Answers to some questions posted by members - PACEY and accessing local funding

[Chatterbox Childcare]

PACEY has highlighted members' concerns on their ability to access EYE funding, the variable fee paid by local authorities and other matters during the consultation process with DFE

This is the link<http://www.**************/pdf/Role%20of%20LA%20response%20form%20%20PACEY%2007%2 005%2013.pdf> to full consultation in the members area

An excerpt of the consultation:

PACEY welcomes the Government’s proposal to revise statutory guidance to make it clear to local authorities that they should make decisions on whether to fund early education providers to deliver places solely on the basis of Ofsted inspection judgements. Removing requirements for local authorities to add locally‐defined eligibility criteria will give clarity to providers, as they will be certain what standard they need to meet in order to receive funding to deliver the entitlement. It is likely to increase the number of providers willing to deliver free early education.

This is of particular importance for childminders who are often prevented from delivering free early education even if their Ofsted rating is good. There have been mixed experiences of being inspected and monitored by local authorities. For example, there have been instances where local authorities have demanded information not required by the EYFS or Ofsted, causing confusion and placing unnecessary burden on providers.

However for this to have a positive impact to the quality of care available there needs to be confidence in the robustness of Ofsted grading. If eligibility to fund places is based purely on Ofsted grades, PACEY would like to see more robust standardisation of the grading procedure to ensure fairness and accuracy. At present grading seems to vary and some
inspectors seem to have differing priorities. There needs to be the same procedures applied across the sector whatever the provision.

It is important to note that although PACEY agrees that local authorities should not be able to set extra conditions on providers, this does not mean that PACEY supports the reduction of local authority responsibility to ensure that there is high quality provision in their localities. PACEY believes that local authorities should play a complimentary role to Ofsted’s role of checking compliance and judging quality, by focusing on building on quality and capacity in the sector.

Local authorities are best placed to improve quality because they have the adequate indepth knowledge of local provision gained through engagement with providers. Local authorities also have the incentive to improve quality to ensure that they are able to fulfil their broader sufficiency duties and objectives under the Childcare Act 2006. For example, they are required to work with providers and other partners such as the NHS to improve the outcomes for all children up to five years old and reduce inequalities between them.

[Simona]

I am puzzled by this post
Most cms would agree with pacey statement that LAs are continuing to put barriers in our way to access funding, hopefully the matter will be sorted
We would also agree that LAs are the best at supporting cms as they have knowledge of local needs and local cms...
I am sure that those who have responded to the consultation on the changing role of the LAs will have stated that they need to remain in place to support us in between inspections to maintain our grades and offer training and support
That has been my clear response

What I feel is unacceptable that it is up to cms to engage with their LA rather than the DfE issuing clear guidelines on what is required by LAs to be in place by September...I feel that is the job of those who represent us to smooth the way to implementation and ensure cms do not have to fight their LA

Speaking for myself I will have spent around £250 to attend two conferences where the DfE repeats the same message 'no barriers should be in cms way' and nothing has come of it since last December