NEWS

Earlier this month, the DfE announced the first wave of 300 school-based nurseries to receive government funding to repurpose spare space for new or expanded nursery provision.

The government has described wider plans to launch 3,000 school-based nurseries as at the “heart” of its Plan for Change.

However, the Alliance has voiced concerns about the impact of the policy on PVI early years providers, including the potential for PVI settings operating on school grounds to be forced to find new premises at short notice because the school in question has decided to open their own nursery provision.

DfE guidance for schools on establishing school-based nursery provision states: “Leasing to PVIs and childminders can be mutually beneficial, offering childcare and additional income for schools. However, you should consider future needs of the space before you enter an agreement.

“Long leases with PVIs or childminders grant exclusive possession, limiting reoccupation until lease end. Licences offer more flexibility and are easier to terminate but must be carefully structured to avoid being considered leases.”

The Alliance states that it has been made aware of a number of recent instances of primary schools terminating leases with PVI providers operating on their premises to instead open their own provision so they can apply for or obtain funding under the new government grant.

The organisation’s FoI request asks:

• How many of the primary schools awarded funding under the school-based nursery capital grant have had private, voluntary or independent early years providers operating on their premises over the past two years?
  
• How many of the primary schools awarded funding under the school-based nursery capital grant have served notice on private, voluntary or independent early years providers operating on their premises over the past two years?
  
• How many of the school-based nurseries awarded funding under the school-based nursery capital grant are within two miles of a registered PVI early years nursery, pre-school or childminding setting?
  

Commenting, Alliance CEO Neil Leitch said: “We have been repeatedly assured by government that school-based nursery provision is intended to work alongside, and not replace, PVI provision, and that only schools that can demonstrate that there is a local need for additional places would be awarded funding.

“And yet, despite this, we are now receiving reports of high-quality PVI providers being forced to seek new premises – or worse still, close altogether – because the school whose premises they were previously operating from has told them to leave. This is completely unacceptable.

“Private, voluntary and independent providers are an absolutely critical part of the early years sector, delivering the vast majority of early entitlement places, and providing the kind of flexible care and education that so many working families around the country desperately need. Any policymaker who thinks that school-based nurseries can ever replace the provision delivered by PVI settings has fundamentally misunderstood the early years.

“Our hope is that our Freedom of Information Act request will help shine a light on the true impact of the push for more school-based nurseries on PVI settings, and ensure that those working in the private, voluntary and independent sector don’t end up as collateral damage as a result of this policy.”

One in three children are not meeting their Early Years Development Goals, according to a report by The Centre for Young Lives.

The report, A Fresh Start for Children and Family Support: Delivering joined-up place-based support through Family Hubs – Part 1: Building from the Foundations, assesses the current provision of children’s centres and Family Hubs to understand the availability of place-based children and family support provided by local authorities across England.

From the data – gathered from Freedom of Information request returns from eight out of 10 councils in England – the report states that cuts to both funding and provision since 2010 have “left many children and families with nowhere to turn for extra support”.

Additionally, almost half (49%) of these local authorities reported further cuts to their budget for children’s centres and Family Hubs between 2023/24 and 2024/25, with councils in the Yorkshire and Humber region reporting budget cuts on average of 10%.

The report also outlines a costed model for the future of existing joinedup children and family support, while emphasising the need for a phased scaling up of investment.

The think-tank’s other recommendations include:

• the Department for Education (DfE) issuing new guidance on the core provision of children’s centres and Family Hubs.
  
• additional investment in the Family Hubs budget jointly funded by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and the DfE, as well as other departments when appropriate.
  
• local authorities and health services working together towards stronger integration.
  

This report is Part 1 of the Centre for Young Lives’ research into joined-up, place-based family support. The next report will be published in the summer.

Baroness Anne Longfield, executive chair and founder of Centre for Young Lives, said: “We welcome the Government’s target to increase the number of ‘school ready’ children by age five to 75% by 2028, but to meet this target, a further 40,00045,000 children must be meeting their development goals each year.

“Our new report sets out the provision of children’s centres and family hubs across local authorities in England, making the case for scaling up investment to reach more children and to deliver the government’s opportunity mission. Evidence has made clear the short- and long-term benefits of children and families accessing joined-up place-based family support.”

Social media posts shared by the Department for Education's official accounts on 2 April 2025 included claims that school-based nurseries provide “high-quality early education in familiar school settings”, that they give children “a smoother transition to reception year”, and that they are at “the heart" of the government’s Plan for Change.

Writing to the early education minister, Neil said:

Dear Minister, 

I’m writing to share my concern and frustration over the statements made by the Department for Education as part of this announcement of the first wave of 300 new school-based nurseries.

These statements include assertions that school-based nurseries provide “high-quality early education in familiar school settings” and give children “a smoother transition to reception year”, and that school-based nurseries are at “the heart [of the government’s] Plan for Change”.

As far as I can tell, there seems to have been no consideration given to the impact of these messages on the thousands of dedicated, hard-working early years professionals working in private and voluntary settings.

To be clear, those working in the PVI sector also provide high-quality early education, and ensure that children have smooth transitions to school. What’s more, many operate for far greater hours during the day than many schools, as well as during typical school holidays, providing vital support to working families. As such, I’m in no doubt that they too should be at the heart of the government ‘Plan for Change’, particularly given that they continue to deliver the vast majority of early years places.

Given the vital role that PVI providers will play in the ongoing rollout of the early entitlement expansion to younger children – and I know from my own direct conversations with department colleagues that the DfE is well aware of this – I cannot understand why the government continues to put out messaging that suggests that our vital part of the sector is held in such disregard.

With settings already struggling in the face of national insurance rises, minimum wage increases and updated charging guidance, morale in the sector is as low as I’ve ever seen it. As such, alongside urgent discussions around the need to secure additional financial support for the sector in this year’s Spending Review, I think it is vital that we also meet to discuss the Department’s school-based nursery policy and how we can ensure that the promotion of work in this area does not end up insulting those working in the PVI sector, as it has done with this campaign.

I look forward to arranging a time to discuss this further.

The Department confirmed that funding for the programme had doubled to £37 million. Overall, the new settings will offer an average of 20 places per site and up to 6,000 new places in total, with up to 4,000 set to be available by the end of September, according to the government.

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said: "Delivering on our promise of a better early years system is my top priority, which is why we’ve more than doubled our investment in this first phase so thousands more children can benefit from a high-quality early education from this September.

"We said we’d act, and now we have. But this is just the beginning - we’ve set a hugely important milestone to get tens of thousands more children every year school-ready by age 5 as part of our Plan for Change.

"We’re raising the bar for early years, delivering on our manifesto commitments and building a system that gives every child the best start in life."

However, Alliance CEO Neil Leitch criticised the government for overlooking the contribution of PVI settings, saying: "While the government is absolutely right to look at how to improve the availability and accessibility of early years provision, particularly in so-called 'childcare deserts', the fact is that boosting nursery places in primary schools alone simply won't be enough to meet ever-increasing demand.

“With more than three-quarters of entitlement places currently delivered by private and voluntary nurseries, preschools and childminders, it's clear that this vital part of the early years sector should be central to any plans to drive up capacity - especially given we're just months away from the final phase of the entitlement expansion and many schools simply do not have the resources, or staff with the necessary skills and experience, to deliver high-quality education and care to under-threes.

"Why, then, is the government continuing to drag its feet on ensuring that PVI providers are both adequately funded and supported to tackle the longstanding staffing crisis?

“Ultimately, if the government is truly serious about breaking down barriers to opportunity, it must come to the realisation that increasing school-based provision can only ever be one piece of a much larger puzzle. Failing to recognise this will simply mean more families will lose out."

The Early Years Alliance has criticised the government for failing to provide addition financial support for the early years sector during this year's Spring Statement.

The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, delivered the statement to the House of Commons on 26 March. However, despite stark warnings of the potential impact of national insurance increases, minimum wage raises and changes to guidance on charging, there was no reference to the early years sector during the parliamentary session.

Despite this, the Treasury has responded to concerns about government impact assessments showing that welfare cuts announced at the Spring Statement could push an additional 50,000 children could be pushed into poverty by arguing that these assessments do not take into account the impact of "falling childcare costs"

The Early Years Alliance has launched an investigation into local authority funding agreements that place greater restrictions on providers than is required by the Department for Education's (DfE's) statutory guidance.

As of 1 April, an updated version statutory guidance for local authorities on early years and childcare is now in effect. The revised guidance contains new information on how early years providers should deliver the early entitlement offers, including clarification that providers must make all additional charges – whether for nappies, wipes or lunch – clear and upfront to parents, and that these charges must not be included as a condition for parents accessing their hours.

According to the guidance, local authorities are "permitted to place requirements on providers in those arrangements in order for providers to receive free early education and childcare funding". However, the guidance also states that councils "are required by legislation to limit the requirements they place on any provider or childminder agency to those which ensure:

• places are delivered completely free of charge to parents
  
• places are provided flexibly in a pattern which meets the needs of parents
  
• that the funding provided is used properly and in accordance with any arrangements made with providers
  
• that the provider meets the needs of disabled children and children with special educational needs
  
• effective safeguarding and promotion of welfare of the children for whom the early education and childcare is provided
  
• effective safeguarding and promotion of welfare of the children for whom the early education and childcare is provided
  
• that providers actively promote fundamental British values and do not promote as evidence-based views or theories which are contrary to established scientific or historical evidence and explanations
  
• that the early years provider takes any measures identified in a report from Ofsted to improve the overall effectiveness of the provision (see A4.12 and A4.15)
  
• are necessary for the effective administration of the arrangements."
  

Despite this, however, the Alliance has received a number of reports of local authorities whose local funding agreements go far beyond the scope of the original guidance. The organisation is now in the process of collating and analysing the examples shared by providers, to help inform our ongoing discussions with the Department for Education.