An hour of quality care and education for three- and four-year-olds is estimated to cost £5.08 an hour to deliver – 17% more than the average rate paid to providers. As  a result, Ceeda has calculated that there is a total funding shortfall of £370 million across the various funded childcare offers available to parents, even with additional funds available to providers such as the Early Year Pupil Premium, SEN inclusion funding and Disability Access Funding.Total annual shortfall: However, Ceeda’s research also revealed that the majority of early years providers use the income from places for three- and four-year-olds to cross-subsidise losses made on places for younger children. With this factored in, Ceeda belives that the total annual shortfall for all care delivered by PVI settings is £536 million." (by Rachel Lawler, PLA)

[FARM]

I think the Government’s aim is to encourage all schools to set up nurseries and to squeeze the private sector out by continuing to fund us poorly. 

Strange thinking really when we, the private sector, have subsidised early years education for them for many years.

It would be far more cost effective for the Government to let the private sector flourish and do what we do - which is by far a superior job! 

[FARM]

We receive £3.85 an hour with no additional funding. 

Our days are numbered! 

[finleysmaid]

2 minutes ago, FARM said:

I think the Government’s aim is to encourage all schools to set up nurseries and to squeeze the private sector out by continuing to fund us poorly. 

Strange thinking really when we, the private sector, have subsidised early years education for them for many years.

It would be far more cost effective for the Government to let the private sector flourish and do what we do - which is by far a superior job! 

In this area this would be impossible as schools do not have the room for expansion. We have currently had 3 local school expand to 2/3 form entry but this means there is even less room for Nursery provision so the reliance on PVI's has increased but we currently are underfunded by about 38p per child per hour and certainly don't get the amount that the borough is allocated by the government.

Additional funding streams are a joke...most people in this area (Expensive Berkshire!) cannot claim EYPP because there is no way they could afford to live round here on that income level. Disability funding is rare I would think for most of us unless you have a child with physical needs and even then trying to claim seems long winded and don't even get me started on SEND funding ...without an EHCP or diagnosis again this seems and unlikely stream.

So this year we have had to insist on children doing 5xmornings or 5x afternoons or 5x full days (plus additional lunch clubs and after school provision) in order to try and minimise loss. The results have been that we are financially stable for this year (next one less so!) but I have had it in the neck from parents wanting to know why they can't have 1/2/3/4 sessions rather than a full week. My reply? you can have it as it is or there will be no pre-school!

[FARM]

Sounds very sensible finleysmaid!

We just offer the 15 free hours. Luckily I have a building, if I didn’t it would obviously be impossible to do!