30 Hours, Part 5: York - Collective action

Extended free childcare got off to a shaky start in early implementer York, when more than 30 providers pulled out of the scheme last year, blaming underfunding. Rates were initially set at £3.38 for the first 15 hours and £3.95 for the second. However, talks between providers, the council and the DfE resulted in the rate being raised to a flat £4 an hour.

Now, 86 per cent of providers in York have signed up to deliver the 30 hours. ‘Discussions about a fair hourly rate came to a good conclusion, but there are challenges ahead for how the new formula will impact the hourly rate,’ says Barbara Mands, head of childcare strategy at City of York Council. A consultation has taken place with York providers on a new Early Years Single Funding Formula, and local authority proposals have been considered by the local schools forum; it is currently proposed that the base rate will remain £4 per hour for 2017/18. Some providers say this is still not enough, and are meeting with minister Caroline Dinenage to express concerns.

In many ways, all eyes are on York as the flagship local authority when it comes to the 30 hours. It is the only area where the trial embraces all eligible children in all types of childcare. The then childcare minister Sam Gyimah chose the city for the national press launch of the scheme. ‘York is a small unitary authority perceived as affluent, but with a low-wage economy linked to the tourist industry, and with small areas of deprivation,’ says Ms Mands. ‘There are 40 nurseries, 21 primary schools, 96 childminders, 39 playgroups and five independent schools participating in the pilot.’

HIGH DEMAND

As with other early implementers, York, which has approximately 1,480 families eligible for the 30 hours, has found that demand for places has been high. ‘Some 83 per cent of applications have been approved, and 79 per cent have been taken up – that’s 1,176 places,’ says Ms Mands. To support parents with information about available childcare, the council has devised a childcare ‘widget’, which gives parents up-to- date information on providers and their vacancies through a live link to the Family Information Service.

‘After-school clubs could become regular providers of the 30 hours, and there are a number of groups involved in a feasibility study about this,’ says Ms Mands. ‘York is the first local authority to carry out a feasibility study to bring additional capacity and flexibility to the market to support the 30 hours, and there are six out of 53 clubs taking part.’

A small number of parents are already accessing the funded hours in these settings, using others to make up their 30 hours. ‘Early findings show parents have found it extremely valuable to be able to spread their entitlement with wraparound care and are planning to use some of their hours during the main school holidays to reduce costs during this period,’ she explains.

In York, links between primary schools and nurseries, playgroups and childminders have been cultivated as part of a model called Shared Foundation Partnerships. Ms Mands calls the model ‘well-researched’, which has been ‘key to the successful delivery of places so far, via signposting to vacancies with other providers and collaboration on identifying and meeting unmet demand’.

Each Partnership shares the aim to improve quality and outcomes for young children by sharing good practice and having good transitions in place, as well as increasing the availability and flexibility of places from six in the morning to eight in the evening. However, they are encouraged to meet these aims in a way which responds to local community needs and preferences, and to develop their own name and logo to communicate to parents.

CASE STUDY: POLLY ANNA’S DAY NURSERY, HAXBY

Having initially declined to take part in the 30 hours pilot, Ken McArthur, owner of Polly Anna’s Day Nursery, only came on board when the rate rose to £4. Polly Anna’s offers parents of funded children two choices: a free, basic service, equivalent to that at a maintained nursery school or nursery class; or a service including paid-for elements.

‘The regulations are based on a school day, not what we offer as a private nursery,’ says Mr McArthur. ‘Look at maintained nurseries and see what they do – that is the free offer. If you do anything above that, you can charge for it. I am saying to parents you can have a place for free but you can’t have any additional services. There is nothing in the statutory guidance that says you can’t charge; it says you can't make it compulsory or conditional on being offered a place. What is the difference between me charging for services and schools providing a breakfast club and after-school club that parents have to pay for?’

Additional services also include a guaranteed place, whereas parents taking up the totally free offer are not guaranteed a place for the next term. So far no parent has decided to take up the basic offer, as it doesn’t fit with their needs, says Mr McArthur. Children only leave the setting once a year to go to primary school, but every term, children come from the toddler room to the three-year-old area. ‘In the autumn term, I had eight children who had not yet turned three but I knew they would before January. I guaranteed them a place in my pre-school, so I was operating the whole term with eight children missing. That costs me a large sum of money, it is an additional service that people want and are prepared to pay for. State nurseries are a bit of a lottery – the local authority says you have got a place, with strict hours.’

Parents have been supportive. Mr McArthur says it is important for settings to communicate clearly with parents well before their child becomes eligible for the funded hours, or at the booking-in stage. He ensures parents make their decision in writing, to lessen misunderstandings.

Although there were concerns about capacity issues, Mr McArthur says these have not been realised, as the majority of funded children were already accessing 30 hours. He says most of the children in his setting – around 95 per cent – who were eligible for 15 hours are now eligible for 30. ‘If they do three full days a week, 52 weeks a year, they will be getting a substantially reduced bill,’ he says. ‘I am offering 30 hours to working families in a way they want to access it, and they are happy to pay for that.’

While Mr McArthur accepts the £4 rate, he has concerns about how much of his income is now dependent on fixed-rate government funding, particularly following increases to the National Living Wage, and a significant rise in business rates. ‘My ability to react to cost increases is far more restricted and the pot I have influence over has shrunk,’ he says. ‘The review of nursery business rates was not known when the Government formulated the amount they need to fund early years by, and the funding rate in 2017 is insufficient to cover current wage rates.’

However, local authority support is very important, he says. ‘Without their help, possibly this would never have worked. You have to have a local authority that works in partnership with the PVI sector. The LA knows how important early years is to the education of children in York.’

Double time

James Hempsall, who has the support contract to aid delivery of the 30 hours, discusses York’s pilot

There is no differentiation between early years and childcare in the EYFS. This is for a good reason: it sends the wrong message to everyone. So the need for funding rates to be the same for the first 15 and the second 15 hours has been a key learning point in York. I welcome the DfE’s assertion this should be the case from September 2017.

The York case is an illustration of the importance of local authority and provider relationships, of open communication and information-sharing. The hub model appears to have actively made this happen, and I imagine supported the important function of providing information for parents.

Many providers have been generous in the past by not charging for the additional services they have provided within the first 15 hours, offering meals, trips, transport and other services as part of their standard offer. Meals have always been chargeable, but this clearly becomes a more relevant issue when children are being government-funded for up to 30 hours.

That said, the ability to pay for at least 40 per cent of families is more limited as they are on low incomes or benefits – this needs a sensitive and balanced approach. There is a big difference between charging for a lunchtime and a lunchtime meal. Families should also have the option of bringing a packed lunch. But there are possible tensions with Ofsted, quality and health and safety, something schools manage on a daily basis.

I always value listening to providers, and Ken McArthur from Polly Anna’s is no exception. The DfE’s Statutory Guidance and Operational Guidance (model agreements, out two weeks ago) aims to achieve a clarity on charging that he and other providers need.

I can see too from York’s experience how wraparound care will become a key delivery partner for 30 hours, and for families wanting a stretched offer in term times and school holidays. This is something that I welcome, as it gives these sorts of providers access to a new Government revenue stream for the first time.