Early childhood development reform misses the mark
Campaign launched to fix bill that experts say fails to improve ECD landscape
The early childhood development (ECD) sector in SA has been devastated by Covid-19. Four months after the national lockdown was declared, researchers estimate that just 13% of children aged up to six years are attending ECD programmes. This is a disaster. But the crisis is not entirely new — challenges in the sector have been mounting for years.
Even before the lockdown, the majority of SA’s children — most of whom live in poverty — did not have access to quality early childhood development services. An incoherent and restrictive legal framework is one of the major reasons for this. Onerous registration requirements have long held the ECD sector in a choke-hold. Consequently, almost two-thirds of ECD providers operate in the informal sector — unregulated and unfunded. They typically service the poorest areas across the country.
Calls to reform this restrictive legal framework have been made for more than a decade and the government has itself identified the crucial need for “enabling policies, laws and programmes”. So when the social development department introduced the Children’s Amendment Bill in parliament it was hoped progressive strides to reform would be made.
The bill proposes wide-ranging amendments to the Children’s Act, which is the main law providing for and regulating, among others, ECD services in SA. Yet, far from the real reform needed, the bill not only fails to address the key issues facing the ECD sector but actually threatens to deepen some challenges.
First, instead of the streamlined registration process the sector desperately needs, ECD programme providers are still required to register programmes and facilities separately. Indeed, on the face of it, some providers may have to register three times (registration of the ECD programme, registration as a partial-care facility and registration as an ECD centre). This signals a dire failure to take seriously the need for comprehensive and comprehensible revision of the legal framework.
Second, the bill continues to adopt a “one size fits all” approach to regulating ECD providers. But this fails to recognise that there are various modalities of ECD provisioning — ranging from small toy libraries and playgroups to large ECD centres. It is inappropriate and ineffective to regulate the sector without taking these differences into account.
Third, the bill makes no effort to revise or streamline compliance standards. Currently, ECD providers have to navigate a morass of provincial and local government requirements, some of which are entirely divorced from the reality of how ECD is provided in SA. By adopting a copy-and-paste approach in parts, the bill creates further potential for inconsistent and overlapping compliance standards being imposed on ECD providers.
Fourth, the bill is unclear as to whether providers who do not fully comply with all required standards are at least able to obtain conditional registration. Conditional registration is an important mechanism to enable providers to access government support and to bring them under appropriate regulation. The current legislative framework does not optimise the progressive potential of such a mechanism.
These barriers to registration and compliance mean that most children who would benefit from the department of social development’s early learning subsidy cannot access it. There are also worrying indications in the bill that provisions aimed at unlocking support to ECD providers, including infrastructure support, will actually be weakened rather than strengthened.
To make matters worse, there is no indication that the bill has been drafted with any regard to the significant changes announced by President Cyril Ramaphosa in last year’s state of the nation address. Along with the proposed introduction of two years of compulsory preschool (grade RR and grade R), the president also declared that certain responsibilities in relation to ECD would “migrate” from the social development department to the department of basic education. As it stands, the intersection between the roles and responsibilities of the departments in relation to ECD has been the source of confusion.
If the bill’s proposals in relation to ECD are passed in their current form we will be failing our children. In response, the Real ECD Reform campaign has been launched by a wide range of organisations to build awareness around the importance of an enabling legal framework for the ECD sector. The campaign is motivating for five key reforms:
• A one-step registration process for ECD providers and recognition that different types of providers must be regulated differently;
• All children attending any type of ECD programme should be able to access the early learning subsidy if they need it;
• Simpler, adequate health, safety and programme standards must be in place;
• It must be clear that conditional registration can be obtained before meeting all registration requirements, and MECs must support providers to meet those requirements (and report on the support being provided); and
• The infrastructure needs of the sector must be supported.
This is an opportunity to engage around the real reforms needed to see all children in SA thriving.