If it's as bad for the poor oppressed childcare organisations as Syla5 suggests, why do any offer the funding mechanism at all?
Surely all these awfully hard done by childcare providers would collude to opt out of the funding scheme and carry on depriving their customers of subsidies, letting the market sort the rest out?
The answer is that some are charging too much, and they don't like being called out on it. Besides which, there are loads of ways round it (as Syla5 explains) for those that can be bothered, though Syla5 also paints them as an awfully lazy lot...
Firstly many don't offer funding.
Secondly child care providers aren't unionised and any form of collective opting out is not going to work as it cannot be controlled.
Thirdly what would you assume to be to much for the cost of caring for your child? Bare in mind that all ousted registered providers have to offer a minimum standard of care, with learning, and education provided to a standard that is inspected at the same level as schools, in settings that are up to high standards of safety.
If you think £5-£6 for this is to much and overcharge go and think about what your £5-£6 buys you in the world today and realise that good childcare should be double that cost! Lest we forget that food for the children isn't free either.
Sadly the scheme is terrible because of the use of the word "free". If the hours were funded, child care providers wouldn't have to faff about with any activity charges or lunch and snack fees.
Early years child care coverage is on the decline due to the ever increasing demands put on the providers and the limited capacity they have to spend time caring for children while doing everything else in terms of observations, learning, care, billing, customer relations, etc. A career that is becoming quite thankless given people's expectations vs reality.
. It includes everything, but still - an absolute roasting. They do the 15 hours grant thing.
.
