PDA

View Full Version : L A and funding



vals
07-11-2013, 01:15 PM
Since the new guidelines came in my L A has still insisted on its own version of the rules including having to have leve; 3 to offer the 15 hours. Today I spoke to them and they have changed and are now letting us offer it if we have a good/outstanding, then they want to look at our learning journals and thats it. phew. I am doing my level 3 but its takes time (and motivation) and I was worried I wouldn't get it done in time. Still need it for 2 year old funding.

Simona
09-11-2013, 10:25 AM
Since the new guidelines came in my L A has still insisted on its own version of the rules including having to have leve; 3 to offer the 15 hours. Today I spoke to them and they have changed and are now letting us offer it if we have a good/outstanding, then they want to look at our learning journals and thats it. phew. I am doing my level 3 but its takes time (and motivation) and I was worried I wouldn't get it done in time. Still need it for 2 year old funding.

LAs are still imposing 'additional' conditions but they are not allowed to do so whether it relates to qualifications, accreditation or anything else
The only thing that matters is your grade at inspection!

bunyip
09-11-2013, 10:41 AM
The current problem AFAIU is the result of sloppy tinkering with existing legislation.

The Childcare Act and its amendments holds LAs responsible for overseeing childcare in their area. But Ofsted (plus their Scottish/Welsh equivalents) are also responsible and More Affordable Childcare appears to take much of the LA control but without repealing any part of the Childcare Act.

Put simply, I believe LAs are worried they may be held responsible for aspects of childcare/welfare over which they may not necessarily have any control.

Really, it's just one big mess. :(

Simona
09-11-2013, 11:18 AM
The current problem AFAIU is the result of sloppy tinkering with existing legislation.

The Childcare Act and its amendments holds LAs responsible for overseeing childcare in their area. But Ofsted (plus their Scottish/Welsh equivalents) are also responsible and More Affordable Childcare appears to take much of the LA control but without repealing any part of the Childcare Act.

Put simply, I believe LAs are worried they may be held responsible for aspects of childcare/welfare over which they may not necessarily have any control.

Really, it's just one big mess. :(

Yes it is a big mess Bunyip but I also apportion a certain amount of blame to the LAs

When they were funded to support ALL cms they chose to create Networks that left many cms out of support unless they chose to belong to one....if they had a network in the first place that is?

Now that the govt has realised it needs cms to deliver the funding for the scheme to be a success LAs are intervening and adding conditions...wish they had embraced all cms in the first place and we would not have this ridiculous situation now

I agree that LAs will also be worried about the quality and held responsible and I also agree that some basic qualifications are required for cms in such a demanding and responsible job...it is Truss et all who have decided CMs do not need qualifications despite Prof Nutbrown recommending this

So we are going round in ever increasing circles and getting nowhere in my view! Nothing great or affordable in this childcare revolution!

KatieFS
10-11-2013, 09:09 AM
Very interesting thread now all the changes in my la are making sense

lilac_dragon
10-11-2013, 11:07 AM
Since the new guidelines came in my L A has still insisted on its own version of the rules including having to have leve; 3 to offer the 15 hours. Today I spoke to them and they have changed and are now letting us offer it if we have a good/outstanding, then they want to look at our learning journals and thats it. phew. I am doing my level 3 but its takes time (and motivation) and I was worried I wouldn't get it done in time. Still need it for 2 year old funding.

Another childminder locally has spoken to our LA and been told the same, and that they will be visiting to go over her LJ's etc every 6 weeks or so.

Shamai
10-11-2013, 11:31 AM
I've been approached by one of my parents to ask if I can provide funding for her 3yo, who will be entitled to receive it from January 2014. My LA have said I still need to be accredited but when I told them this was no longer the case, they replied that I have been misinformed :panic: Is there something in writing we can send our LAs to back us up? Where can I find the new guidelines?

Simona
10-11-2013, 12:49 PM
I've been approached by one of my parents to ask if I can provide funding for her 3yo, who will be entitled to receive it from January 2014. My LA have said I still need to be accredited but when I told them this was no longer the case, they replied that I have been misinformed :panic: Is there something in writing we can send our LAs to back us up? Where can I find the new guidelines?

LAs are very aware that the only criteria for cms to draw funding is their grade...many are still applying conditions that are not required
We can understand why some LAs are concerned at opening the funding to all cms but this is the system now
This article explains what Truss is trying to achieve but there are more documents that you can point to your LA...the last one is the Question and Answer session Truss held via Nursery World when she repeated the same message...I will post it later when I locate it

Exclusive: The Minister's View - Shaping more affordable childcare | Nursery World (http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1194592/exclusive-ministers-view---shaping-affordable-childcare?DCMP=EMC-CONNurseryWorldUpdate&bulletin=nursery-world-update-bulletin)

Here is the link to Truss replies to the sector and specifically on funding for CMs

Exclusive: Ask the Minister | Nursery World (http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1215619/exclusive-ask-minister)

blue bear
10-11-2013, 12:56 PM
There was a post some time ago about these I believe the gist was.
The law states la must be responsible
Revised eyfs (more great childcare or whatever). September 2013 states la's should let all childminders access funding as along as graded.... Etc etc.
The thing that makes the difference is the wording should or must

Until the law is changed to must let all childminders.... Etc etc. then la's can still add conditions although it is frowned upon.

Simona
10-11-2013, 01:03 PM
There was a post some time ago about these I believe the gist was.
The law states la must be responsible
Revised eyfs (more great childcare or whatever). September 2013 states la's should let all childminders access funding as along as graded.... Etc etc.
The thing that makes the difference is the wording should or must

Until the law is changed to must let all childminders.... Etc etc. then la's can still add conditions although it is frowned upon.

You are right Bluebear ...Truss does state that LAs MUST not wait for the law to change as this is not a reasonable excuse

This is her statement
''Our guidance to local authorities is clear that all good and outstanding providers – including childminders – are automatically eligible for 2, 3 and 4-year-old funding. There is no requirement that childminders must be part of a network to receive funding. Local authorities must not depart from the guidance unless they have good reason to do so. Waiting until the law is changed is not an acceptable reason to refuse to allow good and outstanding childminders access to funding. If your local LA is putting up barriers then I would urge you to get in touch with me at ministers@education.gsi.gov.uk.''

Shamai
10-11-2013, 08:13 PM
LAs are very aware that the only criteria for cms to draw funding is their grade...many are still applying conditions that are not required
We can understand why some LAs are concerned at opening the funding to all cms but this is the system now
This article explains what Truss is trying to achieve but there are more documents that you can point to your LA...the last one is the Question and Answer session Truss held via Nursery World when she repeated the same message...I will post it later when I locate it

Exclusive: The Minister's View - Shaping more affordable childcare | Nursery World (http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1194592/exclusive-ministers-view---shaping-affordable-childcare?DCMP=EMC-CONNurseryWorldUpdate&bulletin=nursery-world-update-bulletin)

Here is the link to Truss replies to the sector and specifically on funding for CMs

Exclusive: Ask the Minister | Nursery World (http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1215619/exclusive-ask-minister)

Thank you so much Simona, I will go armed with this evidence to my LA Locality Officer or else my parent may have no choice but to send her child to nursery. I cannot afford to lose the business and my parent cannot afford to miss out on the funding - why should she?. As Arnie said, "I'll be back"..... :thumbsup:

AgentTink
10-11-2013, 08:42 PM
I have been fighting this issue since August and it is my question that is in that nursery world article as my LA stated that they were waiting for the law to change. After a lot of emails back and forth to the DfE i got this response on 28th October:

Thank you for your email of 9October 2013 to the Minister, Elizabeth Truss MP, regarding an article in Nursery World title ‘Exclusive: Ask the Minister’.
I note that you have written to the Department on a number of occasions seeking clarification about funding for childminders rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ to deliver early education places.
You mentioned that your local authority, Sefton, had restricted childminders’ access to the delivery of funded early education places and you had questioned whether this was in line with the Department’s statutory guidance.
I can confirm that we have been in contact with Sefton regarding your query and have been able to clarify our guidance with them that childminders rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted should be able to deliver funded places to eligible children without additional local authority quality assessment . I am pleased to be able to tell you that Sefton have assured me that they will be in contact with you, and any other childminders who have found themselves in a similar position, to communicate the changes.




I am glad to report that a few days later my LA backed down and have now opened up the funding with no additional local authority quality assessment. So it goes to show that the LA's are not always right and with a bit of a battle we can get their decisions overturned. :thumbsup:
.

bunyip
11-11-2013, 09:09 AM
It's good to hear that some pressure has been applied and thus encouraged some LAs to make the changes before the legislation has gone through.

However, I do feel uncomfortable about the idea of any Whitehall department or Minister (and the strong-willed and intransigent Ms Truss in particular) using their weight and influence to simply lean on LAs, instead of sticking to even the sham 'democracy' of parliamentary process and waiting until legislation in the matter is properly passed.

Dictatorship-by-DoE is all jolly nice whilst it's delivering the things CMs want, but will we be celebrating when the tables are turned and the same pressure is used to enforce non-statutory measures that we disagree with? It's not as if Ms Truss can be described as the CM's friend, and we all know there is a lot in More Affordable Childcare that may damage the childcare industry and our livelihoods.

eg. What if Truss and her cronies decide that the agency trial is such a "success" that they can simply decree that the time has come to throw the doors open for anyone wishing to start an agency? Why wait for legislation? If it's the government's "clear guidance" and "intention", why not just go ahead with it? Why not say that "waiting for legislation is not an acceptable reason for delay"? These are all the arguments we're happy for Truss to use to override the LA's - so why should she not use the same arguments to impose agencies before waiting for the legislation? :huh: And then, of course, she can lean on the LAs once more to ensure they co-operate closely with the agencies to make them an even bigger "success". :panic:

When we become comfortable with "the ends justify the means" we should take care and consider where this will take us. :(

Simona
11-11-2013, 06:42 PM
Thank you so much Simona, I will go armed with this evidence to my LA Locality Officer or else my parent may have no choice but to send her child to nursery. I cannot afford to lose the business and my parent cannot afford to miss out on the funding - why should she?. As Arnie said, "I'll be back"..... :thumbsup:

Well done you :thumbsup:
I will have to wait until the end of the month when my LA ...hopefully...will explain why I have to sign a contract first then be declared 'suitable' to do the funding (my grade is my suitability) and then 'audited'...how painful is that??

As you said I will come back!!!

in the meantime Truss has been praising the 2 year old scheme as 'successful' but say 92,000 2 year olds are now receiving 'free childcare'...so we are now been paid for childcare but subsidise education?

Here is the link
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/92000-2-year-olds-already-receiving-free-childcare

bunyip
11-11-2013, 08:58 PM
Well done you :thumbsup:


in the meantime Truss has been praising the 2 year old scheme as 'successful' but say 92,000 2 year olds are now receiving 'free childcare'...so we are now been paid for childcare but subsidise education?



Funny she should say that. We're told quite strongly that the 15 hours funding is for education and not for childcare. Hence, we aren't allowed to draw funding for care provided before 0700 or after 1900.

This in turn is odd, given that we're not allowed to put the EYFS on ice and stop educating the lo's for learning and development at any time.

And then there's lovely Mr Clegg suggesting you can't be outstanding unless you're available 24/7 - in the way that schools and nurseries aren't.

Am I the only one who fails to see the consistency in any of this? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Simona
11-11-2013, 09:18 PM
Funny she should say that. We're told quite strongly that the 15 hours funding is for education and not for childcare. Hence, we aren't allowed to draw funding for care provided before 0700 or after 1900.

This in turn is odd, given that we're not allowed to put the EYFS on ice and stop educating the lo's for learning and development at any time.

And then there's lovely Mr Clegg suggesting you can't be outstanding unless you're available 24/7 - in the way that schools and nurseries aren't.

Am I the only one who fails to see the consistency in any of this? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

I have been asking this question all day and still getting no answer Bunyip :angry:
Consistency here matters not one jot as we are referring to politicians!!

I have just heard that 3 year olds in schools get funded immediately as they turn 3 ...while for us is the term after their 3rd birthday...have I missed this all along?