Questions for licensed providers

[Rachael]

There is this blog going around telling about the horrors of working for an agency, and it states that agencies set your hours. And that if she (the writer) were to join an agency she would no longer be able to work with parents flexible schedules etc...
But I can't find anyone to verify this. I work for my regions home child care program and I have kids from 6am until 8:30pm and sometimes on weekends!
I'm just feeling irritated because spreading that type of misinformation is bad for MY business.

Although not impossible, it seems a bit fishy to me. I'd be interested in where the author is based.

Why I say not impossible....

Years ago, in this Municipality, there was one day home agency. I won't mention their name as incredibly, they are still in business.

This agency imposed several conditions on it's home providers which were rather restrictive to their businesses.

For instance - our regs state a registered provider cannot have more than 3 children under 36 months and out of those three, no more than two can be younger than 24 months. It's commonly summarized as "no more than 2 under 2, no more than 3 under 3" although it's a bit more complicated than that, you get the idea. This particular agency added that it's carer's couldn't have more than one under one, more than two under two, more than three under three and no more than four under four which means to fill all 6 places, two of the 6 had to have had their 4th birthday. Since they go to school here at 5, it was a constantly revolving door of interviews and new clients.

They had/have other additional rules too.

For instance, our regs allow us to arrange cover for carer appointments during the day and ideally that cover should be provided by our supporting agency. But this particular agency didn't want to be called out to homes and so added their own requirement that no carer appointments could be made during business hours and no cover can be offered/provided due to carer unavailability. The insisting on the day home closing and losing that income.

How do they get away with it?

Because prior to 2009, subsidized places were awarded to the agency, and with this being the only agency locally, they of course had all of the allocated places for subsidized care.

It is very key that understand that subsidized care was available by a allocated number of places vs today's system of allocated funds.

This meant the agency had a pool of parents desperately waiting for a subsidized place to open up and often, paying full rates elsewhere whilst they did wait for a subsidized spot. If a private client left, this did not free up a subsidized place. The wait list was for when a subsidized client made a vacancy.

However, with one agency holding all the local funding all the local subsidized places, it also meant enough places for their carers to fill all their spots with financially assisted families. Plus, any agency provider was sure to have vacancies filled immediately.

Essentially, this agency held all the power. Parents needing financial assistance with child care had to go to this agency. Providers who needed to know they would operate at 100% capacity went to this agency because they knew that's where the pool of waiting clients was. The agency grew and because it is paid based on the number of provider's it has, they were in a win-win situation.

As such, they were able legally, to include additional requirements from their carer's which made the task of dealing with so many registered care homes more manageable because it reduced the support they offered.

However, 2009 brought changes.

Instead of child care funding being allocated in terms of a set number of places per agency, the funding was attached to the child needing care. This allowed parents to go directly to the care providers, and over time, the pool of clients as the agency was reduced. The wait list was laughable because now parents weren't waiting their turn but hunting down their own registered provider and getting on all the individual waiting lists increasing their chances of a space when needed. They were no longer on one central wait list but perhaps 10-15 in their area.

With incomes being so low here and cost of living being so high, the majority of parents are usually entitled to some help - although it might just be a few dollars. So suddenly most parents were entitled to financial assistance, all agency places were open to subsidized clients and it become common that every single agency approved day home was 100% subsidized children.

Of course, more and more in home providers wanted to become registered as most of their inquires were from parents needing a registered home. So much so, that this one agency couldn't possibly meet the requirements on them to support so many homes. This opened the door to more agencies being approved locally.

Soon there were two, then three - then four.

With each new agency, and with in-home carer's having a choice locally now, the business smart ones got creative to attract new homes. Bear in mind, agencies here get paid purely by the government not the providers or their clients. They get a set amount for each day home registered with their agency.

The newer agencies didn't enforce additional rules on their carer's. The newer agencies got creative in their ways of being supportive and helping their carer's.

Sadly, this original home has yet to wake up. Sure, they are not able to support any new carer's as they are maxed out but due to sites like this one, carer's are becoming more informed. They are gradually realizing that not all agencies are the same. As slowly, a few are moving agencies.

Sadly, I don't think this original agency will change and sadly I don't think they will lose enough in-home providers to make them think more but it's been a very long time since they have been approached by anyone seeking registered status.

However, their contracts and agreements with their in-home providers remain as they were. Some rules just restrict the business as the market has moved on.

Due to all of this, I am not surprised if there are some agencies which exist who do set the hours, activities, etc of their providers and until all providers are better informed, they will continue to do so.