Another consultation - how to get rid of local authority support for childminders etc

[Tunja]

Consultation on proposed changes to the role of the local authority in early education and childcare

Today the Government launches a six week consultation exercise setting out proposals for a changed role for local authorities in the delivery of funded early education for two, three and four-year-olds. We are asking for views on proposals to free local authorities from unnecessary administrative burdens so they can focus on their role as ‘champions’ of children and their families, particularly the most disadvantaged.<
This consultation will open on Monday 25 March and close on Monday 6 May 2013.



As with the school system, the Government wants to see maximum funding passed directly to the frontline and increased autonomy for early years providers in terms of the training and quality improvement support they access, supported by rigorous inspection arrangements.



At a time when resources are under pressure, it does not make sense for local authorities to be conducting their own quality assessments of providers. That is Ofsted’s job. The Government therefore wants Ofsted to be the sole arbiter of quality in the early years to reduce bureaucracy and confusion for providers, local authorities and parents. As announced in ‘More great childcare’, Ofsted will have a greater focus on identifying underperformance in the early years; ensuring that weaker performers are inspected more frequently and that there is greater involvement of Her Majesty’s Inspectors in inspections.



The Government’s proposals are set out in the document ‘Consultation on proposed changes to the role of the local authority in early education and childcare’ https://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=consultationDetails&consultationId=1889&external=no&menu=1



All those who are interested in contributing to the consultation can do so using the Department’s e-consultation website. You can respond electronically on the site using the response form, or print off a copy and send it to the responsible team. All of the details can be found on the website, which can be accessed using the following link Home - Welcome (http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations).

If you have any questions related to the policy content of the consultation, you can contact the Department’s national enquiry line on 0370 000 2288 or email: fundedearlyeducation.Consultation@education.gsi.go v.uk

[Simona]

I didn't read it as only aimed at cms...it says 'providers' so nurseries and preschools are aimed at as well
There are also some possible good proposals..if you look under govt proposals a b c d e

It looks like they may make it easier for all providers to deliver the funding by removing LAs restrictions on who can give it...so cms may benefit without having to belong to a network as long as LAs still gave support?

Reform the early education funding system by simplifying formulas......more money maybe?? I go along with that so we don't subsidise it.

Remove duty from LAs to provide training but power to offer it...tricky this one ...needs reflecting on, I smell a cost to us??

The more I read the more interesting it becomes..

[justgoodfriends]

Interesting that it is proposing that Satisfactory graded minders could draw the FEEE too, not just Good/Outstanding with Level 3.

"Where providers have their own effective quality systems in place, such as providers in chains or for childminders registered with childminder agencies, they should not be required to also receive support from their local authority." - does that mean Independent minders will still be given LA support? probably not..

[Simona]

We need to fight that on many counts...
1. We do not know who will monitor agencies, who they are accountable to or what their quality assurance scheme will be like
what about those agency cms who never get inspected??

2. yes cms not in agencies will still require support from LAs or we won't be able to maintaing our grades
This consultation will give LAs some worry...well we have complained enough about the discrepancy in their support
it openly leaves out 'independent' cms (IC...sorry about the abbreviation, getting fed up typing it!!))...we do not get a mention ...worrying! but we could think of a system....?

3. Pacey has its own Professional Occupational Standards and that should be like a quality assurance based on reflection and hours of CPD clocked each year...they should try to explain that now
not sure about PLA but I am sure they will come out with something...UKCMA ..not sure

4. satisfactory will, I am sure, in future become 'requires improvement' so am against that especially for 2 year olds who need good care

5. this is all to do with 2 year old funding so leaving IC out will mean the scheme flops

any more?

[justgoodfriends]

This could be paving the way for doing away with graded inspections all together? Agency minders won't be graded and still be able to draw the FEEE afterall.

[Simona]

I have just read the whole explanatory document and I only like a couple of bits
Everything will come at a cost like training and support but the rest is unclear...LAs don't have to do many things but they can provide all sorts at our request and at a cost?
How is this going to reduce fees if we pay for training and support?
no mention of networks...what will happen to them?
there is a lot of 'quiet reference' to agencies

The way it is written and 'manipulated' makes me mad...there is a lot of condescending rubbish.
I think I will put it away and reflect another day!

[The Juggler]

i don't think this works on ANY level. You could argue that nurseries have their own development officers/advisors especially in the large chain. But what if that large chain has really low standards.

I don't agree that ANY one providing care to young children should be self regulated /assessed. If LA's advisory role goes, nurseries will have free reign to do what they want with an Ofsted every 4 years or so. CM's - even more scary prospect - self regulating with the odd visit perhaps from an agency person who may, or may not, be qualified in inspecting quality early years care.

These proposals get worse by the minute.

I'm not saying that LA's do a fantastic job and I'm not saying that the jumping through hoops CM's have had to do for years to offer NEG funding is the best way. However, reducing the requirement on CM's to become accredited and having better qualified LA teams/advisors is a far preferable option to self-regulation :panic::panic:

In the rejig of our LA CM's were moved under the umbrella of the advice and inspection team. Most of that team are ofsted inspectors (out of area) as well as their LA role so I think that is only a good thing.