2 Year Funding

[childminder54]

I think it is so bad with the LA that I cannot look after my grandson for the 2 year old 15 hours funding he has to go to nursery to claim it. What different does it make if I look after him it is so wrong.

[Mouse]

It's all to do with a technicality and isn't down to your LA.

The Children's Act (I think) states that childcare is provided by someone not related to the child. Therefore, if you look after a relative, you are not providing childcare. The funding is only available for childcare so, as you're not providing childcare, you can't receive the funding.
It's all pretty rubbish and not something anyone really seems bothered about challenging (as in, no representing bodies are doing anything about it.)

LAs are supposed to be able to find money from other sources if they want to fund childminders to have their grandchildren, but I don't know of any that do. It may be worth asking your LA if you haven't already.

[Simona]

I think it is so bad with the LA that I cannot look after my grandson for the 2 year old 15 hours funding he has to go to nursery to claim it. What different does it make if I look after him it is so wrong.

It is the DfE that refuses to review this issue for cms....totally and utterly discriminatory and unacceptable and needs some representing associations to push a bit further....some work has been done but the DfE has put up a brick wall and put fingers in their ears.

If you worked in a nursery and your grandson attended there it would be no problem....unfortunately that is the problem.

Having said that the LAs do have the choice to fund you ...as Mouse says...look in the DfE guidance 'Early Education and Childcare' and it says LAs can fund places from other sources of funding not the one provided by the govt'....ring them up and ask them and put up a fight. if you can.

The argument has always been it is childcare not education...that is now almost dissolved into thin air and couldn't stand up as an excuse...look no further than the 30 hour of 'childcare'...I would base my argument on that.

I hope CMs will continue to push for this to be sorted!

[natlou82]

I agree, I have looked after my nephew since he was 5 months old. Once the 30 hours comes in its going to cause a real dilemma as my SIL doesn't want him in a school nursery for so many hours, but why should she lose out and have to pay me if he stays in my care. From a business point of view I also don't want to be providing wraparound for those accessing their 30 hours elsewhere, I want to be able to offer the hours myself.

[Simona]

I agree, I have looked after my nephew since he was 5 months old. Once the 30 hours comes in its going to cause a real dilemma as my SIL doesn't want him in a school nursery for so many hours, but why should she lose out and have to pay me if he stays in my care. From a business point of view I also don't want to be providing wraparound for those accessing their 30 hours elsewhere, I want to be able to offer the hours myself.

anyone who is affected by this anomaly should contact the DfE or Sam Gyimah himself...write to whoever you think is best and make a noise about it
remember how they tell us they are listening to parents and wanting to do the best for them following the survey launched prior to the 30 hours announcement?
If parents themselves raise this issue during the 'implementers' trials they may have a bit of hope it will be reviewed....the other way of doing this is to bargain with your LA when they come begging for placed for the 30 hours.

Good luck!... keep in mind not all 2 year olds get funded but they do have a right to at least 15 hours

[natlou82]

Thanks Simona :-)