Research Project

[cfred]

Could those providers who are agency affiliated, have worked with an agency in the past and those currently with an agency but wish to leave please send me a quick email indicating the following:

1. What made you choose to go with an agency in the first place?

2. What did the agency put forth as incentive to go with them and how did they measure up with following through on those incentives?

3. What did the agency charge parents and what did you receive of that?

4. Was the agency prompt and efficient as it pertains to finding clients and were you ever at full capacity?

5. Was any consideration given to matching certain clients with providers based on needs?

6. What did your inspection entail? Were they consistent and effective?

7. What factors ultimately contributed to your desire to leave the agency?

8. If you are still with an agency and wish to leave, please indicate why.

9. What is/was your monthly income while working for an agency? How many hours per week do you work? Do you find this to be a living wage suitable for supporting yourself/family?

10. Did you feel that the quality of care provided was at all compromised due to your monthly income (ie - food, supplies, equipment) ;

11. If so, now that you are working free of an agency, what has changed with regards to your programming, menu, etc?

12. Which agency are you/were you affiliated with? Was it non-profit or for profit?

It's probably easiest to answer the questions in the same format that I've asked them - 1, 2, 3, and so on....just for the sake of simplicity and information gathering. Anonymity will be maintained. And of course, if you know of any agency providers who wish to participate, please, by all means give them my email address.

c.a.fredenburgh@gmai l.com

[torontokids]

Not sure what you want the info for but I wonder if energy would be better directed in developing/creating an agency. A co-operative of sorts. Run by providers for providers. We handle the inspections as per agency guidelines and anything else that is mandatory, each provider pays a yearly fee to cover costs. Individual providers are still required/responsible for supplying their own equipment, find clients etc etc. Just an idea and I think it would solve some of our problems.

[cfred]

We're not sure we're even allowed to do that. Apparently, one Liberal MPP said it's 'on the table', but that's it and we've not heard anything yet. This research could also be useful for that end as well.....to support a cooperative endeavor as a reasonable, economically viable means to contributing to the childcare spectrum. Not sure if you watched the committee hearings.....the MPPs didn't even KNOW that agencies don't pay for inspectors...that the providers do. The fact is that they really don't know much about the industry. I don't think it hurts to gather information, since there is no research, as yet, on this.

[Artsand crafts]

Thank you Cfred for doing all this work!

[cfred]

No problemo.....

Emails are coming in now and I look forward to balanced research. I think, as do others, that this information could be quite useful. It can't hurt!

[cfred]

Torontokids....are you part of CICPO? I'm not sure how well versed you are on Bill 10. If you've not been following it on the groups site, then there might be a few things you're not aware of. This bill was started in 2012. Research has turned up proof that agencies were the policy writers. Agencies, who stand to make the most from Bill 10 actually wrote it. It is for this reason that a cooperative may not be in our future. Maybe they'll surprise us and let us have it, but I'd not be at all shocked if they didn't, no matter how much sense it makes. The fact appears to be that Bill 10 isn't so much about child safety...which is obvious from the mere 6 inspectors assigned to the province....and probably more about trying to salvage a drowning licensed sector, with as little punch to the government pocket book as possible. The best way to achieve that? Herding us into agencies. This brings in the revenue the licensed sector needs while giving the appearance of competence and 'teeth' the government needs. It's pretty much a gigantic farce. So in a new system where logic and fairness is flagrantly cast aside, I am skeptical that we'll get the go ahead to start a cooperative. I may be waaaaay off base, but this whole affair has been a circus thus far. Besides, other people are focused on the cooperative idea right now....I'm on this. There are plenty of us on task doing different jobs.

[torontokids]

I'm not a part of CICPO but I have read the site, wrote letters, was active in learning about Bill 10 etc. My husband works for the government and he had spoken to someone who works for the Ministry of Education and he was under the impression that anyone can start an agency. He had mentioned one limitation (I can't remember what it is right now but it wasn't major). I think where there might be a problem is calling it a co-operative. Call it an agency and I think you're fine. I haven't looked into it myself and my husband isn't one for details so he may be completely off base but this is what I was told.

[cfred]

Yes, you are correct. Anyone can start an agency. It's not a simple process as nothing with the ministry ever is. I've looked into it myself, and it's still a consideration. Believe me, every thing that can be thought of in regards to sorting this mess out is being looked into. My problem with starting an agency (myself) is that I have to fully give up my business in order to do so. You cannot run an agency and have kids in care. Then, while I say goodbye to my income, I have to hope and pray that my savings (which is nearly nonexistant) hold out long enough for me to sign enough providers to make enough income for myself to be self sustaining. Which is where admin fees come in...which is where really crappy pay comes in....and from what I'm reading, some shifty business practices. This is one of the points of the research; to fully learn about the agency sector. There are some horrible agencies, which will come to light. BUT, there are some wonderful agencies who do a really, really great job and are above board....but the pay is still terrible. This is because of lack of funding. No one in the general public is aware of this....no one. The shady ones just need to be called out, but the the whole system needs a light shone on it for everyone to see. The whole system needs revamping. If we start an agency, the same financial issues will exist. We still need to come up with money for inspectors' salaries. With one inspector required for every 25 home daycares, that's a whole lot of money to come up with, and it will most assuredly NOT be coming from the government unless we make it very public that this is how the system works. We'd be in the same boat...just with a different skipper....make sense? This is how I see it anyway.

This project is, hopefully, going to gather valuable information for just that purpose. My story about the MPs not being aware that Inspectors are funded by us was, I think, indicative of the system as a whole. They just haven't got a clue, nor does the general public. If someone doesn't point it out to them, they never will and nothing changes.

[cfred]

I hope that last post better explained my reasoning behind this project. Honestly, I thought long and hard about starting this. I'm tired and pissed and stressed and just want to sit down with a glass of wine, turn off my brain, turn on a low budget horror film and de-stress. But it's important and I want to do what I can. The more information we have, the better...in my opinion. And since no information actually exists in this particular area, it seems a good idea. If we're going to be forced into agencies (or to start one), wouldn't it be nice to take a crack at a better system and getting some government/public support?

[Fun&care]

Very interesting info cfred...I was not aware that agencies have to pay inspectors....it kinda explains why agencies might take such a huge cut from a providers salary, on top of all the other expenses they incur...definitely makes you think. It's no wonder the gov is pushing for agencies, that way they don't have to hire as many inspectors, they put more responsibility on agencies...Bleh it's weird.

[torontokids]

I just had a thought. Some providers may be looking into joining an agency and starting their own information gathering now to prepare. Some of these questions can be asked when interviewing the agency and this info may be helpful to inform the project. Just another group you could solicit info from.

[cfred]

Yes, Torontokids...good point! I was actually thinking about applying to a number of agencies myself. I have no intention of signing on with any of them....more of just a fact finding mission. I'm also going to speak with a number of people from other work sectors (mechanics, restaurant owners, chiropractor, food truck owner, LCBO, etc) to find out about their inspections (who pays, where is funding from, etc). I can use that to compare to our system. I really need more letters to come in though....the few that I have just aren't going to cut it.

Sooooo....if any of you know people (parents or providers) who are affiliated with or have considered affiliation, I'd really love to hear from them. It is completely anonymous and is not being researched as a biased bit of work. I want to hear from all sides and it needs to be factual.

[cfred]

One thing I want to make clear is that I don't understand fully how the agency sector works. When I say agencies pay for inspectors, these are not, to my knowledge, ministry inspectors. The ministry brought in 6 new inspectors for the entire province, bringing the total up to (I think) around 60. These are the inspectors who would show up at your door if a complaint was lodged against you. They are also the ones who would (I believe) be doing inspections of large facilities. Agencies hire RECEs to do quarterly (or maybe more depending on the agency...not sure on that) inspections of agency affiliated homes to be sure they're in compliance. Ministry inspectors will come around as well, but much less frequently. I want to say annually, but I'm not sure. So agencies don't pay for the ministry inspectors - tax payers do. They pay for the RECEs who come around quarterly with a checklist, etc. The funding for those RECEs comes from us, hence the high fees.

It even looks convoluted in text! The point being, I want to know why the ECEs, some of the lowest paid professionals in the business, are paying for their inspections in full. I want to compare this model to other business inspection models. There are other things the info is useful for, but it might be nice to publicly point out and PROVE that this is how the system is now and why we're not for it.