The next Government should urgently review the way the budget for early
ed
ucation and childcare
–
forecast at £6.4 billion
–
is allocated, to ensure best
value for money. The House of Lords Committee on Affordable Childcare
believes that the budget should be re
–
prioritised to help disadvantaged children,
as detailed in its report, published today (24 February 2015).
The Committee believes that there are three main actions the new Government must take
in order to get the best value for its investment:
- reprioritise spending in early education and childcare to focus on disadvantaged
children –better value for money will be achieved by targeting those most likely to
benefit; - ensure that disadvantaged two year- olds access their free early education in settings
rated good or outstanding by Ofsted no later than 2020; and - address the under-funding of free early education places in the Public, Voluntary and
Independent (PVI) sector
The Committee report includes written and oral evidence from the findings of two major research projects into the impact of the government’s universal childcare policy by the Institute for Social and Economic Research with the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Institute for Social and Economic Research with the University of Surrey and the Institute of Education.
The research, by the University of Surrey, University of Essex and the Institute of Education found that the policy has relatively small benefits for children’s development overall, primarily because only a small number of additional children entered early education as a direct result of the policy. The research was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and the Economic and Social Research Council’s Secondary Data Analysis Initiative.
While there was modest evidence that the policy had more impact on the poorest, most disadvantaged children, the research showed that the policy did not close the gap in attainment between those from richer and poorer families in the longer term.
“While previous research has suggested that early education is key to long term attainment, our research has shown that the free entitlement did not deliver the anticipated gains,” said Dr Jo Blanden, Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Surrey.
“On the face of it, our results cast some doubt over the value for money of universal early education. More than 80% of the children taking up free places would probably have gone to nursery anyway, and the policy had no educational benefits in the longer term. This might be because the extra pre-school places were not of high enough quality. Recent research shows that state-run nurseries are of more consistent quality, whereas this policy encouraged greater use of privately run places. Alternatively, it could be that primary schools do very well at helping children reach their potential, meaning that pre-school experience is not important.”
Dr Birgitta Rabe, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Economic and Social Research, University of Essex said: “It is tempting to say that the money would have been better spent on the poorest children. However, the policy’s universalism may have benefits if it encourages greater take-up of provision among children from more disadvantaged backgrounds or if it mixes children from different backgrounds in the same early education settings.”
“In this context, it might be more appropriate to see the free entitlement as a form of child benefit, and the policy debate should reflect this,” Dr Rabe added.
A separate study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the University of Essex found that for every six children given a free place, only one additional child began to use early education. For the other five children, the policy was effectively giving parents “a discount on the early education they would have paid to use anyway”, found the researchers.
The number of mothers whose youngest child was aged three and who were in work increased from 53% to 56% – equating to an additional 12,000 women in work, most of whom were moving into part-time posts of less than 30 hours a week.
The IFS study found that this meant the policy was costing £65,000 for each extra person helped into work, which it described as “a very expensive employment policy”.
Mike Brewer, IFS research fellow and professor of economics at the University of Essex, said: “In recent months, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party have all promised to spend additional money to extend the free entitlement to early education.
“Our results suggest that the current approach is improving – but by no means transforming – the labour market attachment of mothers of young children. The expansion of free early education in the 2000s was a very expensive way to move an additional 12,000 mothers into the labour force, and the case for extending the free entitlement is not as clear-cut as political rhetoric might suggest.
“A more open and honest debate about the rationale for these policies, and whether the evidence supports these positions, would be welcome.”
A Briefing Note on the research