$10aDay FAQ's

For those already working in the field, the Plan recognizes that you should be offered incentives and support to upgrade your education. This includes: recognizing your existing training and experience; ensuring programs are available across BC and are delivered in ways that make it possible for you to study while you work; providing financial incentives and developing curriculum that reflects the needs of the whole sector – including family and school age child care providers.

If you are a mature provider who doesn’t want to upgrade your education, the Plan would enable you to stay in your current job with your current qualifications until you decide to retire or move on.

Until recently, BC didn’t have any Bachelor of Early Childhood Education programs and today there is still only one. As a result, ECEs who wanted to continue their education completed related bachelor degrees in fields like Child and Youth Care. The Plan recognizes that these degrees need to be articulated with the evolving Bachelor of Early Childhood Education so that ECEs with related bachelor degrees can fully participate in the new system. Post-baccalaureate programs with early childhood education specialties for teachers and other professionals would also be available.

NO. This Plan stands in direct contrast to the standardization of curriculum for young children. It is based on the sound ECE principle that children learn through play in caring relationships and supportive environments and that each child’s developmental journey is to be celebrated and respected.

The diverse ‘cultures’ that exist in quality child care are a strength we want to preserve. That is why this Plan welcomes a range of approaches, including Reggio Emilia, Parent Participation, Montessori, etc. The one requirement is that ALL programs are consistent with BC’s Early Learning Framework and provide play-based, experiential opportunities that support children’s holistic development across all their developmental domains.

YES. If you don’t want to participate in the new system or meet the new accountability measures, you could continue to operate a family child care, pre-school or group child care centre as long as the program meets licensing standards. You would not receive the new public funds tied to the new accountability measures.

Families could continue to make private arrangements with you to care for their children. You would not be accountable for anything beyond meeting licensing requirements. As now, families who qualify would still be able to use their child care subsidy to help cover the fees you set. Over time the Child Care Operating Fund would be phased out for programs that don’t meet public accountability measures. New privately owned and operated for-profit centres could open if they think there is a market need, but would not receive public capital or operating funds.

YES. The Community Plan for a Public System of Integrated Early Care and Learning welcomes existing small independent owner/operators and commercial operators on the same terms and conditions as it welcomes in existing non-profit programs and family child care providers.

If government implements the Plan, existing privately owned preschool and daycare programs that want to become Early Years Centres (EYCs) will receive new public funds to meet the Plan’s 5 accountability measures – lower parent fees, improved staff wages and education levels, inclusion of all children, meeting an identified community need and offering programs consistent with BC’s Early Learning Frameworks. Just like non-profit child care, mechanisms such as the requirement to provide publicly available financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles will be used to ensure that public funds are used to meet these public goals.

The Plan’s costing model allocates all public funding and parent fees to increasing affordable access to quality services. Under the costing formula, all licensed child care spaces – whether delivered in family homes, schools, community-owned or commercially-operated – will be funded to collect the same parent fees, pay the same average wages to trained early childhood educators (school-age and family child care providers), and offer the same inclusion and quality supports.

The Plan gives Boards of Education responsibility for developing and delivering new early care and learning services to meet unmet needs. For the first time, the development of child care programs will be planned for and new services will meet prioritized community needs.

However, some child care operators may not want to be part of the new system. They may not wish to be constrained by the accountability measures attached to accepting new public funding that will reduce parent fees and raise wages. The Community Plan clearly says that these providers can continue to operate independently, as long as they meet Licensing requirements. They will of course not receive the new operating funds that are tied to the accountability measures listed above but could still accept parent subsidy dollars.

BC has always had privately owned preschool and day care centres. Until recently, these private programs have been owned by individuals, typically an Early Childhood Educator with one or two centres or a family child care home. Just like non-profit programs, these privately owned programs are eligible to receive provincial Child Care Operating Funds (CCOF) and child care subsidies paid on behalf of eligible families. As small businesses or self-employed individuals, the owners of these programs are also able to claim tax deductions for their business related expenses.

Owner/operator child care programs have always been part of communities. They are motivated to make a living by providing a much needed community service. In the absence of a ‘system’ within which they can practice their profession – owning a small program has been one of the only viable options. However, we cannot expect them and some good-willed non-profits, with minimal public funds, to build an entire system to meet family needs and provide a living wage for early childhood educators right across the province. In order to do that, the evidence is clear that we need to integrate existing programs into a public system.

More recently, BC has seen the growth of ‘commercial child care’. These are companies, with investors and/or shareholders, who own, want to own, or franchise, a large number of child care programs. For some commercial child care companies, real estate is the most important asset rather than the quality of care. Some of these companies promote their services to a particular niche in the child care market, services to employers or early schooling. To date, commercial child care is also eligible for CCOF and child care subsidies paid on behalf of eligible families.

Commercial for-profit (some call it ‘big-box’) child care is quite different. While ECEs are connected to the children and families they work with, in commercial operations they are rarely the key decision makers. The corporate structure requires that the ‘business’ generate profits for investors. This necessitates a focus on real estate acquisition, and buying up the competition, standardized programs, lower wages and higher fees. Commercial child care sees families as customers, whereas ECEs see families as partners in providing care for children. And, when and if commercial child care fails (like it did in Australia) – families, communities and governments are left to pick up the pieces. ECEs then often find themselves unemployed or needing to start their careers all over again. The international evidence has convinced us that this is not the way to build a system that meets the needs of children, families, educators or communities.

The Community Plan for a Public System of Early Care & Learning is the way to build a high quality system for BC’s children, families, educators, communities and our economy.

We support unionization as an important strategy for advancing the sector. Currently a number of different unions represent some BC early childhood educators, and all teachers and classroom-based school staff are represented by one of two unions. We also support the democratic right of workers to unionize and choose which union can best represent them.

The Plan proposes that operational funding tied to new accountability measures could be provided to existing child care programs that affiliate into EYC Networks through contracts for service or a similar funding mechanism.

Contracts for service (or service contracts) are a relatively common way for governments to fund the delivery of a service when it is provided by organizations or individuals who are not direct government employees.

While not perfect, service contracts may be the most effective way to transition existing providers into the new system. On the one hand, they make it possible for existing providers to keep their own identity and have some control over how services are delivered. On the other, they make it possible for government to tie public funds to public goals – in this case, the five accountability measures for EYC Networks and school age care.

The Plan calls for new EYC Networks, enhanced Kindergarten and Grade 1, and school age programs to be developed and delivered by Boards of Education. These programs would be funded directly by Boards in the same way that the K – 12 system is funded.

This Plan is about extending universal access to quality early care and learning programs for young children, ensuring that public investments meet public goals and building community assets. The ‘private’ school model doesn’t help achieve these goals.

It’s also important to clarify different uses of the term ‘private’. In child care it describes programs that are privately owned by individuals, small companies or national or multinational corporations. These child care programs operate as businesses where the owners make the decisions, can accumulate private assets (like real estate) through the business and can make a profit. These are different from child care programs operated by non-profit societies where an elected board of directors makes the decisions but cannot receive any personal gain. Employees of non-profit societies receive a wage or salary but any assets (like real estate) belong to the society – not to an individual – and any surplus goes back into the program, not into profits.

In education, the term ‘private’ describes schools that are independent from elected Boards of Education. But in order to receive funds from the province these schools must be non-profit societies in good standing and offer provincially approved curriculum.

So while public funding of private schools raises serious questions for us, at least public funds that go to them cannot be used for the private accumulation of wealth or assets.

There are a number of questions about the Plan’s impact on both the function and the staff employed by Licensing, Child Care Resource and Referral and Supported Child Development programs. Here are our answers:

As we expected, there are a number of questions about why we propose to move responsibility of early care and learning programs into the Ministry of Education rather than other options. We hope these answers explain our rationale.

Many BC municipalities have worked hard to support the accessibility and affordability of child care for their residents. In the face of inaction by senior levels of government, many use their powers over zoning and development, their limited budgets and their political influence to do the best they can. We applaud their initiative but we recognize that they do not have the authority or revenue to build the early care and learning system that BC needs.

We considered an expanded municipal role in early care and learning and looked at Ontario, where municipalities have a statutory responsibility for some community services including child care. The current Ontario plan has 4 and 5-year-olds moving to the school system and municipalities responsible for programs for children 3 and under.

BC municipalities don’t have the same powers or responsibilities, so we looked for a made in BC approach that integrated early care and learning for children from birth up.

That said, there is still an important role for municipalities in this Plan. They will need to be key partners in developing Early Care and Learning Plans and in facilitating the growth of Early Years Centre Networks wherever they are located – including as part of new recreation or civic facilities and new residential communities.

The Plan doesn’t provide for every detail and more discussion and thought is required as we move to implementation. But here are answers to some of the common questions about how it would all work.

This question comes from those who are excited by the Plan and want to get going and also from those who think it is a government plan that we have the power to implement.

The Plan is proposed by two community organizations – not by government. It can and will start when there is enough public support to impel governments to act.

In 2011, we are working to build that support so that every elected official in BC makes a commitment to embrace and implement the Plan. To do this we will need the help of all those who are excited by the Plan’s potential to provide a better future for BC’s young children and their families. Find out more on the $10aDay website.