Rural communities call for changes to early education infrastructure fund

Rural advocates and councils say eligibility settings under the Building Early Education Fund do not reflect the organisations, buildings and service models available in small communities.

Rural early childhood advocates are calling for changes to Australia’s flagship early education infrastructure program, arguing that some communities experiencing severe shortages cannot access its grant opportunities.

The concerns centre on the Australian Government’s $1 billion Building Early Education Fund, which supports the construction and expansion of early childhood education and care services in areas of identified need.

ABC News reported on 6 October that advocates and councils in regional Queensland believe eligibility settings have prevented some locally appropriate projects from progressing.

The concerns do not establish that rural communities are excluded from every part of the Building Fund. However, they raise questions about whether individual funding streams accommodate the ownership structures, provider capacity and development timeframes found in small towns. 

The Building Fund comprises several components, including capital funding delivered through state and territory agreements, grants for providers and a Commonwealth build-own-lease model.

The small-scale capital grant round offered at least $20 million for new or expanded centre-based day care services and modifications supporting in-venue family day care.

It targeted outer suburban, regional and remote communities but was open specifically to small not-for-profit organisations already approved to administer Child Care Subsidy. Applications closed on 29 May 2026, with outcomes yet to be announced.

The eligibility requirement creates a potential barrier where a community has no established CCS-approved not-for-profit provider, even if a council or community organisation has identified land, a building or substantial unmet need.

Separate Building Fund agreements permit services to be operated by eligible not-for-profit providers, Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations and state or local governments. The eligibility question therefore differs between funding streams and should not be reduced to a single rule applying across the entire program. 

The ABC report describes concerns raised through forums in Longreach and Blackall, including that rural services commonly use council-owned properties and rely on small community organisations.

The Future Care Project’s Angela Cochrane said communities had found that available funding did not match their circumstances. Quilpie Shire Mayor Ben Hall also raised concerns about limitations affecting expansion of the town’s service.

Central Highlands Development Corporation told the Senate inquiry that requirements involving land and project readiness can be difficult for rural applicants because council land processes may take longer than a competitive grant timetable.

These are stakeholder claims about the program’s design and operation. Grant decisions, individual applications and any departmental assessments have not been published in full.

Early Childhood Education Minister Jess Walsh told the ABC that eligibility was designed to support high-quality not-for-profit services in areas of unmet need and said the government would continue listening as the fund was implemented. 

Infrastructure funding addresses one part of rural early education supply. A new or expanded building also requires an approved provider, service approval, suitably qualified staff and a sustainable operating model.

Housing, transport, fluctuating enrolment numbers and the cost of employing a qualified workforce can all affect whether a service is viable after construction.

The Building Fund includes up to $40 million in time-limited operational assistance, but this is available only to organisations receiving capital funding through the program.

These settings reinforce the importance of assessing infrastructure and ongoing service delivery together. A facility that cannot recruit staff or maintain viable enrolments will not resolve a community’s access problem on its own.

The concerns come as the Senate Education and Employment References Committee examines the state of ECEC in rural, regional and remote communities.

Its terms of reference include service gaps, workforce challenges, Child Care Subsidy settings and the effectiveness of existing Commonwealth investments. The committee is due to report by 29 June 2027. 

For providers and regional leaders, the immediate question is whether forthcoming grant outcomes and later funding rounds address the barriers now being identified.

The broader policy test will be whether communities with the least existing ECEC infrastructure can participate in programs designed to expand supply or whether eligibility depends on already having the provider capacity those communities lack.