Providers frustrated as councils impose free childcare restrictions

As local authorities prepare to extend free childcare to around 300,000 disadvantaged two-year-olds, the rush to find sufficient places is well under way.

But since the publication of the statutory guidance that governs councils’ duty to provide 15 hours of free childcare to three- and four-year-olds, there has been growing unease about how local authorities are imposing restrictions on providers to meet their obligations.

The 20-page guidance will come into effect from 1 September and replaces the former code of practice, which was more than twice its length.

Martin Bradley, chair of the Montessori Schools Association, says he has been contacted by numerous providers concerned about unreasonable conditions being placed on them.

“At the end of last term, literally within a couple of days, I had settings contact me from across the country,” he says.

Bradley has received complaints about councils who are forcing providers to take on disadvantaged two-year-olds in order to continue delivering the offer to three- and four-year-olds. Others are placing strict criteria on when parents should be able to claim their free hours of childcare and some are dictating what facilities nurseries should provide.

“Local authority personnel cannot impose their own conditions over and above what the Department for Education wishes to see,” he says. “We need to be absolutely clear as to what are appropriate conditions to be applied.”

Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries Association, echoes Bradley’s concern and says she has also received complaints from settings unhappy at local authority policies on the delivery of free childcare hours.

“Unfortunately, this is not unique,” she says. “No matter how clear the guidance is from the department, there are many local variations and that is what creates a problem for providers.

“Just throwing these conditions at the providers without consulting with them is not on. Local authorities must work with the sector. All this at a time when we are worried over whether there are going to be enough places for two-year-olds.”

“The government’s Childcare Commission is asking whether regulation is a burden, and how to cut down on bureaucracy to cut costs. We would argue that what is actually creating the cost at the local level is more hoops to jump through for providers.”

Earlier this month, CYP Now reported on the case of Nathan Archer, a Montessori nursery manager in Lincolnshire who has lodged a formal complaint against his council after it imposed criteria on how he should deliver free hours of childcare. He has been told he must offer parents the choice of a minimum of three five-hour sessions or five three-hour sessions a week. Given these criteria, Archer is uncertain whether he will be able to continue offering free places in the future.

Denise Burke, director of the Good Care Guide, says: “We are narrowing the number of places there are for parents to take up as more providers opt out and I don’t think all local authorities realise the scale of the problem.

“Smaller providers find it far more difficult to offer the kind of flexibility that all parents want. Considering the majority of childcare providers only operate one nursery and have 50 places or less, offering that carte-blanche flexibility isn’t going to work.”

Bradley argues that councils must offer settings business support. He says: “Local authorities need to be sure they understand the pressures these settings are working under. At the moment, too many people working in local authorities have little or no experience of working in the private and voluntary sector.”