Throughout 2024, debates around childcare ratios have hit the headlines from across the UK, stemming from the previous UK Governments decision, in January 2024, to increase the ratios in England[1]. The Welsh Government took the decision not to extend the ratios in its National Minimum Standards[2].
Across the UK, many arguments have been made on both sides, with the prevailing narrative of those who wish to increase the ratios being that less staff required on site will enable settings to cut costs. However, the increase in ratios has led from significant pushback in nurseries across England, detailing the negative impact of increased ratios on children, with staff feeling overwhelmed and unable to provide the quality they are trained to do.
A Government's approach to the childcare ratios, especially for children in the first 1,000 days, reflects the value the policy makers place on this crucial part of a child's life. During this time, children benefit from high quality personalised serve and return interactions that is vital for physical, and cognitive abilities. Therefore, lower ratios in settings means that staff can devote more time to these serve and return interactions.
This blog makes the case for Governmental legislation which enables nurseries to operate with the lowest staff to child ratios as possible. We know that children receive the most benefit from childcare which is high in quality, with interactions tailored to their individual needs. Quality childcare of this nature can only be delivered when staff are given the time and space to be able to provide such care, meaning lower ratios gives staff greater ability to perform these vital tasks.
The current staffing ratios in Wales for daycare settings, as outlined in the National Minimum Standards is as follows:
- One adult to three children under 2 years.
- One adult to four children aged 2 years.
- One adult to eight children aged 3 - 7 years.
- One adult to ten children aged 8 – 12 years[1].
These ratios are lower compared to other nations in the UK. In Scotland, current guidance stipulates:
- 0 to under 2 years 1 adult to 3 children.
- 2 to under 3 years 1 adult to 5 children.
- 3 to under 8 years 1 adult to 8 children.
- Over 8 years 1 adult to 10 children[2].
In Northern Ireland, the ratios state:
- Age 0-2: one carer to three children.
- Age 2-3: one carer to four children.
- Age 3-5: One carer to eight children[3].
In England, they are:
- Under 2: 1:3
- Age 2: 1:4
- Age 3+: 1:8 or 1:13. Notes: Ratio for children aged three and over is 1:13 if led by a teacher[4].
The relaxation in the childcare ratios in Scotland, Northern Ireland and England has hit the headlines on several occasions over 2024, with Nurseries in England experiencing difficulties and rejecting the change[5]. This blog will outline why keeping ratios low in early years is an important decision the Welsh Government has made, as well as making the case for Governments across the UK to legislate for the lowest possible ratios.
[1] Early childhood play, learning and care: Developmental pathways 0 to 3
[2] https://www.careinspectorate.com/images/ELC_adult-child_ratios_-_final_29.3.18.pdf
[3] https://www.daynurseries.co.uk/advice/national-standards-for-early-learning-and-childcare-in-northern-ireland
[4] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/childcare-ratios-in-england/
[5] https://www.eyalliance.org.uk/nurseries-reject-plan-relax-ratios-and-warn-it-won%E2%80%99t-lower-childcare-costs-new-survey-exclusively
Extensive research shows that in order for the child to receive the biggest benefits from attending a childcare setting, the care they receive must be high in 'quality'. Defining 'quality' in this context can be defined by both structural and process characteristics. "Structural characteristics include the adult/child ratio, group size, the formal educational level of staff, years of working experience and in-service professional development of the caretakers/teachers, and the physical childcare facilities. Process characteristics include the caretakers' sensitivity and the quality of the child-caretaker interactions during the day"[1].
Caregiver-child interactions are crucial for a child's development, providing meaningful contact to help the child begin to understand basic language, play, facial movements etc. Lower staffing ratios ensures that a member of staff has more time to devote to communicating with the child, providing more meaningful and high-quality interactions with the child[2]. Therefore, lower staffing ratios in early years settings enables more personalised care and individual attention for children, meaning the support they receive is much more bespoke to their needs[3].
Tailored support is incredibly important for children in the early years, as it recognises that children are all individuals, have differing experiences, interests and abilities which can be focused upon and tailored towards enabling development to the best of their ability. This is of particular importance to children with Additional Learning Needs (ALN), who's needs may require increased and specialist support. This fact is recognised and outlined in the Welsh Government’'s additional learning needs transformation programme which was launched in 2020[4]. This means that lower staffing ratios in childcare settings is also a question of equality of opportunity, enabling all children to benefit from high quality childcare in order to assist their development into later childhood and adult life. Increasing the ratios only acts as a disadvantage, and threatens to impact children in our society who are more disadvantaged.
The lower the ratio, the more support can be provided to the child through interactions with caregivers, the greater the benefits to both physical and cognitive development. Conversely, higher ratios result in less time being allocated to the child meaning they do not receive a significant amount of crucial serve and return interactions. No matter the experience level of the member of staff, having more children under their care means less time can be focused on individuality. Research from the Early Years Alliance covering the relaxation of ratios in England found that some nurseries described the new rules reducing their care to 'crowd control'[5]. This means that staff were more likely to feel overwhelmed, devoting less time to the care of each child in their setting.
[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cl2.1239
[2] https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00907.x
[3] https://eden-ts.com/education/understanding-early-years-ratios-the-staff-to-child-ratio/
[4] https://www.gov.wales/additional-learning-needs-transformation-programme-frequently-asked-questions-html#:~:text=7.,to%2C%20and%20for%2C%20them.
[5] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/sep/14/nurseries-in-england-say-new-rules-have-reduced-care-to-crowd-control.
The question of lower ratios in childcare settings must focus on what situation is most likely to benefit children. We know that quality childcare leads to the best physical and cognitive developments for children. This is enabled by staff employing quality serve and return interactions in everyday practice, utilising measures such as active play and movement to enable the child to make friends, innovate, communicate and explore new environments in their own way. This has been recognised in a House of Commons report[1].
Enabling the child to benefit in the best way possible requires significant government investment, adding a significant amount of value onto the sector. Whilst investment can be costly, the long-term beneficial impacts of this investment is clear, with all children, no matter their background, being given the best chance to succeed by accessing the same level of high quality childcare.
This question of quality is incredibly important. There have been numerous examples in our history of childcare provided by the state which was shown to be low in quality, and consequently, negatively impact the children who accessed the service. A prime example of this is the 1997 initiative employed in Quebec Canada. In this instance, the economic argument took precedence, with parents being told that their child would receive childcare for as little as "$5 a day"[2]. Predictably, this initiative was incredibly popular, especially with parents from lower income backgrounds who were unable to afford other avenues of childcare[3]. Due to the fact that economic arguments were given priority, little thought was given to the workings of the programme, and, as a result, settings were overcrowded, with staff underpaid and overworked. As a result, extensive research carried out in the wake of the policy has found that children attending the programme experienced 'negative effects' which stayed with them into later life[4].
A contributing reason could be because children were not provided with the crucial serve and return interactions within the settings, meaning the nurturing aspect of the setting was lost. This study shows that childcare, for the sake of childcare, is not the correct approach for Governments to take. Policies towards children, especially in the first 1,000 days must be high in quality, nurturing, and designed to benefit children.
[1] https://post.parliament.uk/the-impact-of-early-childhood-education-and-care-on-childrens-outcomes/
[2] Measuring the Long-Term Effects of Early, Extensive Day Care | Institute for Family Studies
[3] Measuring the Long-Term Effects of Early, Extensive Day Care | Institute for Family Studies
[4] Measuring the Long-Term Effects of Early, Extensive Day Care | Institute for Family Studies
Early years practitioners are at the heart of delivering high quality early years provision. Their knowledge and expertise enables every child who enters the setting to experience the full range of physical and cognitive benefits provided by the provision. These benefits are a measure of the quality of provision a setting can provide. Lower ratios enable staff to spend more time with children, gain an understanding of their different wants and needs, and tailor their provision to suit the individuality of children, as discussed in the previous section. The higher the ratio, the less time a member of staff has to get to know and understand the child in their care, meaning there is less of an opportunity to ensure the child in question is receiving all of the benefits that childcare provides.
It is this question of quality why many early years providers across England have been reluctant to reduce their staffing levels[1], as many staff feel overwhelmed in situations where higher ratios are implemented[2]. Feelings of being overwhelmed in the workplace can lead to lower staff morale, and cause higher turnovers in staffing numbers, meaning early years settings are more likely to be unable to operate. There are many jobs available in early years provision, with research from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) showcasing a 58% increase in job adverts for 'Early education and childcare practitioners'[3].
This data could be interpreted as evidence of the staffing crisis, with many professionals leaving the sector due its current state. Further, research from the Early Years survey conducted by Early Years Wales in partnership with ARAD in 2022, found that many providers across Wales were experiencing significant staffing turnover due to longstanding issues within the sector such as lack of pay, and financial insecurity of the setting[4].
The early years survey showcases that, in order for effective and high-quality early years provision to be delivered, policy makers must ensure that the workforce feel supported and valued. With higher ratios proven to cause stressful feelings of being overwhelmed, implementing higher rations in the current climate is not a sustainable policy to follow. For this reason alone we welcome the decision made by the Welsh Government to retain the ratio for early years despite financial advantages to changing this as done in England. The impact of higher ratios only exacerbates the issues facing the sector caused by lack of pay, financial uncertainty and lack of support.
[1] https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10165687/1/cepeobn18.pdf
[2] https://www.eyalliance.org.uk/nurseries-reject-plan-relax-ratios-and-warn-it-won%E2%80%99t-lower-childcare-costs-new-survey-exclusively
[3] Which skills are employers seeking in your area? - Office for National Statistics
[4] https://cwlwm.org.uk/news/early-years-survey-i-arad-report
In conclusion, this blog has made the case for government legislation to ensure the smallest possible ratios are possible within our childcare system, and not go the other way. Relaxing the ratios, veiled in shroud of cost cutting purposes does not act within the interests of children accessing the setting, as well as staff within the setting itself.
The Welsh Government can be commended for retaining the existing ratio of one staff member for every three children under the age of two years old. This reflects the value the Welsh Government places on the first 1,000 days of a child's life. We encourage the Welsh Government, as well as all Governments across the UK to legislate for the lowest possible staffing ratios , supporting settings financially to pay and retain an increased number of staff to support the ambition of lower ratios.
As a society, we need to reframe our thoughts about early childhood away from decisions which may provide the best short-term economic outcome, instead considering what benefits children the most. If we are to realise the value of the first 1,000 days, significant investment is required from all levels of Government. This investment will have far-reaching long-term benefits, leading to new generations of young children armed with knowledge and capabilities by having the best start in life.
Blog by Leo Holmes, Head of Policy and Advocacy