There is general agreement in the early years and childcare sector on the need to strive for a better trained and better paid workforce, so why has the response of providers to the Transformation Fund (TF) apparently been so lacklustre and take-up so low?
First, most providers and local authority workforce development managers will conclude that the DfES is in denial as it insists that 'take-up of qualifications at all levels has been very encouraging'. Anecdotal evidence from many local authorities suggests otherwise, with many providers shunning the chance to apply for the recruitment incentive and the quality premium (see box).
The DfES has been monitoring returns from local authorities, but when asked to provide details of take- up, a spokesman stated, 'Local authorities predict to spend TF funding on around 40,000 new qualifications at levels 3, 4 and 5, and to spend 18m on training to support children with special educational needs and disabilities.'
Claire Schofield, National Day Nurseries Association head of communications, says, 'We have been asking the DfES for data on what the uptake has been across the country. That would be valuable to show where it's worked and where it hasn't worked so well, and what steps need to be taken.'
Emma Knights, Daycare Trust joint chief executive, says, 'We don't have proper figures and so we are really adding up a lot of anecdotes to make a whole. But if the fund is underspent, we don't want anyone to take the message from that that it is not a useful fund. We think it could be phenomenally useful, but more needs to be done to help people gain qualifications they need and enhance their pay.' The Trust indicated in its annual report that the TF was 'underspent and work was underway to discover the reasons for this'.
Pulling the rug
Perhaps the most obvious reason for the apparently slow response to the Fund is the uncertainty surrounding its future after 2008. While the Government has set ambitious long-term targets for upskilling the workforce and ensuring graduates in every setting by 2015, its approach to funding this process appears to many to be short-term.
Emma Knights says, 'The short- term nature of the funding means that some providers are not inclined to participate in something which they feel may be pulled from under them in a very short time. We will certainly be pressing the Treasury that the fund needs to be continued in order for people to plan ahead.
'We need a concerted lobby to get the holders of the purse-strings to understand that it is counterproductive not to give people reassurances. I realise civil servants do not want to be seen to be pre-empting the Comprehensive Spending Review next year, but at the same time it is inhibiting people taking up the money now.'
Ana Simons, workforce strategy manager at Devon County Council, says the inflexibility of the guidelines and the 'rigidity of the bureaucracy'
surrounding the fund has effectively excluded rural small providers. Under the fund rules, they have to have 20 children registered to qualify (see Letters, page 30).
Devon has an initial target of six recruitment incentives (RI) and ten quality premiums (QP), which she says should be achieved and might be exceeded, 'but only by a tiny amount'. Most of the money accessed through the TF has been put into raising the qualifications of practitioners to level 3 and beyond.
Ms Simons believes that a key reason for the low take-up of the RI is that there are few people in the sector with degrees. 'The career route to get there seems to have missed out the fact that the vast majority of people in the sector have level 3. So to put all this money and energy in a really short time into level 6s is not appreciating the fact that if we are to grow our sector in a reasonable timeframe, then it's getting people to level 4 where you need the big investment,' she says.
She cites as another reason for the low take-up a shortage of trainers and assessors with a higher education background and the necessary skills and experience.
Spare parts
Like many authorities, Essex County Council has held roadshows to promote the fund to providers. But Harriet Hill, head of early years and childcare in Essex, says some may opt 'to grow their own graduate', rather than recruit one. She also questions whether employing a graduate would mean a setting 'losing' an employee, especially if it already has a member of staff leading on the Foundation Stage.
In Gloucestershire 173 settings are eligible for the QP or RI funding. So far, seven have received the RI and 27 the QP. Workforce development manager Janet Sharpe says the authority has held drop-in surgeries and has given advice and support to providers. A Transformation Fund co-ordinator ensures that everyone involved in early years and childcare is fully informed. 'We have taken the view that we need to open up opportunities and break down barriers to the funding for settings, but 75 per cent of them have yet to come forward with applications,' she says.
She adds, 'We have taken a very pro-active approach, made our applications very simple and tried to look at it from the settings' point of view. The original guidance document was complex and applying could have been difficult.'
The county includes a large number of sessional providers and they feel marginalised, says Ms Sharpe, because they have been unable to access the QP and RI funding. Gloucestershire is currently engaged in a pilot scheme for the DfES, trying to enable two sessional settings to work together to meet the criteria.
She welcomes the investment that the Transformation Fund represents, but for many providers in Gloucestershire it is a huge step to restructure their staff teams to accommodate a graduate role. Many providers would rather develop their 'mainly level 3' staff teams, but this takes time.
Apart from the 'leap of faith' expected of providers to use the fund to take on - and sustain - a graduate, Ms Sharpe believes there has been a major underestimation of the need for providers to restructure their businesses and staff teams. She reckons the money would be better spent on ensuring 'the throughput of people getting qualified and having opportunities after level 3'.
Higher fees
Particular concern has been expressed about the stipulation that providers cannot charge more than 175 a week, or 205 in London, for a nursery place in order to secure funding. This effectively rules out daycare providers in the south-east and some areas of London where nursery fees are higher.
Ms Sharpe regards this as a significant factor in the low take up among providers in the capital, but Denise Burke, London Development Agency senior childcare manager, says, 'I don't believe it is the main issue, which is that boroughs need to do a lot more work with providers on this.
'Some boroughs have just sent out invitations to bid to providers, but having worked on the Childcare Affordability Programme in London I know how important it is to nurture and persuade them. We do have a ten-year strategy that has not been completed and I think some boroughs need to be more committed.'
Claire Schofield says the 175 cap may also influence the thinking of providers whose fees are set just below this level. They may be put off applying because of concern that rises in business rates and utility bills will oblige them subsequently to raise fees. 'The reward of the fund is probably not enough to tie themselves into that cap on their fees,' she adds.
But while there are general misgivings about the way the fund has been structured, there is a consensus that any money for the training and development of the workforce should be welcomed.
As Ann Spetch, quality, education and care manager at York City Council early years service, says, 'I understand all the concerns of the sector, but I feel it's an opportunity and we have to try to make the best use of it for our practitioners while we know that we have the money.'
How long they have the money and how much will depend ultimately on the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review. But if the TF continues to remain underspent, the Treasury could opt to channel the money elsewhere - and no-one in the sector wants that.
Transformation Fund at a glance
* Worth 250m and made available from April this year until August 2008.
* It has four elements:
1 A recruitment incentive (RI) of 3,000 in each year for PVI full daycare settings to take on a graduate
2 A quality premium (QP) of 5,000, only available to settings already employing someone with a level 5 or 6 qualification, though the premium can be spent on training for other staff too
3 Money for training staff to level 3 and above
4 Funds for disability and special educational needs training.
