The Logic Behind Charging Less For 2 Year Olds?

[iheartkids]

I don't understand why some daycares charge less when the child turns two. When my babies were all under 1 year the parents provided everything for them...diapers, wipes, formula, babyfood. Now that they are growing up I have to provide everything for them...milk, juice, food, toilet paper. I go through so much milk now I can barely keep it stocked in my frigde! So what is the logic behind 2 year olds being cheaper to watch?

[MsMe]

I think it is that they need more one-on-one care. I set my prices this way when I started just because this is what I saw everyone else doing.

I now know this locgic is not true...two year olds and up are MUCH more work than babies!!!

I am thinking about chnaging my prices but i can't decide what price to stick with.

Full time:
155.00 Birth - 2
135.00 2 and up

[SilverSabre25]

I don't charge differently...babies may be more hands on work but toddlers and up are more mental work, more supplies, more physical work, more guiding and disciplining, more chasing, more costly in terms of an increased supply of caffeine and chocolate for your (or wait...maybe that's just me ).

Bottom line, I think it's silly to charge less for older kids, so I don't. When asked, I tell parents, "I give the same level of care to all the kids, no matter their age."

[godiva83]

I did the same, and now all my babies are turning 2- silly me. I am thinking about putting out a revision and keeping the price the same. Hopefully it goes over well

[Mommyto4]

Originally Posted by godiva83

I did the same, and now all my babies are turning 2- silly me. I am thinking about putting out a revision and keeping the price the same. Hopefully it goes over well

I like the idea of "same level of care, same price"...do you mind if I ask what price do you charge?

Thanks!

[DCMom]

I don't charge different rates for different ages~I never have. The way I look at it, each age has it's own challenges. Infants require more physical care, but toddlers need more supervision. Then there is potty training and preschool for the 2 and older crowd!

I have always looked at it as a 'spot' rather than an 'age group' I guess.

[mom2many]

I keep the price the same until they go to school and then I drop it $10. My logic was that infants are more hands on and I can only have 2 (under 2 yo) in my daycare, while watching 8 kids--so my spots are limited.

Around the age of 2, they get the benefit of participating in the preschool program at no added charge, so I never lowered my prices for this age group, figuring that this helped compensate me for the cost of these materials.

[mismatchedsocks]

Here I charge more from birth to age 1 is $150/wk then from age1-3 1/2 is $140.wk and ages 3 1/2 and up is $130/wk ( even school agers )

MY thought is I provide formula, baby food, etc. It cost more to feed formula then milk. And at 3 1/2 I am thinking most kids are potty trained.

I like the idea of a "spot" fee. That sure would make things easier!

[sharlan]

I never charged more for infants. But I am beginning to see logic in charging more, the OLDER they are. I can turn my back on my 3 & 4 yo while I make lunch or snack, but not on the older ones.

[Zoe]

To be honest, I don't change my rates because it's too much for me to remember! I want to be able to tell a parent on the spot without looking at anything that this is the daily/weekly rate. Maybe when I have more experience I'll change that, but I don't really see the logic behind reducing rates for older kids. Why would I lower my income as the kids get older? My two cents.

[Abigail]

I don't see it as much as charging less once they turn two. I see it as charging more until they turn two. We can have three under 24 months including our own and those spots are limited. I've seen many people charge a flat rate across the board for simplicity, but many charge for 1-2, 2+ then some charge per year of age, etc.

Either way, it comes down to personal preference on how difficult someone wants to make their fees.

[familyschoolcare]

It also has to do with ratio laws here in cal. a family day care can have 4 infants (infants under the age of 2) or 6 children with no more than 3 being infants. Also, a center can have 1 teacher/helper to every 12 preschoolers (2 years to not yet in school).

[blessedmess8]

Originally Posted by familyschoolcare

It also has to do with ratio laws here in cal. a family day care can have 4 infants (infants under the age of 2) or 6 children with no more than 3 being infants. Also, a center can have 1 teacher/helper to every 12 preschoolers (2 years to not yet in school).

This is part of why I charge more for under 2 - it drops my ratio down. For instance, I have one who will turn 2 in Sept and I'll be able to add another child. So, essentially, it costs me more to keep children under two because it can cause me to lose a whole spot or more!
Also, my rates progressively go down as children age. Not by much, but my mentality is that there are so many free programs now for 3 and 4 year olds, I want to give parents a little incentive to keep their child with me as long as possible because that is best for the children and it is easier to keep kids you've always had and have a relationship with the family, rather than taking on a new child.

[KEG123]

I personally charge the same age for all children until they get to age 5. My logic is that they are never truely "easier" to take care of, their needs just change.

[AnneCordelia]

A spot is a spot in my daycare and they all cost the same. But I'm not limited to age ratios where I live.

[JenNJ]

I charge the same no matter what age. I charge by the spot.

Why on earth would a home day care provider cut her/his rates just because a child became older? I start at a higher rate for an infant - but by the time she/he is 2, I've gone 2 years at the same rate of pay - so I either raise the rate then or it stays the same (if the economic climate is iffy and I'm not sure I"ll get to keep a kid if I raise rates.) Most people get at least a bit of a raise after 2 years. Certainly few go down in pay rates. That just seems odd to me that anyone would consider taking a pay cut because of a child's age. Every child takes time/a "spot"/care. New kids, no matter the age, always come in at a slightly higher rate, so I can afford to have fewer rate increases for families once they are in care.

[Hunni Bee]

I think that came from centers, the whole "charge less as the child gets older" thing. The reason being because the older the children, the more of them one teacher can have.

Because in center you can "only" (and I use the term loosely) have four infants for every one teacher, you would feel the need to charge more per kid. But when you can have up to ten two-year-olds in a class and still only have to pay one teacher, you don't charge as much.

Plus it makes the parent feel as if they're getting a "discount"...they see the highest price for the infant room, then they see that because they have a two-year-old they get to pay $25-30 less.

ETA: Somebody pretty much already said this...sorry.

[Crazy8]

I do charge more for an infant. I don't provide formula or diapers so that has NOTHING to do with the reason and I provide the same level of care for all children - that also has NOTHING to do with the reason.

My reason is 100% based on the state guidelines that can cause me to have ONE LESS spot available if a certain number of my kids are under 2 years old. I could basically be losing $175/week if I had all under 2's in my care.

[Blackcat31]

I used to charge a different rate for different ages (following the state guidelines) but now charge one rate per slot; regardless of age.

Each age has it's own pros and cons so...

[learn-n-grow]

I charge the same for all ages as well. Some parents have an issue with paying the price for the school agers. I though about lowering them but I read a post that encouraged me to keep my prices until I find a family that is willing to pay me what I feel I am worth.

I don't understand why the state feels that the older they are the cheaper their tuition should be...

[Blackcat31]

Originally Posted by learn-n-grow

I charge the same for all ages as well. Some parents have an issue with paying the price for the school agers. I though about lowering them but I read a post that encouraged me to keep my prices until I find a family that is willing to pay me what I feel I am worth.

I don't understand why the state feels that the older they are the cheaper their tuition should be...

Because on paper the school agers require less supervision from the caregiver so they are easier.

Another example of a textook theory but no field knowledge to back it up.