Following the prime minister’s announcement in the House of Commons yesterday on the ‘living with Covid’ plans, the Government has ended the requirement for staff in early years settings, and staff and children in schools in England, to test twice-weekly with immediate effect.
Updated Department for Education guidance also said that on 24 February, the guidance on tracing close contacts and self-isolation will be replaced by UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA guidance).
Free testing for the public will end in England from 1 April, with most people having to pay for lateral flow and PCR tests. There will be some exceptions, with free symptomatic tests remaining for NHS patients and in care homes, and some asymptomatic testing for both.
Ian Morgan, owner of Little Ducklings Day Nursery in Berkshire and Puddleduck Nursery in Oxfordshire, told Nursery World that the changes left ‘a huge dilemma’ for early years settings and that the nursery would continue to test staff twice-weekly, at least until supplies of lateral flow tests runs out.
‘The removal of these restrictions poses the issue of “should staff work if they are positive?” I have staff that have test positive recently, some felt completely well, some felt well but had a cold and some felt unwell enough that it took additional days to return after isolation. If we adopt the ‘it’s OK to work if positive stance’ we may exacerbate our problems as we can’t guarantee how people will react if they catch it “again”.
‘How will we also know who has the virus? We have since its introduction been doing the twice weekly LFT testing. That is how we detected our outbreaks and minimised any infection. We will carry on until our supplies run out. However, will parents now be prepared to test themselves or children if they have symptoms and pay for a test? Most probably not because they have been told they don’t need to and just get on with life.’
His nurseries had been ‘very pragmatic over the pandemic in terms of how we have dealt with the issues’ but had nevertheless experienced outbreaks at both settings. On one occasion he closed a nursery for two weeks completely and on another closed two rooms over two weeks on a rolling basis. In both cases, he returned ‘thousands of pounds in fees’ to parents.
Morgan said the nurseries would continue to ask parents to wear face coverings on pickup and if they have Covid in the home to voluntarily keep their children at home too.
‘The staffing/recruitment crisis is a big issue here,’ he added. ‘Staffing is hard at the moment and with increasing absences due to sickness, smaller less financially stable settings will have issues here. There is a shortage of bank staff, especially qualified practitioners so it is really hard to back fill when sickness occurs.
‘Today, I am on the fence with the “should staff work if positive” route.’
Mixed response
A call-out for views on Nursery World’s social media views elicited a mixed response, with some settings taking the approach that 'we have to learn to live with Covid', but also calling for a more cautious approach.
On Facebook Annemarie Noble said, ‘I do think we need to learn to live with it however I still feel there needs to be safeguards in place for early years workers and other low waged.
‘We look after young children who aren't eligible for the vaccine; taking away free testing and the isolation support grant means staff won't necessarily know if they're positive and if they do, won't be able to afford to take time off.
‘The Government are asking people to take responsibility yet taking away the means for them to act responsibily.
‘If Covid had already been classified as an endemic I would feel more confident but we're not there yet!’
Sue Cowley tweeted, ‘If isolation is now only advisory, a parent could insist on sending in a child who has tested positive. How does @educationgovuk think staff, children and parents are going to feel about that? I'm really not here for this buck passing nonsense.’
Tamsin Grimmer said, ‘It's crazy. As soon as we're not testing no one will even know if they're positive too. Stupid, stupid, stupid.’
On our Facebook page Vicky Mccormack said, ‘I think we just have to be sensible and that like any other infectious illness I'm updating policies this week to state that if the child is exhibiting illness they need to stay home till symptoms go just like flu, chicken pox and sickness bugs . We don't give Calpol for temperatures unless it's a medical emergency and this will still remain the same and the child will still need to be picked up and stay home.’
Kitty Ann Martin said, ‘I would feel more comfortable if we phased out isolation eg. Test on day three and four then two and three. I don’t like the grant being taken away either as it can help people if they do get sick with it.’
Annmarie Noble said ‘How can we safely manage risks if we don't have access to free tests?! Also scrapping the isolation payment for those who do test positive is going to cause financial hardship for all low paid workers.’
Sector organisations also called on the government to ensure that the safety of those working in early years settings is not put at risk following confirmation of the plans to remove all legal Covid-19 restrictions, including the legal requirement to self-isolate following a positive Covid-19 test.
Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA), said, ‘Removing all Covid restrictions is likely to provoke a mixed response and pose different challenges within the childcare sector.
‘On the one hand, nurseries are really struggling to remain open as so many staff members have been off isolating or poorly. Removing the requirement to isolate could really help nurseries, especially when recruitment and retention is a huge issue for the whole sector.
‘However, nurseries are also alarmed at the high numbers of cases affecting both children and practitioners. These won’t go down overnight because in nurseries, unlike other workplaces, it is impossible for people to socially distance, as anyone with a toddler will know. This will be a source for worry for any vulnerable members of staff.
‘It’s also a concern for the businesses because they lose parental income when children are off nursery due to Covid or if the nursery does not have enough staff members to open safely. There has not been enough support to the sector while nurseries have been experiencing the highest numbers of cases.’
Neil Leitch, CEO of the Early Years Alliance, said, ‘While we know that many working in the early years sector will welcome today’s step towards a return to normal, it is likely that many others will be understandably worried about the potential impact of the removal of self-isolation requirements on the safety and wellbeing of not only themselves, but their colleagues and loved ones.
‘Early years providers have gone above and beyond to keep their settings as safe as possible throughout this crisis, but with reports of positive cases within the sector soaring to record highs over recent weeks, it’s clear that for our sector, the pandemic is not yet over.
‘With under-fives now the only group not eligible for vaccinations and the early years remaining a particularly close-contact environment, it is vital that the government ensures that those working in the early years sector are protected as the changes announced today come into effect.
This means ensuring that providers are actively supported to apply and enforce their own Covid-19 policies, based on their own professional judgement and risk assessments, and to take the steps they feel are needed to keep themselves and the children and families they support as safe as possible.’
Childminders
Meanwhile, the Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years (PACEY) has raised concerns with the DfE that the rules for childminders leave them out of step with other early years settings.
The UKHSA has decided to retain the current rules that childminders with a positive case in their household are not allowed to accept children into their setting, unless the childminder is able to operate in another premises, or a self-contained annexe or cabin.
‘PACEY is dismayed at this decision, as it places registered childminders in England at a significant disadvantage to other early years and childcare settings,’ said Liz Bayram, chief Executive of PACEY. ‘We hear regularly from members who have had to temporarily close because of this rule. They have to not only disrupt the care and education that the children they look after receive, but also have to refund parents for the days they are closed. This rule cannot continue when everyone else in England is being asked to use their own “personal judgement”.
‘PACEY has already raised concern about this decision with the Department for Education (DfE) and will be calling on the government in England to overturn this decision as soon as possible. We have also asked to urgently see the UKHSA’s rationale for retaining this rule rather than trusting childminders to make professional judgements on how to manage the virus in their setting. If they are trusted to make such judgements for other illnesses, why not coronavirus?’
PACEY said they had received the following update on Tuesday from the DfE, confirming that, 'From Thursday 24 February, the Government will remove the legal requirement to self-isolate following a positive test.
Public health guidance will continue to advise that adults and children who test positive will continue to be advised to stay at home and avoid contact with other people for at least five full days, and then continue to follow the guidance until they have received two negative test results on consecutive days.
'The guidance will also advise that people with symptoms of Covid-19 or a positive test result should not have social visitors to the home. This means that the guidance on managing positive cases for childminders has not changed and childminders should not childmind in their home when someone living there has tested positive or have symptoms of Covid-19. This is because there is a higher risk of transmission to those attending the provision for childcare as they are in close proximity of the case and for extended periods of time.'