Martha says “no” to the Kentucky Fried Chicken franchising of Alberta’s Child Care

Martha and Henry get a lot of junk emails and one caught their eyes for an online franchise place offering franchise opportunities for Kentucky Fried Chicken, Dunkin'Donuts, and Petland. They also found, on that American website, that there are franchise opportunities for child care centers! That's right. In the U.S., you can franchise chicken and children with only a few clicks of the mouse. Martha just felt this was wrong. Child care needs to be outside of the realm of profit. Doesn't it? Well, not according to the Alberta government.

In spite of the federal government’s $5 Billion commitment to a national child care strategy, the Alberta Government has already indicated that it will not be participating, arguing that national standards mean a “lack of choice” for parents. The Province's Minister for Children's Services, Heather Forsyth, says that the Government would rather take its share of the money and set up its own system – one that would allow parents to spend day-care dollars where they see fit. While we wish to support parents’ choices for child care, we are concerned that Alberta’s lack of commitment to a comprehensive, regulated and public child care strategy will signal more of the same—increased privatization of child care, low wages for child care workers, lack of quality and lack of systemic accountability for Alberta’s most vulnerable.

By any objective standard, the Alberta government's provisions for child care are inadequate. In a number of national studies Alberta's child care (particularly in the for-profit sector) has ranked among the poorest in the country. Not only has Alberta’s spending for regulated child care steadily decreased since the early 1990s, but Alberta’s allocation for regulated spaces and for each child 0-12 years has fallen to that of the lowest in Canada (Child Care Resource and Research Unit) Within the province of Alberta, the significant decline in service over a number of years may be clearly linked to a lack of accountability and self-assessment. There appears to be little needs assessment and planning in place; so that in cities such as Calgary, where the number of working families with young children has been growing rapidly, waiting lists for high quality child care programs are extensive. For example, in a recent radio interview, staff from Mt. Royal College's Child Development Centre reported that children were waiting up to two years to be admitted to their program.

While the introduction of accreditation to Alberta has been a positive move, there are a number of systemic issues that need to be addressed if that initiative is ever to be successful. The quality of care offered in many licensed child care centres remains problematic; child care operators find it difficult to hire and retain trained caregivers; salaries are low and staff turnover is typically high. Women make up 98.3% of child care workers so this is an issue for women on so many levels. One college educator told Martha that she finds it hard to recommend the career for her students when she knows she is saddling them with low pay, poor working conditions, and few opportunities for advancement.

Family Day Home Care is also in trouble. Recently, the Calgary Rocky View Child and Family Services Authority conducted a review of their Family Day Home Program. The review, begun in March 2002, was initiated in part because of concern about the steady decline in the number of approved family day homes and the high turnover of approved providers in the region following the de-regulation of family day homes in 1994. The final report noted: "Since December 1993, the number of approved homes has declined from 722 to 444, a decrease of almost 39%. In real numbers the decline in accessibility is much higher due to vigorous growth in the population of Calgary" (p.1, March, 2003). The report expressed concerns about the "growing number of private providers who are not subject to meeting any basic standards of care, nor are they connected with agencies that can offer them on-going training and support". It noted: "in the past year in Calgary, one private provider was charged with manslaughter in the death of a toddler; another was charged with aggravated assault for injuring a 21 month old girl by shaking her; and a third provider was charged with assault for pushing a child down the stairs (as reported in the Calgary Herald, May 10, 2002, June 7, 2002, October 10, 2002). Compounding these incidents was the recent finding in the “You Bet I Care Study” that over a third of Alberta agency-approved providers who were evaluated were ranked as offering only mediocre, or minimally adequate care" (p. 4).

Since that time, the situation regarding family day homes has further deteriorated—the number of agency-approved (regulated) providers has continued to decrease. The provincial decision to direct the accreditation process to family day home agencies, rather than to day home providers themselves (which is the common practice in most other jurisdictions) has meant that provincial efforts to improve quality apply to an even smaller number of home caregivers. In Alberta, the majority of day home providers are operating outside of any formal licensing or support system—a certain recipe for continuing abuse and mediocre care.

Provisions for special needs care, for rural and aboriginal child care are also extremely limited. In many other provinces there are excellent examples of innovative programs that meet families' needs in these areas; Alberta provides little in the way of support or incentives to develop them.

A number of these problems stem directly from Alberta's policy to leave the development of child care in the hands of commercial operators, thus treating the early education of children as a market commodity, and not as a public good. This focus on operating child care as a profit-making business rather than as a community service, however, has not worked and has contributed to the current mediocrity, inaccessibility and piecemeal care. Continuing present policies can only lead to more of the same--or worse--the "Kentucky Fried" franchising of child care by large-scale operators. While Colonel Sanders makes a mean piece of chicken, Martha says let’s keep child care out of the hands of the for-profit world. The federal proposals offer us an opportunity to develop community-based non-profit centres and day home programs where funding is directly invested in children, rather than into making profits that go into the pockets of corporations and their investors.

Many suggest that the national child care initiative penalizes those parents who choose to stay at home with their children, offering incentives only for working parents. However, participation in a national child care strategy need not preclude comprehensive assistance for parents who stay at home. It is Alberta policy makers who have tended to pit mothers who stay at home against those who work. We believe that a national child care strategy helps all mothers and fathers. Parents who stay at home should have access to community play groups, nursery schools, full day kindergartens, and other kinds of family support; parents who work should have access to affordable, accessible, quality care arrangements. Neither should have to scramble to find child care when needed nor worry about whether their children will be kept safe. Further, there is nothing to preclude the Province of Alberta from developing its own strategies to assist mothers and fathers who care for their children at home. The fact is that children are increasingly in the care of others. Does it not therefore make sense to endorse a strategy that is aimed at ensuring this care’s quality, accessibility and accountability?

Martha is indebted for much of the research and the following letter to a brand new Martha in Calgary who is concerned about the lack of public discussion on child care in Alberta. (Thanks, Irene!) If you, like her, want to see a quality, accessible, accountable system of child care in Alberta then please copy the following to Premier Klein at premier@gov.ab.ca, The Minister of Children’s Services, the Honourable Heather Forsyth calgary.fishcreek@assembly.ab.ca. Liberal opposition leader Kevin Taft at Edmonton.riverview@assembly.ab.ca, Weslyn Mather Liberal Critic for Children’s Services at Edmonton.millwoods@gov.ab.ca, New Democrat leader Brian Mason at Alison.Crawford@assembly.ab.ca, to Paul Hinman of the Alberta Alliance at cardston.taberwarner@assembly.ab.ca and back to us at marthasmonthly@yahoo.ca. Many Marthas have had good responses when they also sent the email to their own MLA. Find your MLA and contact info here. You may wish to consider sending your letter to your local paper.

Please do remember to put your name and address on the bottom of the letter.

April 8, 2005

Dear Premier Klein,

As a citizen of Alberta, I am deeply concerned about my province’s position on opting out of a National Child Care Strategy by recommending a “made in Alberta” solution. Alberta should be taking advantage of this opportunity to work with others and to learn from the progressive work that is going on in other parts of the country and elsewhere.

Like you, we believe that parents ought to have “choice” in accessing the types of services that will best suit their family’s needs. However, we are concerned that, without adequate funding from the Province of Alberta, these choices are, in practice, extremely limited, and often force parents into impossible predicaments.

Many have suggested that the national child care initiative penalizes those parents who choose to stay at home with their children, offering incentives only for working parents. However, participation in a national child care strategy need not preclude comprehensive assistance for parents who stay at home. We believe that a national child care strategy helps all parents. Parents who stay at home should have access to community play groups, nursery schools, full-day kindergarten, and other kinds of family support. No parent should have to scramble to find childcare when it is needed nor worry about whether their children will be kept safe. Further, there is nothing to preclude the Province of Alberta from developing its own strategies to assist mothers and fathers who care for their children at home. The fact is that children are increasingly in the care of others. Does it not therefore make sense to participate in a strategy that is aimed at ensuring this care’s quality, accessibility and accountability?

Your Minister of Children’s Services, the Honourable Heather Forsyth, has talked about Alberta's "uniqueness" –sadly this uniqueness has more to do with patchwork, inaccessible and substandard care than to any other special circumstances. Given the wealth of resources available in this province, this neglect is unconscionable. Alberta needs to be held accountable for its neglect of child care and future moneys need to be directed to expanding the non-profit sector and to developing the basic infrastructure to support a quality system.

I strongly urge you, Mr. Klein, and your colleagues to rethink your position on child care and to explore more positive ways of participating in the national initiative.

Yours truly,

[YOUR NAME]