The Story Behind the Childcare Cleaning Standard (CCS)

Q&A: The Story Behind the Childcare Cleaning Standard (CCS)

An open conversation with Lindsay Smith, the architect of Australia’s first childcare‑specific cleaning standard.

Opening Statement

I know people are probably wondering who I am and how this work even started. The reality is, the CCS didn’t come out of a university, a government team, or a funded initiative. It was built independently, outside the usual pathways, because the problem it solves was too important to leave sitting in the “too hard” basket. The sector needed a standard, and no one was building one — so I stepped in and did it.

Since I’m sure people have questions, I’ve put together this Q&A in the hope that it answers them clearly and openly.

Q: How did your journey in the ECEC sector begin?

A: I started with a tiny independent cleaning service — just two staff. BLB Cleaning wasn’t a consultancy or a funded project. It was two people doing the work, night after night, centre after centre. That’s where I saw the realities of childcare up close. BLB wasn’t just a business; it became the research foundation for what would eventually become the CCS.

Q: You often say you “came from the floor.” What does that mean?

A: I’m not an academic and I didn’t come from a policy unit. I came from the floor — literally. I spent years inside childcare services at 6pm, 7pm, 8pm, cleaning rooms that had been lived in by dozens of children all day. I saw the real conditions, the real risks, the real gaps. I saw what educators were up against and what operators assumed was happening. And I saw what wasn’t happening at all.

Q: When did you realise the sector needed a formal cleaning standard?

A: During COVID. I went looking for a clear, childcare‑specific cleaning protocol. I assumed it existed. It didn’t. There were clear expected outcomes — “keep children safe,” “reduce illness,” “follow infection‑control principles” — but no clear steps on how to achieve them.

No required protocols.

No defined methods.

No measurable standards.

Nothing that translated into real‑world practice.

Standing in a centre trying to piece together a protocol that didn’t exist, I realised: if there wasn’t a clear, definable standard, then there absolutely needed to be one. That was the ground‑zero moment.

Q: How did the research process begin?

A: Honestly, with simple Google searches. I’d type in a question expecting a clear answer and instead fall down a rabbit hole for hours. Every time I questioned something, I’d check whether my thinking was supported by research — and it was. There was data. There were studies. There was evidence. It just wasn’t being translated into anything practical or usable for childcare services.

Curiosity became investigation.

Investigation became structure.

Structure became the early architecture of the CCS.

Q: What did your time inside centres teach you?

A: Everything. Why illness cycles repeat. Why floors are high‑risk surfaces. Why educators burn out. Why generic commercial cleaning fails in childcare. Why no one can self‑verify their own work. Why services can’t fix this alone.

These weren’t isolated issues — they were structural failures. And those failures became the foundation for the CCS.

Q: How did the CCS evolve into a full standard?

A: Observations became patterns. Patterns became a framework. The framework became an architecture. And the architecture became a national policy model.

Today, the CCS includes:

- The CCS National Policy Framework

- The CCS Operational Standards

- The CCS Architecture Overview

- DOI‑registered research publications

It’s a complete, multi‑layered system.

Q: When did you realise this was bigger than a business?

A: When I realised I could keep cleaning centres for 20 years and nothing would change. Children would still get sick at the same rates. Educators would still be overwhelmed. Services would still be guessing. Families would still accept illness as “normal.” And the sector would still have no standard to protect them.

I had two choices: keep operating BLB, or build the system the sector actually needed. I chose the second.

Q: Why act now, after six years of research?

A: The workforce crisis kept worsening. Compliance pressure kept increasing. And what became obvious was that the connection between the workforce crisis and the absence of a cleaning standard wasn’t understood.

When cleaning isn’t defined or resourced properly, the pressure falls back onto educators. And when educators are already stretched, any additional load — even indirectly — compounds burnout and turnover.

On top of that, without proper environmental cleaning standards that match the risk rating of childcare, sickness rates will continue for both staff and children. When illness cycles don’t improve, stress rises, conflict increases, and parents become more dissatisfied. It’s a domino effect — and it all starts from the same missing piece.

If this one issue were resolved, a whole range of other issues would ease by default. That’s why now.

Q: What did it take to finish the CCS?

A: It took turning all the evidence I’d collected and the solutions I’d drafted into a fully structured, standards‑ready system. That meant translating six years of observations, data, patterns, and field‑tested solutions into formal governance architecture, operational standards, risk classifications, workforce models, verification pathways, and audit logic. It wasn’t just writing a document — it was building an entire framework that could stand up to scrutiny, align with national policy, and actually work in real‑world childcare environments.

Q: Why you?

A: Because I was close enough to see the truth. I saw the gaps firsthand. I understood the operational reality. I knew what educators needed. I knew what children deserved. I knew what families expected. And I knew the system had no architecture to support any of it.

I didn’t need a degree to see the problem. I needed courage to build the solution.

Q: How has the sector responded so far?

A: The DOI analytics place the CCS white paper in the top 1% globally for downloads — across all DOI‑indexed papers. That’s not luck. That’s appetite. That’s readiness. That’s momentum. The sector isn’t waiting for reform. It’s reaching for it.

Q: What comes next?

A: Institutional engagement. Sector consultation. Pilot programs. Accreditation pathways. National adoption. This is no longer about me. It’s about the system. And I’m committed to seeing it through.

Q: And finally — how do you feel about where the CCS has landed today?

A: What began as questions and confusion grew into six years of research, documentation, and system design. The CCS is now ready — not just as a framework, but as the standard the sector needed long before it had a name. I’m proud of what it has become, and I’m ready for the work ahead.