Rural families may have “three days” on paper, but access still hinges on supply and In Home Care rules

Most of the early childhood sector is across the basics of the 3 Day Guarantee. The sharper question for rural and remote communities is whether a larger subsidy entitlement can be converted into actual hours of care when services are scarce, distances are long, and the only viable option is often In Home Care (IHC).

Across Australia, access remains uneven. ABC reporting on neighbourhood-level data found nearly 6 million Australians live in a “childcare desert” (three or more children competing for each place), including more than 680,000people in areas with no access at all. Families in very remote areas were reported as 3.7 times as likely as those in major cities to live in a childcare desert. 

For rural families, the 3 Day Guarantee may reduce a subsidy barrier, but it does not automatically remove the availability barrier.

1) The biggest impact: more entitlement, but still no place

The Department of Education is explicit that families are not guaranteed a place, they still need to secure a vacancy and may still pay gap fees. 

In “thin markets”, where demand is dispersed and services struggle to remain viable, the gap between entitlement and access can be stark. Productivity Commission material on ECEC availability notes persistent regional and remote constraints and long wait times in some areas,  including case examples of 4–6 months and 12 months or more waits in parts of regional Queensland. 

Practical impact for rural families:

• the reform can increase demand for places in towns already operating at capacity
• families may still be unable to use their entitlement if no local service exists, or if available sessions don’t align with work patterns, including seasonal and shift work.

2) When IHC is the only option, program rules can block “workable” solutions

In remote locations, families regularly report that IHC is the only feasible pathway to subsidised care. But the IHC program is capped nationally and governed by rules designed for specific circumstances rather than broad access. The In Home Care National Guidelines describe IHC as a capped place program and set out key eligibility requirements, including that families must demonstrate no other approved care type is available or suitable. 

The guidelines also outline restrictions that can bite hardest in geographically isolated contexts:

• “Multi-care” is outside program scope — care cannot be provided for children from more than one family in a session of IHC. 
• Educators cannot bring their own children to the care environment during an IHC session, and an educator’s own child cannot receive CCS for IHC on the same day the educator provides IHC. 
• IHC Support Agencies manage a waitlist for eligible families who have been assessed as in-scope but have not commenced care. 
• The national cap is stated as 3,200 places. 

ICPA (Aust) has argued that these settings can make IHC “unsuitable” for geographically isolated families and can prevent families from accessing the CCS they are otherwise eligible for. In its 2025 comment on the legislation, ICPA points to remote property realities, including multiple families living in a single homestead complex, and calls for legislative flexibility,  including changes that would allow an educator to care for children from more than one family and to care for their own child while providing IHC. 

Practical impact for rural families:

• IHC may be the only realistic care type, yet its rules can limit staffing models that would make care viable in remote settings
• recruitment is harder when educators cannot bring their own children — a constraint that may be manageable in metro areas but can be a dealbreaker in isolated communities. 

3) Workforce participation and essential services feel the flow-on effects

Childcare access in rural and remote Australia is repeatedly linked to workforce participation, not only for families, but for community stability.

The Rural Doctors Association of Australia has highlighted childcare as a factor affecting parents’ capacity to participate in paid work, with broader impacts on communities and the national economy. It also reports that childcare access influences recruitment and retention decisions for rural health professionals and notes the additional challenges of shift work, extended hours and on-call rosters. 

This mirrors what many rural communities observe: when early learning and care cannot be accessed consistently, hospitals, schools, police stations, farms and small businesses feel it, especially where the workforce is already stretched.

Practical impact for rural families:

• the 3 Day Guarantee can support those who already have a service to use
• but for communities without supply, the change may highlight inequity rather than resolve it.

Even without changes to local supply, services in regional and rural towns may experience:

• increased enquiries and waitlist pressure as families seek to use expanded entitlement 
• heightened frustration where “guarantee” is interpreted as “guaranteed place” 
• more families exploring IHC, and more disappointment when families encounter eligibility evidence requirements, capped places, and out-of-scope restrictions. 

For rural and remote communities, the 3 Day Guarantee shifts the policy centre of gravity from eligibility to delivery. The most material next-step questions look like:

• how governments address “thin markets” where private provision is not viable 
• whether IHC rules can be adapted for geographically isolated contexts without undermining program intent 
• what targeted workforce and service-viability measures are needed to turn entitlement into access. 

References

• Australian Government Department of Education – 3 Day Guarantee, provider information — “families are not guaranteed a place”. 
• ABC News. Mapping Australia’s childcare divide and childcare deserts. 
• Productivity Commission. Supplementary paper on availability of ECEC and “thin markets” . 
• Australian Government Department of Education. In Home Care National Guidelines.
• Isolated Children’s Parents’ Association of Australia (ICPA) (Aust). Comment on the Three Day Guarantee Bill 2025.
• Rural Doctors Association of Australia. Childcare in rural and remote Australia.