EARLY
YEARS DEVELOPMENT
AND CHILDCARE
PARTNERSHIPS
69. The welcome diversity of provision in the Early
Years sector can lead to competition for scarce resources. It
is argued that one reason children start school as young as they
do is because it is in schools' interests to maximise their income
from funded places for four year olds (and, increasingly, three
year olds). It is claimed parents feel that unless they put their
children into a nursery class attached to a primary school they
will not be place for the child when he or she reaches the statutory
age. One of the roles of the Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships is to reconcile the various interests and to focus
on providing good quality education and childcare for children
in all settings. The annual Early Years Development and Childcare
Plans, agreed locally, are subject to approval by the Secretary
of State.[175]
It is estimated that the investment in funding for early education,
childcare and family support over the period will amount to some
£7.5 billion.[176]
70. The Early Years and Development and Childcare
Partnerships have only been in operation for less than three years
and, in this short time, have been effective in most areas. Where,
to begin with, there was unequal partnership between members,
there was dissatisfaction with the outcomes of key decisions.[177]
In Partnerships where the Chair is seen as an independent figure,
this situation has improved.[178]
71. The Partnerships are totally independent and
work as a local initiative. Ms Margaret Hodge, the Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State for Employment and Equal Opportunities,
said "We would not want to dictate from the centre how partnerships
work, but what we do want is genuine partnership, open working,
an inclusive mechanism which ensures that everybody feels that
they have a stake in the development of services locally".[179]
72. One of the main issues for every Partnership
is that of quality. Every setting which is approved by OFSTED
has the same grant for each four year old. It is unrealistic to
expect the same quality from a well resourced nursery where there
are graduate staff, to a setting where there are few resources
or facilities and few qualified staff with possibly no qualified
teachers. It is the task of the Partnership to raise standards
and enhance quality in all settings, and this is expensive, time
consuming and labour intensive.
73. Training of staff is the key to raising standards
in all settings, but this presents Partnerships with difficulties.
According to Ms Julie Fisher of the Oxfordshire Early Years Advisory
Group, "although everybody can undertake training, and increasingly
people are, it is very hard to make up on a deficit where one
sector starts with a four year graduate training to specialise
in how children learn, what they should learn and all that entails.
When you are trying to make up that sort of gap, very often it
is too massive ... one day's training does not make up that sort
of gap".[180]
74. The Partnership approach enabled representatives
of all those concerned with the education of young children—the
local authority, the voluntary sector, the school sector, the
health sector, the private and independent sector, employers,
ethnic minority representatives and, very importantly, parents—to
meet together around a table to discuss the issues which concerned
them.[181]
It would be an advantage for planners also to be included in the
Partnership. Consideration could be given when giving conditional
planning permission for large scale developments to the inclusion
as 'planning gain' of on- or off-site of child care facilities
on the scale appropriate to the expected workforce or local population
in the new development.
75. Having meetings of the Partnership open to the
public helps to engender the trust that has been established between
the various interests. The Sub-committee was informed that the
meetings of each of the three Partnerships represented by the
witnesses appearing on behalf of the Local Authorities Early Years
Co-ordinators Network were open to the public.[182]
Ms Hodge told the Sub-committee that she could see absolutely
no reason why the meetings of Partnerships should not be open
to the public.[183]
76. We recommend that the Early Years Development
and Childcare Partnerships should continue to be supported in
every way, but particularly in the consistent training for members
and Chairs.
77. The most effective Partnerships have Chairs who
are regarded as independent, from both the local education authority
on the one hand and from too close an identification on the other
hand with any of the other sectors represented on the Partnership.
We recommend that all Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships should work towards establishing an independent Chair
who is acceptable to all members.
78. We recommend that quality should be monitored
closely by the DfEE where Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships are not working well and that these Partnerships
should be identified, supported and have the opportunity to observe
and emulate good practice where it already exists.
79. We recommend that every meeting of a Early
Years Development and Childcare Partnership should be open and
that members of the public should be invited and encouraged to
attend.
FUNDING
80. There has historically been a low base of funding
and investment in early education in the UK compared with other
developed countries. The structure of funding in education has
favoured education at the later stages. The funding of care for
young children has not been viewed as a public responsibility
at all in the UK unless the child was deemed to be 'at risk' in
some way. Provision for families where parents worked or were
in training was largely left to the market place. This situation
has changed radically in the last three years. Ms Hodge told the
Sub-committee:
"I remember when I was
sitting in your chair, Chairman, that we were very concerned,
if you look at the OECD comparative figures, that we probably
invested less than any other country in the early years. I hope
that by the action we have taken in the three years we have been
in Government that we are turning that around. Certainly in the
recent visit we had from the OECD I felt that they were looking
at what we were doing as an exemplar of cutting edge practice
now, and so there has been a real shift".[184]
81. Free early education places for four year olds
in schools and nurseries in the maintained sector are funded by
the Under Fives Standard Spending Assessment, which is calculated
according to the population of birth to three year olds and the
number of four year old children in local education authority
maintained provision. Local education authorities determine through
their Fair Funding arrangements how the standard spending assessment
should be distributed to schools and nurseries in the maintained
sector.[185]
82. The specific nursery education grant is based
on a headcount of eligible four year old children attending settings
in the private and voluntary sectors (and for new places in the
maintained sector since the last schools census). Funding for
three year olds is not based on universal provision. It is planned
to expand the proportion of three year olds able to access a free
place to two-thirds by 2002. The required funding is being phased
in, beginning with the areas of greatest social need.[186]
83. International research has demonstrated the cost
effectiveness of investment in early education and care by the
state.[187]
The links between funding and the quality of early education and
care provision have also been demonstrated.[188]
Recently, the need for a significant increase in funding, and
a shift in funding priorities, has been acknowledged at Government
level and significant increases in the funding for early education
and care has occurred. In their background report on the United
Kingdom for the OECD Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education
and Care, Dr Tony Bertram and Professor Christine Pascal drew
attention to "the international evidence emerging from economic,
social and educational sources [has] provided the Government with
an irrefutable case for significantly increased investment in
services for young children and their families".[189]
There has also been pressure to revise the funding structure in
favour of the youngest children.[190]
84. The separation of funding streams between education,
health, social services, has been demonstrated to limit the effectiveness
of delivering integrated, comprehensive early education and childcare.[191]
The differential in funding levels between the state, private
and voluntary sectors has also led to inequalities in the quality
of provision. There are moves to bring these different funding
streams together to support the further integration of Early Years
services.[192]
There is also a shift to allocate funding for the local development
of Early Years services through Early Years Development and Childcare
Partnerships to encourage partnership and collaboration between
sectors, and more locally responsive delivery of services.[193]
The Chief Education Officer for Oxfordshire told the Sub-committee:
"I do not think you can separate the social services provision
for families and childcare from an education authority. They are
one and the same thing, which is why the Children's Committee
makes sense".[194]
He also told the Sub-committee that the whole mechanism for funding
"needs to be sorted" and "we need to look carefully,
because we have been talking a lot about granting funding today,
at getting the balance right between the revenue funding and the
hypothecated funding that comes through grants because otherwise
you have so many programmes that are so earmarked you get the
tail wagging the dog. That is true of both social services and
education. There needs to be a radical examination".[195]
85. We recommend that the increased Government
investment in early education and care should be sustained over
a long-term period.
86. We recommend that those responsible in the
DfEE should continue to review the relative fairness of access
to funding for places, staff, resources, capital, and training
across the sectors in the Early Years.
87. We recommend that the long-term aim of DfEE
Early Years funding policy should be to ensure the development
of a diverse and innovative pre-school sector which meets the
need of children and parents in all situations.
164 Q. 13. Back
165 Ev.
p. 166. Back
166 Appendix
4 paras. 25-26. Back
167 Q.
401. Back
168 Q.
67. Back
169 Q.
396. Back
170 Q.
396. Back
171 Q.
398. Back
172 Appendix
10 paras. 37-38, Appendix 24 paras. 14-15, Appendix 25 para. Q.
5.4. Back
173 Appendix
8 para. 20, Appendix 14 para. 17, Appendix 15 para. 4.3, Appendix
19 para. 5(a). Back
174 Appendix
1 para 1.2.5, Appendix 10 para. 70, Appendix 17 para. 3.1, Appendix
24 para. 24. Back
175 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
40. Back
176 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
59. Back
177 Q.
54. Back
178 Q.
58. Back
179 Q.
438. Back
180 Q.
67. Back
181 Q.
54. Back
182 QQ.
267-269. Back
183 Q.
437. Back
184 Q.
434. Back
185 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
59. Back
186 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
59. Back
187 For
example, the High/Scope pre-school programme in the USA has been
estimated to deliver a return of $7.16 for every dollar invested-Parliamentary
Office for Science and Technology, Early Years Learning POST
Report 140, June 2000, page10. Back
188 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page36. Back
189 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
30. Back
190 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
60. Back
191 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
33. Back
192 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page39;
Q. 145. Back
193 Tony
Bertram and Christine Pascal, UK Background Report for OECD
Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care, page
40; Q. 54. Back
194 Q.
145. Back
195 Q.
146. Back
