MEMORANDUM FROM THE PRE-SCHOOL LEARNING
ALLIANCE (EY 35)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Pre-school Learning Alliance is
a registered educational charity and voluntary organisation which
acts as a training, support and umbrella body for 17,500 registered
pre-schools, playgroups and nurseries. Those affiliated pre-schools
and other providers cater for more than 750,000 children.
1.2 Pre-schools (formerly playgroups) began
nearly 40 years ago when parents, frustrated by the lack of nursery
provision, came together to create their own self-help nursery
schools. Current relevant facts relating to the operation of pre-schools
are as follows:
— 74 per cent of sessional (part-time)
pre-schools meet in community buildings, eg church and village
halls;
— 62 per cent of sessional pre-schools
do not receive grants (excluding funding for four year olds and
Department of Health milk refunds);
— the average annual income for sessional
pre-schools is just £10,728;
— of the 750,000 children attending
pre-schools, 100,000 are four years old, nearly 300,000 are three
years old and the remainder are under three years old (1988).
1.3 Pre-schools offer a form of education
which is rooted in the local community. Children enjoy activities
which are practically indistinguishable from those offered in
maintained nursery schools and classes, but witness their parents
as active players in the process. Pre-schools, by virtue of their
independence and the fact that they are managed by parents, can
be led by local demand, shaping the form of the provision to match
the needs of children and offering courses and other activities
to parents on request. It is of significance that so many parents
who use and become involved in pre-schools go on to some form
of study for themselves or find employment.
1.4 As a large co-operative organisation,
the pre-school movement has much to offer to the building of capacity
within local communities. This was noted in the recent Demos report
(To Our Mutual Advantage, 1999), which comments that pre-schools
"provide an excellent model for family learning centres,
able to address the needs of families in a coherent and supportive
fashion within the community. Pre-school groups excel at reaching
isolated mothers with few qualifications who are often intimidated
by official public services. They could thus also play a role
in the Government's lifelong learning programme".
1.5 Pre-schools account for a workforce
of 100,000 staff and, in addition, are supported by an estimated
40,000 volunteers. Up to one million parents are also involved,
helping out in the pre-schools sessions, undertaking fundraising
and serving on parent management committees.
1.6 This infrastructure of locally-led pre-school
projects has a national dimension in the form of the Pre-school
Learning Alliance which has a National Centre in London, eight
regional centres and over 400 branches across England. Among other
things, this structure enables the charity to provide a representative
to sit on nearly all the Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships in England.
1.7 The charity has, for many years, provided
courses and qualifications for parents and for those working in
pre-schools. The Pre-school Learning Alliance is currently recognised
as an awarding body under Schedule 2(a) of the Further and Higher
Education Act 1992 in respect of care and education for young
children and co-operates with over 150 colleges and other institutions
in the provision of these qualifications. From September 2000,
the charity will continue to be a training provider but will cease
to be an awarding body for qualifications and this latter function
will be assumed by the Council for Awards in Childcare and Education
(CACHE)
1.8 The charity is also a major provider
of family learning, with a £2.7 million Family Learning Millennium
Awards Scheme funded by the Millennium Commission and a range
of other courses and projects for parents.
SUMMARY
1.9 The nature of the charity and its activities
means that pre-schools are contributing to and, in some respects,
taking a lead across a broad spectrum of Government objectives,
including the expansion of funded nursery education, the National
Childcare Strategy, widening participation in post-16 education,
promoting social inclusion and offering gateways from welfare
into work.
2. EARLY YEARS
EDUCATION
2.1 The Government has made a very substantial
commitment to the development of high quality, appropriate education
and childcare for children under statutory school age. The period
since the General Election has been one of unprecedented expansion
and investment in targets for the growth of free education for
four year olds, now also for three year olds, the implementation
of a national childcare strategy and the development of the Sure
Start programme.
2.2 This must be welcomed by everyone with
an interest in the welfare of young children. The Pre-school Learning
Alliance also supports the Government's desire to establish a
firm foundation in the early years for later educational achievement,
the objective of overcoming educational disadvantage and social
exclusion and the creation of a learning society.
2.3 This expansion cannot take place without
voluntary sector pre-schools. There are simply not enough places
in the maintained sector to deliver the Government's targets.
Already, more than half of the pre-schools affiliated to the charity
have registered with their local Partnerships to offer funded
nursery education. An estimated 40 per cent of trailblazer Sure
Start projects involve pre-schools and an unpublished study—Unlocking
the Potential—commissioned by DfEE indicates that 82
per cent of the sessional pre-schools surveyed would be willing
to undertake some form of expansion to meet the needs of parents
for appropriate childcare.
2.4 However, paradoxically, pre-schools
are under threat. Since 1997, 2,000 pre-schools have closed and
a further 1,500 have staved off closure only because of DfEE crisis
funding for pre-schools facing closure. In addition, and at the
present time, at least a further 1,200 pre-schools anticipate
closure in the coming year.
2.5 In response to continuing pre-school
closures, an independent review of pre-schools and playgroups
was set up by the Parliamentary, Under-Secretary of State, Margaret
Hodge MP, in March 1999. The review's report, Tomorrow's Children,
was published in October last year. The charity endorses the recommendations
of this important review and, in places, draws on its findings
in this submission.
2.6 Pre-school closures began to rise steeply
following the introduction of the previous Government's nursery
education voucher scheme. The charity's evidence to the 1997 Education
and Employment Committee's inquiry into the operation of the nursery
education voucher scheme, said: "The voucher initiative
rests on competition among providers. The effect of competition
may be to damage existing voluntary or statutory partnerships
and may even eliminate some providers altogether. In this way,
the effect of introducing vouchers may be to reduce the number
of available places for four year olds and for younger children
also".
2.7 In this same submission, the charity
reported on the closure of pre-schools in the pilot areas and
predicted that the main affect of the voucher initiative might
be to accelerate the trend towards early school entry, where most—if
not all—children start school at the age of four.
2.8 With the election of the Labour Government
in 1997, nursery education vouchers were abolished and local partnership
arrangements were created to ensure the supply of funded nursery
education across the maintained, private and voluntary sectors.
The Early Years Development and Childcare Partnerships have been
in operation for two years and there is a broad consensus that
it will take time to develop the co-operative arrangements which
the Government is keen to secure. However, in the short term,
the Partnerships have acted to consolidate the trend of early
admission to school for four-year-olds. This is evidenced in the
headcount figures for the autumn term of 1998 and the autumn term
of 1999, which show that 89 per cent of four-year-olds were in
maintained provision.
2.9 The contraction of the voluntary sector
is confirmed by DfEE statistics published last year. These show
that, overall, the non-maintained sector contracted between 1998
and 1999 by a total of 36,400 places in pre-schools and 34,100
places provided by childminders.
2.10 The main reason given for closure by
pre-schools is the loss of four year olds as a result of changing
admission policies. In January 1998 only 100,000 four year olds
were in pre-schools affiliated to the charity, compared with 200,000
four year olds in 1996. Taking the average fee per session, the
estimated revenue loss to Pre-school Learning Alliance pre-schools
if £46.5 million per year since 1996. This figure rises to
£107.8 million per year if the calculation is made on the
funded four-year-old rate of £1,100 per year.
2.11 The combined turnover of pre-schools
in membership of the charity is in the region of £225 million
per year. The sudden loss of 20 per cent of that per year is a
prime reason for the financial instability which is leading pre-schools
to close. In addition, many pre-schools are reporting the loss
of three-year-olds to nursery classes in maintained schools, which
represents a further loss of revenue.
2.12 New employment legislation—in
the form of the national minimum wage and the Working Time Directive—has
had enormous implications also for the pre-school movement. In
the short term—and taking into account the fact that approximately
half of pre-school assistants were paid less than half of the
minimum wage—it has tipped the scales towards closure. In
the longer term, it means that the costs of running pre-schools
can no longer rely on subsidy from staff willing to work for nothing,
or for substantially less than the minimum wage.
2.13 The independent review panel suggested
a wide-ranging action plan to reverse the decline in provision
and to secure the future of pre-schools. These recommendations
cover the age at which children start school, admission arrangements,
the conduct and operation of Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships, pre-school support organisations, quality in early
years provision and the need to provide a stable funding base
for pre-schools.
RECOMMENDATION
2.14 The Government which has accepted (at
least in principle) the recommendations of Tomorrow's Children,
should bring forward an action plan to reverse the contraction
of the voluntary sector. Without such an action plan, the charity
predicts that at least 1,200 pre-schools will close in 2000 with
a consequent loss of 28,000 places.
3. THE AGE
FORMAL SCHOOLING
SHOULD START
3.1 There is widespread concern about the
age at which children now start primary schooling and, in the
charity's view, this issue should be the starting point for the
Sub-committee's whole inquiry.
3.2 Most children now go into primary school
when they are four years, although the compulsory school age is
five. By international standards, five is relatively young to
start compulsory schooling but English children now start school
at four and this has occurred without recourse to either public
or parliamentary debate and without evidence to support the efficacy
of such a change.
3.3 There is no sensible rationale for children
starting school at four and there are fears on the part of concerned
parents and among early years educators that it may actually be
harmful. The independent review panel expressed the concern that
"Reception classes may not be able to reflect the broader
needs of young children . . . particularly the need to promote
personal development and allow young children to form secure attachments."
Young four year olds in particular are most likely to be intimidated
by an earlier start to their schooling and may experience actual
distress.
3.4 A number of studies have shown that
summer-born children are likely to be disadvantaged by starting
school in the September before they are five (NFER, Sharp and
Hutchison, 1997). A further study in the US (Crosser, SL 1991)
of summer-born children whose parents delayed their entry for
a year found that, from a later start, those children did significantly
better overall and the difference was most apparent in reading.
An IEA study of reading literacy (Elley, WB, 1992) conducted an
assessment of reading standards in 32 educational systems. An
analysis of the relationship between reading attainment and the
age of starting reading showed that there was little disadvantage
form a later start. Finland, Sweden, Norway and Iceland all began
reading at age seven and all were in the top 10 scoring countries.
3.5 It may be asserted that current admission
arrangements merely reflect the preference of parents to secure
a primary school place when their children are four. As Tomorrow's
Children noted, however, this is not backed up by a study
into the views of parents of young children conducted for the
DfEE in 1998. Parents were most concerned that the provider of
nursery education was local, had a good reputation and that brothers
and sisters already attended the setting. A further study conducted
by NFER (Sharp and Davis, A, 1997) of nearly 1,000 parents found
that, in choosing pre-school provision, the most important factors
reported by parents were the reputation of the setting and the
happiness of the children.
3.6 Many parents report pressures from schools
to accept reception class places for their four year olds in order
to secure places when their children reach the age of five. As
the 1997 Select Committee inquiry report into the operation of
the nursery voucher scheme concluded (paragraph 148), "This
sort of pressure is unacceptable". It is imperative that
parents should have access to impartial and comprehensive information
in order to make an informed choice.
3.7 Are reception classes appropriate for
four year olds? Ofsted (June 1998) has reported that teaching
is satisfactory in 90 per cent of reception classes, but the lack
of comparability between school inspections (Section 10) and nursery
inspections makes this data difficult to interpret. The 1997 Select
Committee inquiry concluded (paragraph 148) that, "such classes
may not be appropriate for [young four year olds'] educational
needs and therefore may not be providing high quality education".
The independent review of pre-schools and playgroups concurred
that the early school starting age may harm younger children and
recommended that, "The Government should encourage admission
authorities operating single points of entry to reception class
to return to at least two points of entry, in September for older
children and January for younger children".
3.8 In order to flourish, young children
need an environment which combines good quality care with opportunities
for play and learning which, in turn, requires a higher ratio
of adults to children than that required by older children.
3.9 This was accepted by the Department
of Health in the Children Act 1989 which, in respect of voluntary
and private nurseries, requires a ratio of one adult to eight
three and four year olds. Similarly, nursery classes and schools
in the maintained sector are required to operate a ratio between
1:13 and 1:10.
3.10 No such requirement is made of reception
classes, in respect of the four year olds in their care. In October
1999, the Government announced extra resources for 40 local authorities
to increase staffing resources in reception classes, but made
no reference as to whether it would introduce statutory regulation
in this area.
3.11 Since then, the Government has published
the Care Standards Bill, currently under consideration by Parliament.
This will reform the regulatory framework for early years provision
and a consultation document on standards is due to be published
shortly. However, the maintained sector including reception classes
will be exempt from the provisions of the legislation.
RECOMMENDATION
3.12 Parents need comprehensive information
about when their children should start school. Admission authorities
should be encouraged to re-examine their admissions policies and
to consider whether it would not be in the interests of children
to revert to a "rising fives" policy. Interestingly,
one local authority—ie City of York—has recently agreed
to implement an admissions policy along these lines on the grounds
that it will serve the bests interests of children. Where four
year olds are in primary school reception classes, there should
be a ratio equivalent to that required in maintained nursery classes
and schools—ie between 1:13 and 1:10.
4. EARLY LEARNING
GOALS
4.1 QCA's initial consultation on Early
Learning Goals raised widespread anxieties about the creation
of over-formalised teaching for children under statutory school
age and the possible disappearance of play from the early years'
curriculum. However, these concerns have been largely allayed.
The revised Early Learning Goals emphasise the acquisition of
literacy and numeracy but within a broad framework of all-round
development and with suitable indications of the six outcomes
can be achieved through structured play.
4.2 The Early Learning Goals are linked
to the concept of a Foundation Stage. This is useful in the sense
that a Foundation Stage distinguishes clearly nursery education
from compulsory schooling. However, there must be confusion about
the nature of a Foundation Stage which includes the reception
year. Indeed, the Foundation Stage is defined as starting at age
three and finishing at the end of the reception year.
4.3 Where schools and/or local authorities
operate single annual admissions' policies, any child who is four
before the start of the school year will join the reception year.
This means, at the extreme, that a child with a birthday on 31
August will begin primary school having just turned four. By the
summer holidays the following year, that child will have completed
reception and will be deemed to have come to the end of the Foundation
Stage without having reached compulsory school age. That child
might not have attended any form of pre-school provision at all
and, therefore, the Foundation Stage—rather than being three
years' long—will consist only of the reception year.
4.4 To continue with this example. If the
reception class in question is staffed only by a classroom teacher
with, say, occasional support from a classroom assistant and if
the class consists of 28 or more four and five year olds, it is
very difficult to see how the learning goals can be delivered
using a play-based curriculum which requires, of necessity, more
intensive interaction between adults and children.
4.5 In Age of Starting School and the
Early Years Curriculum (NFER, 1998), the educational researcher,
Caroline Sharp, concludes that, "Young children (aged five
and under) seem to do best when they have opportunities to socialise,
make their own choices and take responsibility for their own learning.
It appears possible for pre-schools to instil resilience and a
`can do' attitude which serves children (especially from disadvantaged
backgrounds) well all their lives".
4.6 The early years are a period of rapid
development for children and there are significant differences
in ability and general maturity between children who are just
four and, say, rising five. If a child's reception year ends in
the July before s/he is five, it may be unreasonable to expect
that child to demonstrate a similar grasp of the learning goals
compared to a child who is almost six at the end of the reception
year.
RECOMMENDATION
4.7 The Foundation Stage should be defined
by age. More radically, nursery education should be more clearly
defined from—and should come before—primary schooling.
This latter option would mean reverting to the previous status
quo with regards to admissions—ie children going to school
in the term following their fifth birthday or, at the very least,
as rising fives.
Combating educational disadvantage
4.8 Children do not develop uniformly at
the same rates and children as young as three and four are disadvantaged
by poverty, ill health and family stress. One in eight pre-school
children have some form of communication difficulty—meaning
that their speech and language skills have not developed in the
normal way—and, without appropriate additional support,
these children will be disadvantaged throughout their schooling.
4.9 While, on the surface, it might seem
that these are the very children who will benefit from an early
school start, in fact the reverse is likely to be true. Children
suffering from some form of developmental delay are unlikely to
have their needs met adequately in a large class, where there
are more limited opportunities for adult:child interactions.
4.10 The Pre-school Learning Alliance has
many pre-schools operating in inner cities, in deprived rural
communities and in run-down council estates—all areas where
a high proportion of children suffer from general developmental
delay, combined with ill health or emotional problems. It has
been demonstrated amply that—where sufficient staff exist
to provide appropriate learning opportunities for the children
and where parents are welcomed into the pre-schools as partners—such
initiatives can make a real difference to the achievements of
children who might otherwise never catch up.
4.11 A research study to be published shortly
into the community benefits of pre-schools in disadvantaged areas
(The contribution of pre-schools to disadvantaged communities:
McGivney) revealed that pre-schools are far more than just nurseries
or playgroups: they are a vital family and community resource
providing parents and carers with social contacts, practical and
emotional support, education, training and employment opportunities
and valuable information, help and advice on parenting, education,
health, social security and housing matters.
4.12 The independent review concluded that
the Government and the National Family and Parenting Institute
need to recognise the strengths of pre-schools and playgroups
and their value in providing imaginative parenting education and
community-based support and to consider what support can usefully
be provided to help pre-schools and playgroups develop these services.
RECOMMENDATION
4.13 Innovative community-based projects—particularly
those in disadvantaged areas—which enlist the involvement
of parents and combine this with good quality teaching for children
need support and stability in order to flourish.
5. QUALITY OF
TEACHING
5.1 The Pre-school Learning Alliance has
sought to ensure that pre-schools offer the very best standards
of care and education to young children. The charity was the first
national organisation in the early years sector to develop courses
and qualifications tailored to the needs of the mature adults
who, for the most part, comprise the staff and volunteer workforce.
The Pre-school Learning Alliance was also the first early years
body to develop, in 1991, curriculum guidelines for the early
years (which were approved by the Department at that time) and
in 1992 the charity pioneered the first voluntary quality assurance
scheme for pre-schools, based on self-assessment and external
verification.
5.2 The issue of quality in pre-schools
and playgroups in one that was studied comprehensively by the
independent review panel and the conclusions and recommendations
of Tomorrow's Children are ones which the Pre-school Learning
Alliance would broadly support.
5.3 As noted by Tomorrow's Children,
the focus on play within pre-schools is not at odds with the requirements
of Ofsted for funded nursery education. A play-based curriculum,
appropriately planned, is consistent with the achievement of the
Early Learning Goals.
5.4 Ofsted inspection of private and voluntary
provision was introduced alongside the nursery education voucher
scheme and continues under the current arrangements. More than
half of all pre-schools in membership of the Alliance are registered
for inspections. More than 5,000 inspections have now been carried
out. In 1998, 97 per cent of Alliance pre-schools inspected by
Ofsted were passed as satisfactory or better. In 1999, 81 per
cent of those groups re-inspected achieved a two to four year
report—ie revealing no serious weaknesses.
5.5 These results are particularly satisfactory
given the difficulties which staff working in pre-schools experience
in trying to access funded training. However, there are no grounds
for complacency. High levels of turnover among staff create the
potential for a skills' shortage and, in addition, no information
is available to verify the educational standards of those pre-schools
not registered for Ofsted inspections.
5.6 A Local Government Management Board
workforce survey conducted in 1998 confirms the significance of
Pre-school Learning Alliance qualifications—currently approved
by DfEE for the purposes of Schedule 2(a)—among pre-school
and playgroup workers. The survey found that 74.1 per cent of
paid staff held relevant qualifications. 48 per cent of staff
held Pre-school Learning Alliance qualifications. In addition,
around one-sixth of paid staff were working towards relevant qualifications,
one of the main ones being the charity's Diploma in Pre-school
Practice.
5.7 The charity's courses and qualifications
are specifically tailored to the needs of mature students who
already have experience of young children. The Diploma in Pre-school
Practice and other related courses are the most appropriate form
of training for staff and volunteers working in pre-schools and
playgroups. All of these qualifications have undergone revision
and unitisation to meet the requirements of QCA and are currently
being assessed for accreditation within the new framework. From
September 2000, the Council for Awards in Childcare and Education
(CACHE) will act as the awarding body for Pre-school Learning
Alliance qualifications, which will strengthen quality and add
to their stature.
5.8 However, there remains a substantial
unmet need for training. The LGMB survey found that more than
67 per cent of pre-schools/playgroups reported that paid staff
had significant training needs. The survey also showed that more
than half of the pre-schools and playgroups in the sample reported
that lack of time and lack of funding were constraints on undertaking
training. In addition, only 22.5 per cent of pre-schools/playgroups
had a training budget, with the average annual value being only
£380.
5.9 The cost to students of obtaining qualifications
can be considerable. As mature students, pre-school workers are
unable to access vocational training on the same terms as 16 to
19 year olds.
5.10 The high staff turnover in pre-schools
means that many are unable to have the benefit of the investment
made in staff training and contributes to the relatively low levels
of qualification established by the LGMB survey. It is the charity's
view that turnover is related to low pay which is, in turn, related
to the lack of resources available to pre-schools.
5.11 The independent review of pre-schools
and playgroups substantiates these points within its findings
and—while identifying as a long-term target that all registered
early years settings should be led by appropriately-qualified
staff at graduate level—acknowledged that achieving the
target will depend on, among other things, "the real availability
of sufficient qualifying courses at NVQ Levels 2 and 3, such as
those provided by the Pre-school Learning Alliance . . .".
The review also makes a strong case for the introduction of systems
to accredit prior learning and experience—a view which the
charity would endorse.
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.12 Tomorrow's Children's vision
of an increasingly well-qualified workforce will require significant
additional funding. Such funding is required, both in the narrow
sense of investment in expansion of training but also, more broadly,
guaranteeing the voluntary sector stability of funding, leading
to lower staff turnover and a heightened commitment to professional
development and training.
5.13 A further requirement is an adequate
supply of accessible courses and qualifications. As noted above,
Pre-school Learning Alliance qualifications are currently with
QCA for accreditation. If these are approved by QCA, there is
every possibility of making a substantial contribution to the
targets suggested in Tomorrow's Children. Should these
qualifications not be approved—and taking into account the
attitudes and expectations noted in the workforce survey noted
above—there will be a very large vacuum in training provision
for workers in pre-schools.
6. THE ROLE
OF PARENTS
6.1 While it is self-evident that the skills
and qualifications of those delivering the early years curriculum
are of crucial importance, this should not obscure the pivotal
role of parents in encouraging emergent literacy and numeracy
or the importance of the family as an environment for learning.
6.2 There is a wealth of research relating
to the positive effects of parental interest and involvement on
children's progress in learning to read and in other areas of
intellectual achievement. More specifically, success in literacy
has been associated with the interest of parents in reading to
children from books or other printed material as well as the frequency
and quality of shared conversation.
6.3 Here in the UK we have a long tradition
of separating children from their parents for the purpose of education.
In the planned expansion of early years education there is an
opportunity to develop a model which is fundamentally parent-centred
as well as child-centred. Through partnership with parents and
by building on the role of parents as their children's first teachers,
value will be added to the efforts of teachers. On the part of
parents, a habit will be established which will serve children
throughout their subsequent years of education.
6.4 Approached in the right way, many parents
would welcome pre-school education which was inclusive in this
way. A research study—Adults Learning in Pre-schools
(McGivney, 1996)—looking at the outcomes for parents, mainly
mothers, involved with their children in pre-schools, identified
a range of gains, including better understanding of child development,
increased self-esteem and widened horizons in terms of returning
to study or seeking work. These benefits were found to be most
significant for lone parents, those who had completed their education
early, or parents who were isolated for one reason or another.
6.5 Such an approach would provide not only
opportunities for parents to be involved in nursery classes alongside
teachers, but would also include the provision of drop-in facilities,
discussion groups and courses for parents.
6.6 In the Pre-school Learning Alliance,
within the voluntary sector, and in some community schools, these
developments are already taking place. Each year many thousands
of parents enrol on courses organised by the Pre-school Learning
Alliance—in pre-schools themselves, or in colleges or through
the WEA. Over the years, such courses have enabled hundreds of
thousands of adults to find pathways back into education, to value
learning, to return to employment and to enable them to play a
fuller part in their communities.
6.7 This type of approach has never been
properly evaluated. Yet, initiatives to reach the most disadvantaged
children may have the best chance of success where they are able
to enlist the support and involvement of families and to support
productive relationships between parents and their children.
RECOMMENDATION
6.8 The Government should conduct an evaluation
of nursery education projects which are inclusive of parental
involvement and governance, family learning programmes and counselling
for parents to determine whether such an approach could more universally
add value to early education provision.
7. ASSESSMENT
7.1 The introduction in 1996, of Ofsted
inspections for pre-schools was welcomed by the charity as the
first means of assessing the educational performance of non-maintained
provision.
7.2 The recent decision by Government to
create a single regulatory regime for non-maintained settings,
combining registration and inspection and covering care and educational
standards, is welcomed in principle.
7.3 The Care Standards Bill, as noted above,
provides a legislative framework for registering childminders
and providers of daycare. The standards which will be the subject
of regulation and guidance have yet to be published.
RECOMMENDATION
7.4 It is important that the regulatory
regime pays due attention to the health and welfare of young children
and their need to form secure attachments, as well as setting
out children's educational requirements.
8. FUNDING
8.1 Pre-schools have shown themselves able
to meet the challenge of the current policy environment and are
cost-effective. However, as noted above, many pre-schools are
struggling to make ends meet and, as a result, are closing. If
this continues, the potential for voluntary sector pre-schools
and playgroups to contribute to the planned expansion of high
quality early years education will be diminished.
8.2 What is required is an investment to
sustain and develop infrastructure. Traditionally, pre-schools
have survived on shoe-string budgets largely because staff have
been prepared to work for nothing, or very small wages, to subsidise
the cost to parents and to keep the pre-school going. The introduction
of the national minimum wage, the Working Time Directive and the
raft of responsibilities which pre-school staff have assumed to
ensure acceptable standards of education make it a necessity that
other sources of funding are found.
8.3 To fulfil their potential, pre-schools
require not only capital investment but additional funding to
raise their present average levels of income. At just over £10,000
per year among affiliated pre-schools, the current average cost
per child is just £285. The Pre-school Learning Alliance—on
the basis of the experience of those groups which have been able
to expand their provision—believes that a more realistic
annual turnover would be in the region of at least £50,000.
This would not only provide for realistic staff salaries and create
the opportunity for investment in the skills and qualifications
of those working in pre-schools, but would also allow groups to
open all day providing full and part-time places, together with
associated opportunities for parents. This would still make for
a cost-effective form of provision—costing less than £1,500
per child per year.
8.4 These are outline figures and no assumptions
are made about the proportion which should be contributed by parents
in the form of fees. However, it must be clear that such an expansion
could only be achieved with a higher level of public subsidy than
is currently the case. There is no evidence that this could be
delivered on the demand side from Working Families Childcare Tax
Credits. As the 1996 Trades Union Congress General Council Survey
demonstrates, only 16 per cent of women with children below the
age of four work full-time and just 33 per cent work part-time—indicating
that the number of families with pre-school children eligible
for Working Families Childcare Tax Credits (lone parents working
over 16 hours a week or two parent families with both partners
working over 16 hours a week) will be quite small.
8.5 The independent review noted that the
introduction of education grant for three year olds and Working
Families Tax Credits would provide extra resources to those settings
able to offer daycare, but felt that more could be achieved within
available resources by the development of a new and integrated
funding system.
8.6 The present funding arrangements are
complex, involving a number of funding streams, which operate
separately from each other. Where nursery education funding is
concerned, funding continues to follow the child as it did under
the nursery voucher scheme, encouraging competition for children.
8.7 The model suggested by the independent
review would have two main strands—revenue funding and support
and development funding. In addition, it was recommended that
capital funding should be considered to provide accommodation
for pre-schools/playgroups where this was needed, and for new
service development.
8.8 Within this model, revenue funding would
replace nursery education grant and could include various elements,
rather than simply reflecting the numbers of children in the setting
at any given time. One of these might be a strategic element which
could include the level of qualifications of the staff, or the
amount of staff training undertaken; the level of deprivation
in the area; and the contribution to other priorities, such as
family support services, or the development of "wrap-around"
childcare.
8.9 The merits of this proposal—currently
under consideration as part of this year's Comprehensive Spending
Review—are that funding could, at the same time, provide
stability to all providers while creating incentives for development.
It would replace the present complex funding arrangements with
a single integrated mechanism.
RECOMMENDATION
8.10 Increased investment in pre-schools
is required to secure their full contribution to the expansion
of services and to ensure their survival. The integrated funding
mechanism suggested by the independent review has much to offer
and should be considered for implementation from 2001. In view
of the large number of pre-schools anticipating early closure,
further stop-gap funding from DfEE should be made available.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 The charity is grateful for the opportunity
to submit written evidence to the Education Sub-committee and
would be more than happy to provide oral evidence, should this
be considered appropriate.
Pre-School Learning Alliance
January 2000
| 
