Agenda item

Purpose of report: To apprise the Scrutiny Board of the extension of the Free Early Education entitlement for eligible working parents.

Witnesses:

Julie Page, Early Years Sector Development Manager
Jo Jarvis, Assistant Head, Epsom Primary School
Frank Offer, Head of Market Strategy

Declarations of Interest:

None

Key points raised in the discussion:

1. Officers explained to the Board that the Early Years and Early Help services were being designed as an integrated service as part of the Children, Schools and Families Commissioning Programme. It was highlighted that, as part of this integration there were savings and culture changes being undertaken within the service and that a new Supporting Families Manager had been appointed to support this.
   
   
2. Officers highlighted there had been consultation with the childcare sector relating to the implications of the National Funding Formula and the potential issues that 30 hours provision would have on the sector. It was explained that this shift would likely create some difficulties for providers, particularly smaller ones. Members were informed that the funding rate for providers would be agreed in Cabinet on Tuesday 28 March 2017.
   
   
3. It was highlighted that the service had a support fund available to help limit the potential issues that may arise in the childcare sector as a result of the change in provision requirements.  It was noted that there would be a requirement for 31,000 places for children as a response to the new 30 hours provision. Officers highlighted that the service held a statutory responsibility under the provisions of the Children’s Act (2014) to provide 30 hours free childcare and that the service had a Sufficiency fund, provided by the County Council, and a Sustainability fund, provided by central government, to ensure that this statutory provision is met.
   
   
4. It was noted by officers that approximately 8,450 children would be effected by the new rules of provision and that a website was in development by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) that would give parents the accessibility to check eligibility for 30 hours childcare provisions.
   
   
5. It was explained that the majority of families eligible for 30 hours childcare provision would be likely to apply for it, reflecting on trends from current 15 hour provision. Officers also outlined some feedback from parent forums and networks. It noted that there had been a survey undertaken of Surrey parents which outlined that 79% of parents involved were likely to take up the childcare offer and that 43% of that figure were already accessing a similar offer.
   
   
6. Officers noted the concern that there was a risk of lack of provision across a significant area of the county. It was highlighted that there were projects in development to alleviate this issue and prepare for the national launch of the 30 hours provision in September 2017.
   
   
7. Officers highlighted that parent feedback implied that users of childcare would tend to move to providers offering the 30 hour provision. It was suggested that this would lead to parents driving the market for childcare provision and would encourage providers to set up 30 hour provision to respond to demand.
   
   
8. It was highlighted that there was provision for a ceiling of no more than two providers to provide care. However, the majority of parents indicated that they would remain with one provider to maintain continuity of care.
   
   
9. Several key risks were highlighted by the service as potential future issues: specialist provision of care for SEND children, and sustainability of care providers.
   
   
10. In response to sustainability concerns, officers explained the requirement for the funding mechanism to be robust and streamlined. It was also stressed that a sufficiency team was working closely with providers to resolve potential sufficiency issues with providers and help them remain sustainable.
    
    
11. Officers noted that the service was committed to launching on time and that the 30 hour provision was on target for the launch date.
    
    
12. The Assistant Head of Epsom Primary School explained that one the biggest concerns for providers was ensuring sufficient childcare places in areas of deprivation. In addition, their school had been creative with regard to remodelling their childcare provisions; offering diverse and comprehensive options for eligible parents.
    
    
13. It was noted by witnesses that there was some resistance to the provision changes from some schools, but that attitudes were changing to reflect changing demand.
    
    
14. Members questioned whether there was a possibility for childcare provisions to be delivered out of county highlighted that this does happen, and that it also occurred both ways, with children from London and neighbouring counties coming to Surrey based providers.
    
    
15. Officers explained that the service had worked closely with the School Commissioning team to ascertain potential places and areas where an influx of new families may cause childcare pressures. It was stressed that a sufficiency audit was undertaken once every three years, with updates per annum, to ensure that the service was prepared for potential demographic changes which could add additional stress to the childcare providers.
    
    
16. The service highlighted concerns regarding its ability to provide 30 hours provision across the county evenly, noting several areas that do not have sufficient places currently.Members queried whether the work relating to potential sufficiency issues should have been undertaken sooner. However, officers clarified that this was a piece of work that had been ongoing for significant amount of time, noting that capital projects had begun three years previous and that there were other ongoing projects to help alleviate potential insufficiency issues ahead of the launch in September 2017.
    
    
17. The Board questioned what communication and consultation had been undertaken with parents regarding childcare provision. It was highlighted by witnesses that there had been a significant number of communications made via social media, websites, and discussion with community groups with parents.
    
    
18. Members raised concerns regarding the National Funding Formula and whether a number of factors were serving to price private sector provision out of the market. Witnesses acknowledged that there were challenges regarding introduction of the Living Wage and changes to business rates that would put pressure on the private sector. However, it was highlighted that the service was working with care providers to improve their business models to cater for 30 hours provisions.
    
    
19. It was noted that the most intensive stream of work undertaken by the service was preparation with schools to improve nursery provision to provide 30 hours free childcare. The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement commented that there was an opportunity for the service to encourage schools to improve school’s nursery provision and make better use of premises for this.

Recommendations:

1. The Board requests that Officers return to the Board providing a report covering: the progress made, and updated projections and figures following the introduction of the 30 hours childcare provision.