Bienenstock Research

    Approaches to software in childcare.

    Six approaches, twelve data areas, the data protection picture and the recording duties per country. Every number and every claim carries a source. Bienenstock is the publisher, with no product recommendation.

    The six approaches

    From paper to a state platform. Each approach with a definition, strengths, weaknesses and typical fit.

    Paper and spreadsheets

    Records on paper, in folders and in spreadsheet files are the analog baseline of almost every childcare centre.

    Strengths

    • No licence cost, no processor relationship, no server question.
    • Regulatorily allowed: in Texas the sign-in log may be paper or an automated system (Texas HHS 2025).
    • Available immediately and usable without onboarding.

    Weaknesses

    • Data is entered several times; evaluation and reports are manual.
    • The IFP describes the childcare day as traditionally analog and sees a need for digitalisation (IFP 2025).

    Fits: Small settings with little reporting load, or as a fallback level.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Texas Minimum Standards Chapter 746, Paragraf 746.631 (2025)

    Messenger groups

    Groups in services such as WhatsApp or Telegram are used for parent and team communication.

    Strengths

    • Very common and usable without onboarding; per the IFP about 42 percent of centres used WhatsApp in 2019 (IFP 2025, citing DKLK study 2020).

    Weaknesses

    • The IFP advises against social media and instant messengers for childcare communication entirely; many points are incompatible with the GDPR (IFP 2025).
    • The Lower Saxony data protection authority holds WhatsApp for official school purposes to be impermissible (LfD Lower Saxony 2017).

    Fits: Per the IFP assessment, not a suitable basis for processing childcare data.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Dürfen Lehrkräfte WhatsApp für dienstliche Zwecke nutzen? (2017)

    Single-purpose apps

    Single-purpose apps cover exactly one task: education documentation, communication or a parent survey.

    Strengths

    • Depth in one core area, for example licensed observation forms in documentation.
    • A clearly bounded data scope, which keeps the legal basis per task manageable (IFP 2025).

    Weaknesses

    • Several tools mean several contracts and repeated data entry.
    • Their share of the IFP overview is shrinking: documentation from 2 to 1 to 5, communication from 3 to 3 to 2, parent survey a constant 1 (IFP 2025).

    Fits: Settings with one clear, deep need in a single area.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Expertise Nr. 1 KitaApps, Stand Dezember 2019 (2019)

    All-in-one suites

    All-in-one suites bundle documentation, communication and administration including master data, staff planning and billing in one platform.

    Strengths

    • Many functions are included by default and can be introduced step by step (IFP 2025).
    • The IFP names complete solutions as most in demand; their number rose from 7 to 11 to 21 (IFP 2025).
    • Per the IFP they already cover team communication, so a separate team-chat app is not necessarily required (IFP 2025).

    Weaknesses

    • The IFP notes that the full range of functions is often not exhausted in daily practice (IFP 2025).
    • A complete solution processes data for several tasks, so the legal basis must be determined per task (IFP 2025).

    Fits: Settings that want several processes in one system.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Modular specialists with interfaces

    Several specialised systems are connected through interfaces, for example administration, parent communication and statutory reporting.

    Strengths

    • Each building block can be best of breed; the IFP lists interfaces as a dedicated row in its comparison tables (IFP 2025).
    • This mixed approach already exists in practice: in Bavaria for example adebisKITA for administration and KiBiG.web for funding applications (IFP 2025).

    Weaknesses

    • Interface entries are provider self-reports per the IFP, not verified capabilities (IFP 2025).
    • Several processors increase the review and contract effort.

    Fits: Providers with an existing specialist system that should be kept.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Public and state platforms

    A state or municipality provides a platform, mostly for administration, monitoring, funding or communication.

    Strengths

    • Rhineland-Palatinate runs KiDz for web-based administration and monitoring; it collects monthly facility, occupancy and staffing data (kita.rlp.de 2026).
    • The IFP names the KITA HUB Bayern as a state platform with GDPR-compliant communication services (IFP 2025).

    Weaknesses

    • Availability and scope depend on the state, programme or municipality; the IFP still sees commercial solutions as relevant alongside them (IFP 2025).

    Fits: Settings in states or municipalities that offer such a platform, mostly for reporting and funding.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Webbasierte Administration und Monitoring (KiDz) (2026)

    The twelve areas and their data

    Where software processes data, how sensitive it is and which legal notes apply. Derived from the IFP taxonomy.

    AreaData categoriesSensitivityLegal note
    Education and development documentationObservations, learning stories, portfolios, observation forms (PERIK, LISEB, SELDAK, SELSA, SISMIK).High. The IFP rates development profiles as especially sensitive, even within the Art. 9 categories (IFP 2025).Digitally fillable observation forms with extensive health data can trigger a data protection impact assessment under Art. 35 GDPR (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Parent communication (organisational)Messages, notice board, calendar, sick notes and absences.Medium. Parents' contact data; sick notes touch health data.Communication about one's own child rests on Art. 6 and Art. 9 GDPR with national law; general parent information with photos generally needs consent (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Team communicationInternal chat, team calendar, file upload.Medium. Staff data and content about individual children.US-based cloud tools such as Slack, Google Drive or Dropbox cannot be recommended per the IFP; for EU providers the processing agreement must be checked (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Parent survey and quality managementSurvey responses, quality metrics.Low to medium, depending on anonymisation.A distinct single-purpose category (parent survey) in the IFP, often also a module in complete solutions (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Attendance, check-in and staffing ratioArrival and pick-up times, presence lists, terminal or QR capture.Medium. Biometric capture falls under Art. 9 GDPR (GDPR Art. 9).Recording duties differ by state and by country; see the records and reporting section.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Child, parent and group administration (master data)Profiles of children, parents and groups; allergies, vaccination status, sick notes.High. Almost all apps also process health data under Art. 9 GDPR per the IFP (IFP 2025).In Germany, per the IFP, children's and parents' data in childcare is always treated as social data because of section 61(3) SGB VIII; using an app is commissioned processing with prior notification under section 80 SGB X (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)SGB VIII, Paragraf 61 Anwendungsbereich (Sozialdatenschutz) (2026)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Registration and place allocationWaiting lists, applications, contracts.Medium. Family data, partly social data.The IFP means the childcare waiting list here, not municipal statutory place allocation (IFP 2025 via IFP_CRITERIA_TO_BEREICH).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Staff administration and schedulingStaff profiles, rosters, working hours.Medium to high. Employee data.Legal basis typically Art. 6 and Art. 9 GDPR with national employment data protection (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Financial administration and billingParent fees, invoices, SEPA mandates.Medium. Payment and family data.Per the IFP only present in complete solutions (IFP 2025 via IFP_CRITERIA_TO_BEREICH).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Meal planning and cateringMenus, meal cancellations, allergies and intolerances.Medium to high. Allergies are health data under Art. 9 GDPR (GDPR Art. 9).Mostly a calendar function; ordering and billing often sit with separate providers (IFP 2025 via IFP_CRITERIA_TO_BEREICH).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Photos, video and audio recordingsPhotos of children, video and audio recordings in digital portfolios.High. Digital portfolios with video or audio can trigger a data protection impact assessment (IFP 2025).GDPR-compliant handling of photo, audio and video recordings of children is an open legal question per the IFP; a separate IFP expertise was announced for late 2025 or early 2026 (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Interfaces and statutory reportingData exports to statistics and funding portals (KiBiG.web, KiBiz.web, Destatis, ISBJ, KiDz), accounting (DATEV, SEPA), open APIs.Medium. Aggregated facility and occupancy data, partly personal.Interface entries are provider self-reports per the IFP (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Why some approaches fit better

    Five criteria on which suitability turns.

    1. Single data entry

      Is a datum entered once and reused everywhere?

      Separate tools force repeated entry. Complete solutions and connected modules avoid it, provided the interfaces really carry the load.

      Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    2. Coverage of legal record duties

      Does the approach meet the recording and reporting duties of the given country?

      Duties differ by country and, in Germany, by state. The approach must fit the concrete duty, not the other way round.

      SGB VIII, Paragraf 47 Melde- und Dokumentationspflichten (2026)EYFS statutory framework for group and school-based provi... (2026)Besluit kwaliteit kinderopvang, art. 7a (2026)Guide PSU (Prestation de service unique), Septembre 2025 (2025)Texas Minimum Standards Chapter 746, Paragraf 746.631 (2025)22 CCR 101229.1 Sign In and Sign Out (1998)

    3. Data protection risk

      How high is the risk of the data categories processed?

      Almost all apps process health data under Art. 9 GDPR, which can trigger a data protection impact assessment. Provider seat and server location must be checked (IFP 2025).

      Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    4. Exportability and lock-in

      Do the data come back out structured and machine-readable?

      If an app is discontinued, the provider as customer usually bears the migration cost. Important: Art. 20 GDPR applies only between data subject and controller, not between the childcare provider and its vendor. The IFP therefore recommends agreeing return in a structured, machine-readable format by contract; Art. 28(3) GDPR is the lever (IFP 2025).

      Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 20 (2016)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 28 (2016)Data Act (Verordnung (EU) 2023/2854), Policy-Seite (2025)

    5. Effort and adoption

      Is the system really used in daily practice after rollout?

      Per the Zukunftsstudie Kita-Management 2024 the biggest hurdles were too small a budget (58 percent) and lack of time for onboarding and data upkeep (56 percent); only 6 percent said no suitable application exists (IFP 2025, citing Botzum et al. 2024).

      Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Modular or complete solution

    The honest trade-off, with no robust comparative study.

    There is no robust comparative study weighing complete solution against modular approach. The IFP does not explicitly weigh the two.

    Complete solution

    Strengths

    • Many functions by default, stepwise rollout possible (IFP 2025).
    • Most in demand; also covers team communication (IFP 2025).

    Weaknesses

    • Range of functions often not exhausted (IFP 2025).
    • Switching back to single tools may require a new selection project (IFP 2025).

    Modular with interfaces

    Strengths

    • Each block can be a specialist; already exists in practice (IFP 2025).
    • Existing specialist systems are kept.

    Weaknesses

    • More contracts and more processors to review.
    • Interfaces are provider self-reports (IFP 2025).

    On switching

    On switching, Art. 20 GDPR does not apply between the childcare provider and its vendor; return in a machine-readable format must be agreed by contract (IFP 2025). The EU Data Act applies from 12 September 2025 and aims to make switching between cloud providers easier (European Commission 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 20 (2016)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 28 (2016)Data Act (Verordnung (EU) 2023/2854), Policy-Seite (2025)

    Records and reporting duties per country

    What must be recorded differs by country and, in Germany, by state.

    Germany

    DE

    Section 47 SGB VIII requires the operator of a licensed facility to keep records of operation and results and to retain facility-related records for at least five years; occupied places are reported annually (SGB VIII section 47).

    State note: The states add their own duties. Rhineland-Palatinate collects monthly facility, occupancy and staffing data via KiDz (kita.rlp.de 2026).

    SGB VIII, Paragraf 47 Melde- und Dokumentationspflichten (2026)Webbasierte Administration und Monitoring (KiDz) (2026)

    Per-jurisdiction detail →

    Austria

    AT

    Supervisory and recording duties are set by the federal states in their childcare laws. There is no single federal rule.

    Per-jurisdiction detail →

    Switzerland

    CH

    The PAVO sets only a minimum standard; the concrete rules are set by cantons and communes. Recording duties vary accordingly.

    Per-jurisdiction detail →

    United Kingdom (England)

    UK

    The EYFS framework requires in para 3.104 a daily record of the children cared for, their hours of attendance and each child's key person (EYFS 2026).

    EYFS statutory framework for group and school-based provi... (2026)Children and the UK GDPR (2026)

    Per-jurisdiction detail →

    United States

    US

    Rules are set by the states. California requires under 22 CCR 101229.1 a written sign-in and sign-out procedure with full signature and time of day; Texas requires under 26 TAC 746.631 a system with name, date, arrival and departure time that may be paper or automated (California DSS; Texas HHS 2025).

    22 CCR 101229.1 Sign In and Sign Out (1998)Texas Minimum Standards Chapter 746, Paragraf 746.631 (2025)

    Per-jurisdiction detail →

    Netherlands

    NL

    Article 7a of the Besluit kwaliteit kinderopvang requires the operator to demonstrate the staff-child ratio through an overview of staff deployed and presence lists of children with arrival and departure times (BKK art. 7a).

    Besluit kwaliteit kinderopvang, art. 7a (2026)

    France

    FR

    For PSU-funded centres, the actual arrival and departure times must be recorded; if rounded (at most half an hour), both raw and rounded times are kept and verifiable by the CAF (CNAF Guide PSU 2025).

    Guide PSU (Prestation de service unique), Septembre 2025 (2025)

    Selection guide

    Short form of the IFP five-phase model.

    The IFP recommends the Fraunhofer IAO five-phase model for selection (Kasper et al. 2024). Core steps (IFP 2025):

    1. 1. Information and needs

      Prior information and needs assessment in the team.

    2. 2. Requirements and market

      Define requirements, evaluate the market with test accounts, clarify hardware and financing, tender where required. The IFP estimates this phase at at least 15 working days over two months.

    3. 3. Offer, data protection, contract

      Evaluate offers, check data protection, notify under section 80 SGB X at least four weeks before signing, sign the processing agreement.

    4. 4. Rollout

      Roles and rights, rules, parent consent and Art. 13 GDPR information, stepwise activation, support. The IFP names three to twelve months.

    5. 5. Ongoing operation

      Operation and upkeep; if requirements change, the selection project is run again.

    The IFP advises small providers to join larger providers for selection, because a well-founded selection and rollout is very demanding (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Frequently asked questions

    Answer first, with source and year.

    Which approaches to childcare software exist?
    There are six: paper and spreadsheets, messenger groups, single-purpose apps for one task, complete solutions for all tasks, modular specialists with interfaces, and public state platforms. The IFP sorts the software it reviews into single-purpose and complete solutions (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Which is better, a complete solution or several specialists?
    There is no robust study weighing one against the other. The IFP names complete solutions as most in demand but does not explicitly weigh suite against best of breed (IFP 2025). The choice depends on need, existing systems and effort.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Which data does childcare software process?
    It processes master data of children, parents and staff, attendance, documentation, communication and often finances. Almost all apps also process health data under Art. 9 GDPR, such as sick notes, vaccination status and allergies, per the IFP (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9 (2016)

    Are WhatsApp groups allowed in childcare?
    The IFP advises against social media and instant messengers for childcare communication entirely and names many points as incompatible with the GDPR (IFP 2025). The Lower Saxony data protection authority holds WhatsApp for official school purposes to be impermissible (LfD Lower Saxony 2017).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Dürfen Lehrkräfte WhatsApp für dienstliche Zwecke nutzen? (2017)

    Must childcare software be notified for data protection?
    In Germany childcare data is treated as social data per the IFP; using an app is commissioned processing with prior notification to the authority under section 80 SGB X, at least four weeks before signing (IFP 2025). For extensive health data a data protection impact assessment under Art. 35 GDPR may be required (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)SGB VIII, Paragraf 61 Anwendungsbereich (Sozialdatenschutz) (2026)

    Can I take my data with me when I switch providers?
    Not automatically. Art. 20 GDPR on data portability applies only between data subject and controller, not between the childcare provider and its vendor. The IFP therefore recommends agreeing return in a structured, machine-readable format by contract; Art. 28(3) GDPR is the lever (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 20 (2016)Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 28 (2016)

    How many childcare centres use software at all?
    Robust figures exist mainly for Bavaria: there the share of centres with childcare apps rose from 26 percent (2021) to 53 percent (2024) per the IFP (IFP 2025). For other regions and for the United Kingdom no official adoption figures were found; the DfE 2025 survey reports nothing on software (DfE 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Childcare and early years provider survey: 2025 (2025)

    Is a paper list enough for attendance?
    Regulatorily often yes. Texas expressly allows the sign-in log as paper or as an automated system (Texas HHS 2025). There is no robust source showing that paper lists categorically fail in an emergency, so we do not claim that.

    Texas Minimum Standards Chapter 746, Paragraf 746.631 (2025)

    Is there state-provided childcare software?
    Yes, in part. Rhineland-Palatinate runs KiDz for web-based administration and monitoring (kita.rlp.de 2026). The IFP names the KITA HUB Bayern as a state platform with GDPR-compliant communication services but still sees commercial solutions as relevant alongside it (IFP 2025).

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)Webbasierte Administration und Monitoring (KiDz) (2026)

    How do I select childcare software?
    The IFP recommends the Fraunhofer IAO five-phase model: clarify needs, define requirements and test the market with trial accounts, check offer and data protection and sign, roll out, operate (IFP 2025). The IFP does not rate or recommend individual apps.

    Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelb... (2025)

    Sources

    Every claim above refers by its id to one of these entries.

    1. ifp2025Expertise KitaApps. Apps und Softwarelösungen für mittelbare pädagogische Aufgaben in der Kita, 3., überarbeitete Auflage. IFP Staatsinstitut für Frühpädagogik und Medienkompetenz (2025). Source
    2. ifp2019Expertise Nr. 1 KitaApps, Stand Dezember 2019. IFP Staatsinstitut für Frühpädagogik und Medienkompetenz (2019). Source
    3. gdprArt9Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 9. Europäische Union (via legislation.gov.uk) (2016). Source
    4. gdprArt20Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 20. Europäische Union (via legislation.gov.uk) (2016). Source
    5. gdprArt28Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 (DSGVO), Art. 28. Europäische Union (via legislation.gov.uk) (2016). Source
    6. dataActData Act (Verordnung (EU) 2023/2854), Policy-Seite. Europäische Kommission (2025). Source
    7. sgb8_61SGB VIII, Paragraf 61 Anwendungsbereich (Sozialdatenschutz). Bundesministerium der Justiz, gesetze-im-internet.de (2026). Source
    8. sgb8_47SGB VIII, Paragraf 47 Melde- und Dokumentationspflichten. Bundesministerium der Justiz, gesetze-im-internet.de (2026). Source
    9. kidzRlpWebbasierte Administration und Monitoring (KiDz). Ministerium für Bildung Rheinland-Pfalz, kita.rlp.de (2026). Source
    10. cnafPsuGuide PSU (Prestation de service unique), Septembre 2025. CNAF Caisse nationale des allocations familiales (2025). Source
    11. txMinStdTexas Minimum Standards Chapter 746, Paragraf 746.631. Texas Health and Human Services (2025). Source
    12. caCcr22 CCR 101229.1 Sign In and Sign Out. California Department of Social Services (1998). Source
    13. eyfsEYFS statutory framework for group and school-based providers (from September 2026), para 3.104. UK Department for Education (2026). Source
    14. nlBkkBesluit kwaliteit kinderopvang, art. 7a. Overheid.nl (wetten.overheid.nl) (2026). Source
    15. icoChildrenChildren and the UK GDPR. ICO Information Commissioner's Office (2026). Source
    16. lfdNiDürfen Lehrkräfte WhatsApp für dienstliche Zwecke nutzen?. Landesbeauftragte für den Datenschutz Niedersachsen (2017). Source
    17. dfeSurveyChildcare and early years provider survey: 2025. UK Department for Education (2025). Source

    Download the dataset

    The same data, machine-readable. JSON with the full structure, CSV with one row per area.

    Not fully verified

    These points could not be checked against the primary text and are therefore not stated as fact in the analysis.

    • Data Act switching deadlinesThe concrete deadlines (two months notice, 30-day transition, switching charges abolished from 12 January 2027) could not be checked against the primary text; only the confirmed frame is stated.
    • Netherlands: register and inspection spaceThe role of the Landelijk Register Kinderopvang together with the Gemeenschappelijke Inspectieruimte could not be verified; only the recording duty under BKK art. 7a is confirmed.
    • GDPR Recital 38The wording on the special protection of children's data could not be checked against the primary text; the page relies on Art. 9 GDPR and the ICO guidance instead.

    More research

    Vendor comparison and other research pages.

    Childcare software vendor comparison →All research pages →

    Licence

    Free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0 with attribution. Publisher 997 Ventures UG (haftungsbeschränkt), brand Bienenstock.

    Not legal advice. The national and state law in force is what counts.

    How to cite

    Bienenstock Forschung (2026): Approaches to software in childcare. Publisher 997 Ventures UG (haftungsbeschränkt). https://bienenstock-kita.de/en/childcare-software-approaches. Updated 2026-09-30. CC BY-SA 4.0.

    Back to research →

    See Bienenstock first in Google Search: