Why regulatory reform will boost numbers and perception of childminders
Elizabeth Truss MP
Friday, May 11, 2012
Despite the Government spending 7bn on childcare per year, British parents currently pay 27% of their income on childcare.
A poorly structured system means we are not getting value for money. In particular, the number of childminders has halved over the past decade. Many childminders have left because they felt it was too bureaucratic without sufficient rewards.
Last year, visiting and inspecting around 55,000 childminders cost Ofsted £21.1 million – nearly £400 per year per childminder. Yet there are concerns over inspections. A recent study by academics from Oxford University and the Daycare Trust found that Ofsted childcare ratings are an unreliable measure of quality.
This is recognised by the head of Ofsted Sir Michael Wilshaw who admitted at the Education Select Committee that, 'We need to think about the future and how we inspect childminding institutions. I do not think we can carry on doing it as we are doing it at the moment: every time a youngster goes into a childminding setting, we have to inspect. That is unsustainable.'
Childminders follow the early years framework and those receiving funding are expected to be a member of a childminding network. These networks were set up to provide peer support and training but vary considerably from area to area and can be difficult to sustain in disadvantaged areas this is due to the lack of clear incentive to run a network. Often, the different forms of support and inspection are not well co-ordinated.
Instead of the status quo, I advocate Ofsted regulating local agencies who support a number of childminders. This role could be taken up by nurseries, children’s centres or existing childminding networks.
In the Netherlands, agencies train and monitor more than 50,000 childminders and nannies. These agencies then act as intermediaries between parents and childcarers, handling payments and help negotiate the hourly rate.
'Agencies check that childminders meet national standards.'
All childminders are registered with an agency, which checks that the prospective childminder has met the requisite national standards. It then supervises the quality of childcare provided by conducting home visits and meets the childminder at least twice a year. Agencies also help childminders with their business plans as they tend to be self-employed. They produce a care plan, which childminders attached to the agency subscribe to. All forms of childcare are highly regarded by parents in the Netherlands, with childminders receiving the highest quality ratings and being a very popular choice for parents.
Agencies are regulated through annual, unannounced inspections. The regulator also inspects childminders on a random basis (between 5 and 30 per cent of the total annually) to verify that the standards have been met. The result of the agency model is that the Netherlands now has twice as many childminders per capita as Britain,while providing better supervision and more training and support.
The agency takes a percentage of the cost the parent pays for childcare (approx 10 percent in the Netherlands). Thus agencies have an incentive to ensure there are available quality childminders in areas that may be under resourced. Better supervision would mean that the staff to child ratios could be more flexible. Currently the UK has some of the lowest staff to childminder ratios in Europe for the under-fives at 3:1. In the Netherlands that ratio is 5:1. For children under one the ratio in the UK is 1:1, while in the Netherlands it is 2:1. In Germany the child to staff ratio for childminders is 5:1, while in Finland the ratio is 4:1, plus part-time care for one pre-primary or school-aged child.
Introduction of an agency model also provides an opportunity to make use of existing Childminding Networks, nursery and local authority provision by their converting to agency status and taking on greater responsibility. I have met a number of nurseries who would be interested in offering training and support to local childminders. Agencies would also reduce the bureaucratic burden on individual childminders. They would market childminder services locally, collect payment from parents and to train childminders in best practice. There are many capable people out there who are already looking after their own children or perhaps used to work in childcare, who provided with a simple and well supported route could become childminders.
This would have the added benefit of allowing a clearer structure to organise Government funding through tax credits, the two, three, and four-year-old entitlement, and employer vouchers, which could be an additional benefit for childminders. An agency model would deliver better supervision and a lessening of the bureaucratic burden on individual childminders.
Last year, visiting and inspecting around 55,000 childminders cost Ofsted £21.1 million – nearly £400 per year per childminder. Yet there are concerns over inspections. A recent study by academics from Oxford University and the Daycare Trust found that Ofsted childcare ratings are an unreliable measure of quality.
This is recognised by the head of Ofsted Sir Michael Wilshaw who admitted at the Education Select Committee that, 'We need to think about the future and how we inspect childminding institutions. I do not think we can carry on doing it as we are doing it at the moment: every time a youngster goes into a childminding setting, we have to inspect. That is unsustainable.'
Childminders follow the early years framework and those receiving funding are expected to be a member of a childminding network. These networks were set up to provide peer support and training but vary considerably from area to area and can be difficult to sustain in disadvantaged areas this is due to the lack of clear incentive to run a network. Often, the different forms of support and inspection are not well co-ordinated.
Instead of the status quo, I advocate Ofsted regulating local agencies who support a number of childminders. This role could be taken up by nurseries, children’s centres or existing childminding networks.
In the Netherlands, agencies train and monitor more than 50,000 childminders and nannies. These agencies then act as intermediaries between parents and childcarers, handling payments and help negotiate the hourly rate.
'Agencies check that childminders meet national standards.'
All childminders are registered with an agency, which checks that the prospective childminder has met the requisite national standards. It then supervises the quality of childcare provided by conducting home visits and meets the childminder at least twice a year. Agencies also help childminders with their business plans as they tend to be self-employed. They produce a care plan, which childminders attached to the agency subscribe to. All forms of childcare are highly regarded by parents in the Netherlands, with childminders receiving the highest quality ratings and being a very popular choice for parents.
Agencies are regulated through annual, unannounced inspections. The regulator also inspects childminders on a random basis (between 5 and 30 per cent of the total annually) to verify that the standards have been met. The result of the agency model is that the Netherlands now has twice as many childminders per capita as Britain,while providing better supervision and more training and support.
The agency takes a percentage of the cost the parent pays for childcare (approx 10 percent in the Netherlands). Thus agencies have an incentive to ensure there are available quality childminders in areas that may be under resourced. Better supervision would mean that the staff to child ratios could be more flexible. Currently the UK has some of the lowest staff to childminder ratios in Europe for the under-fives at 3:1. In the Netherlands that ratio is 5:1. For children under one the ratio in the UK is 1:1, while in the Netherlands it is 2:1. In Germany the child to staff ratio for childminders is 5:1, while in Finland the ratio is 4:1, plus part-time care for one pre-primary or school-aged child.
Introduction of an agency model also provides an opportunity to make use of existing Childminding Networks, nursery and local authority provision by their converting to agency status and taking on greater responsibility. I have met a number of nurseries who would be interested in offering training and support to local childminders. Agencies would also reduce the bureaucratic burden on individual childminders. They would market childminder services locally, collect payment from parents and to train childminders in best practice. There are many capable people out there who are already looking after their own children or perhaps used to work in childcare, who provided with a simple and well supported route could become childminders.
This would have the added benefit of allowing a clearer structure to organise Government funding through tax credits, the two, three, and four-year-old entitlement, and employer vouchers, which could be an additional benefit for childminders. An agency model would deliver better supervision and a lessening of the bureaucratic burden on individual childminders.
