MPs call for single funding system for early years and primary education

The report by the Children, Schools and Families Committee is calling for the Government to examine a unified funding system because the distinction between early years and primary education is becoming ‘blurred’, with some four-year-olds starting school and therefore funded through the schools formula, while others are in early years settings and would be funded by the EYSFF.

The committee looked at the potential impact of the Early Years Single Funding Formula, amid concerns that it would force maintained nursery schools to close.

The report concluded that it would be disastrous if the excellent provision in nursery schools was lost as a result of implementing the new funding formula.

It said, ‘The year’s delay in full implementation must be used to settle nerves and restore some stability to the sector, and to rework funding formulae where necessary.’

However, the concept of the formula was not flawed, the committee said.

‘While the Early Years Single Funding Formula may have its faults, it can, if the underlying principles are applied carefully and consistently, be sufficiently versatile to fund all settings sustainably and in a way which respects and rewards the varying provision offered,’ said the report.

It recommends that the Government review all early years single finding formulae – whether proposed or implemented – by autumn 2010.

In an interview with Nursery World, the committee’s chair, Barry Sheerman, said there needed to be more funding focused on the early years of a child’s life.

‘This is the time to spend money on children for intensive support and help,’ he said.

Asked whether introducing a system of funding for children from two to 11 would mean more money for private and voluntary providers in the early years, he said, ‘I would have thought it would mean that everyone would get more money, regardless of the sector. It would prioritise the age that you get more support.’

In relation to the potential impact of the new Code of Practice in forcing private and voluntary nurseries and pre-schools to pull out of offering the free entitlement, Mr Sheerman said, ‘If any [Government] department saw the range and diversity [of provision] diminishing, they would have to look at the rate.

‘The Government has got to set a rate and monitor it and be willing to revise it, if there are unintended consequences. No-one wants a catastrophic drop in settings. The Government has got to carefully monitor the situation.’

The committee’s report also recommends that it be mandatory for local authorities to introduce a quality supplement, noting that it had been ‘astonished’ that so many local authorities had failed to take this up.

The supplement should be used to recognise high quality provision, for example, for employing teachers and other well qualified staff.

The committee said it was unacceptable that only around half of all councils had incorporated a supplement into the funding formula.

Mr Sheerman said, ‘You’ve got to reward quality. Local authorities have got the ability to reward quality. When a high percentage [of settings] are not high quality, there should be cause for concern.’

The Graduate Leader Fund must not be allowed to peter out, to continue the recruitment and retention of graduate level staff in early years settings, the report also said.