Ofsted: Quality of childcare

Leading to Excellence from Ofsted based on evidence from 90,000 inspections of 84,000 early years and childcare settings during the three years to March 2008. The report shows how well the whole sector is doing to promote positive outcomes for children. It focuses on how early years and childcare settings are organised, led and managed so children make good progress.

Key points:
- Almost all settings (97%) provide at least satisfactory childcare, and approaching two thirds are good or outstanding. Of the small minority of settings (3%) judged inadequate most improve quickly although a few have not yet done so. We have set stringent actions for these settings and continue to monitor them closely.
- The quality of childcare varies across the sector. The proportion of good or outstanding provision ranges from 47% in out-of-school schemes to 65% in full day-care settings.
- Well-established provision is generally of a higher quality than recently registered provision. There is also variation across the country with provision in socio-economically deprived areas generally below that elsewhere. There are, though, deprived areas that buck this general trend.
- The proportion of day-care group providers inspected with good or outstanding childcare has risen from 53% in 2005–06 to 64% in 2007–08, though the proportion of childminders judged good or outstanding has fallen from 65% to 59%.
- The quality of organisation, leadership and management is key to ensuring provision supports positive outcomes for children. The best settings place children at the heart of all that happens, and how the best providers are continually working to improve their already excellent practice.
- Almost all registered early years and childcare settings (97%) are satisfactory or better in the way they are organised to promote positive outcomes for children. Over half the settings (54%) are good or outstanding.

Raising Education Achievement and Breaking the Cycle of Inequality

This OECD report examined the two big strategic objectives which the government has for education policy (as outlined in the Public Sector Agreements). This report compares recent policy against international standards.

Key points:
- Whereas the UK often ranks very highly on certain measures of economic policy and outcomes, this is certainly not the case when it comes to educational standards.
- The test-dominated education system in the United Kingdom has pioneered the use of school benchmarking techniques and the use of targets to raise school quality. However, targets may have biased some national measures of education performance, and there is relatively little evidence of improvement in performance when evaluated using international tests of cognitive ability, such as PISA and PIRLS.
- Socio-economic background plays an important role in explaining education performance, and the government has tried to address this through the use of funding formulas which direct additional resources to areas with a higher proportion of pupils from deprived backgrounds. There has been some improvement in the most disadvantaged schools but pupils in the middle and lower half of the distribution continue to perform particularly poorly relative to students in countries with the best performing education systems.
- One explanation may be that local authorities and schools are not distributing deprivation funds as intended by the central government, resulting in outcomes which can be seen as inequitable. Stronger measures may be required to correct this imbalance.

The paper makes the following recommendations:
• Increase regular participation in quality early childhood education, and continue to target childcare services provided by Sure Start Children’s Centres to disadvantaged families. Sustained intervention once disadvantaged children have entered primary school will also be required, to ensure that the benefits of pre-school interventions are sustained.
• Continue to promote a focus on the acquisition of core literacy and numeracy skills for pupils at primary and secondary school.
• Ensure that the focus on core skills is not compromised by the goal of expanding the average number of years of schooling. Emphasise the role of core literacy and numeracy skills within the new Diplomas. Consider introducing a higher age for compulsory participation only for those students who have not already achieved a certain minimum standard of core skills by age 16.
• Evaluate returns to the new diplomas closely. When A-levels are reviewed vis-à-vis the new Diplomas in 2013, give serious consideration to moving towards a more unified framework of qualifications as originally recommended by the Tomlinson report.
• Ensure continued participation in international tests of cognitive ability, such as PISA and PIAAC.
• Reduce the focus on testing and targets and put more focus on supporting weak students and schools.
• Design all remaining targets in a way that limits the potential for gaming, by ensuring an interactive performance management system that captures the complexity of the education process. Ensure that remaining key performance measures are not based on targeted outputs.
• Encourage a public debate about whether the goal of the education system should be to make all schools high performers, and what societal values that would reflect.
• Consider ways of encouraging the highest quality teachers to move to the most disadvantaged schools – such as by giving bonuses for high quality teaching performance at such schools.
• Promote a national benchmark formula for local authorities to use in allocating funding between schools, while still permitting flexibility (i.e. deviation from the benchmark formula) to meet local needs.
• Promote the transition to a more efficient allocation of funds by providing standard procedures for taking deprivation-targeted funding out of the formula used to determine the Minimum Funding Guarantee.
• Evaluate the pros and cons of introducing a differentiated voucher system of funding (as in Chile) where pupils from poorer families receive vouchers that are valued more highly than those for the general population.
• Encourage more research into determining which resource mixes within schools are most successful at narrowing socio-economic gaps.

Jobs for youth, OECD

This OECD paper on youth employment offers an objective critique of recent government initiatives and policy.

Key points:
- Measures of youth labour market performance and indicators describing the transition from education to work over the past 15 years paint a mixed picture. On the one hand, there is evidence that youth labour market integration and career progression have improved considerably since the mid-1990s, however, other indicators paint a less rosy picture.
- In 2007, the youth unemployment rate was 14%, slightly above the OECD average, compared with just 11% in 2004. These figures hide significant differences between teenagers (16-19-year olds) and young adults (20-24-year olds).
- 13% of 16-24-year olds were neither in employment nor in education or training (NEET) in 2005 (the latest year for which comparable data are available), and many youth in this group are at high risk of poor labour market outcomes and social exclusion. This rate is just above the OECD average of 12% and has increased slightly over the past decade.
- The New Deal for Young People – has helped many youth return to work, sustainable employment outcomes have proved difficult to achieve and there are signs that the programme is no longer as effective as in the early days.
- In terms of the education system, the priority is to reduce early leaving from education and training.
- Provision of free early childhood education, which helps reduce early leaving from education and training particularly when interventions are sustained beyond the pre-school period, is lower in England than in many OECD countries.
- Raising the age of compulsory participation in education and training to 18 by 2015 has the potential to ensure that youth enter the labour market better prepared for work. However, the part-time learning participation option may bring in its wake some enforcement problems when job separation occurs.

The report provides a good, objective, introduction to recent policy in this area and the current planned changes to the 14-19 agenda.

Childcare and early year's providers survey

This survey by the DCSF gives data on the make up of this provision and it's workforce.

The report has many data, here are some points:
- All types of childcare provision have increased in quantity since 2001 (with the exception of sessional child care provision).
- The number of after school clubs continues to rise, although at a lower rate than previously, whilst the number of holiday clubs is in decline.
- Full day care and out of school providers appeared to be distributed reasonably proportionately across all areas (30% of these providers were located in the 30% most deprived areas). In contrast, childminders (18%) and sessional providers (17%) appeared less likely to be located in the 30% most deprived areas.
- The majority of full day care provision was privately run (66%), with just one in five settings run by a voluntary organisation. The opposite pattern was true for sessional care.
- With the exception of sessional providers, there has been a real increase in the number of paid and unpaid staff working in childcare settings since 2003.
- For most childcare providers, the proportion of staff having attained at least a level 3 qualification increased sharply between 2003 and 2006 while continuing to increase at a slower rate in 2007. While in early years provision in maintained schools, the proportion of staff with at least a level three qualification has increased steadily since 2003.

Draft legislation: Children's Trusts; Sure Start; Pupil Groups; Apprenticeships; Wellbeing; School Buildings; Admissions

In the last three months (June-September) there have been ten draft legislation pieces open for consultation from the DCSF alone. These are listed below, in order of initial publication.

Admissions - a technical area, so best reading the document if interested.
Pupil wellbeing - educational establishments are required to promote pupil wellbeing, this is draft guidance as to how they could achieve.
Schools causing concern - proposed changes on how to deal with schools which cause concern.
Strengthening Children's Trusts - proposals aimed at making the Children's Trust the main strategic body for children's services.
Zero carbon schools - calls for evidence so the government can realise their 2016 target.
Apprenticeships - steps to legislate for the provision of apprenticeships, including making the LSC ensure apprenticeships exist.
Draft guidance on safeguarding children from sexual exploitation.
Draft guidance for children not receiving a suitable education.
Under performing groups - changes to which groups of children are monitored reducing the overall number but including pupils on free school meals for the first time.
Sure Start Children's Centres - legislation to make this provision a legal requirement.

Reaching the hardest in Children's Centres

A report by Capacity was carried out to look at the effectiveness of children’s centres in reaching the most highly disadvantaged families, the ways in which they meet the needs of those families and the outcomes achieved.

Ket findings:
- The study revolved around four “exemplar” children’s centre case studies, examining their work within the context of current government policies, best practice and a wide range of research perspectives.
- The centres within the study were found to be highly effective in delivering multi-agency services to and for children and families. Each has been successful in reaching a number of families who would be considered “difficult to include”, giving thought to and overcoming the practical and other barriers which might prevent those families using the various services on offer.
- It is possible that more resources than are currently allocated for the children’s centre programme are needed to ensure that it can meet its objectives. In acknowledgement of this, the DCSF has recently announced a cash injection of more than £4billion to children’s
centres which will include additional funds for outreach workers.
- The reach strategies adopted by successful centres have been implemented in a particularly thorough way. Some of the community consultations, for example, have been extensive and highly structured, utilising focus groups, outreach and public information campaigns, as opposed to more limited consultations and surveys.
- If children’s centres are to achieve their objectives, they need to capture detailed information about their users, both at the point of first contact and at subsequent intervals.
- In all four centres, the expertise and depth of experience of those leading the work was very considerable and this was a critical factor in their extensive achievements.

Children's Centres - reaching the hardest

This study was carried out to look at the effectiveness of children’s centres in reaching the most highly disadvantaged families, the ways in which they meet the needs of those families and the outcomes achieved. The study revolved around four “exemplar” children’s centre case studies, examining their work within the context of current government policies, best practice and a wide range of research perspectives.

Key points:
- There might be a case for additional resources if children's centres are to achieve their objectives, this is more likely as children's centres attract middle class parents who can afford to pay for services.
- The reach strategies adopted by successful centres have been implemented in a particularly
thorough way. Some of the community consultations, for example, have been extensive and highly structured, utilising focus groups, outreach and public information campaigns, as opposed to more limited consultations and surveys.
- Achieving high visibility for the work and value of children's centres, particularly among those who are most remote from services, requires motivation, painstaking research, rigorous planning, effective communication and a range of professional skills and expertise. Children’s centres which have not yet formulated their strategies may not have ready access to this range of skills and expertise.
- If children’s centres are to achieve their objectives, they need to capture detailed information about their users, both at the point of first contact and at subsequent intervals. Only by this can they demonstrate both that they are engaging the most “difficult to include” and offering them services of value.
- Best practice involved highly differentiated and personalised planning for individual parents, built around their specific circumstances and needs, whether in relation to support for particular family difficulties, or involvement in centre activities, learning or volunteering opportunities. The concept of progression was very evident, each parent moving through a continuum of involvement at the pace which was most appropriate.
- In all four centres, the expertise and depth of experience of those leading the work was very
considerable and this was a critical factor in their extensive achievements. It would be difficult for any qualification to provide benefits comparable to this level of experience.
- On the evidence of the studies, a critical requirement for reaching the most disadvantaged families is an understanding of poverty and disadvantage. Training to provide skills and knowledge in this area should be part of the updated strategy for the children’s workforce.

"Social Mobility"

The Prime Minister announced a crusade on social mobility within the UK (see Downing St. news release).

Key points:

- Moving to offer nursery places to 2 year old's in the most disadvantaged communities.

- Pilots in certain areas, to give one off payments of £200 to parents who use services such as Children's Centres.

- Publish a plan for child care and early learning and reforms to how these are funded to be released later.

- Doubling the number of Teach First placements, a scheme aimed at getting the best graduates into schools serving disadvantaged communities.

- Increasing, by 10 more local authorities, the use of the Family Intervention Project, a cross government, multi-agency approach to tackle anti-social behaviour by intensive engagement of families.

_

Read DCSF News Release.

_

Read BBC News article.

See BBC TV News piece

Person or place education policies?

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation have analysed government policies since 1997 to evaluate whether policies focused on the person or the place are the most effective at tackling social disadvantage (with a focus on education, employment and income, in this blog entry I focus on those relating to education). Full report

Key points:
- Policies have been equally split between place (e.g. academy schools in deprived localities) and people (e.g. early years education, curriculum change, widening participation in HE) initiatives.

- There was some evidence to suggest that sure start was improving outcomes for children and families but this was reduced for the most socially disadvantaged families.

- The New Deal for Communities and Academies programme demonstrated a link to higher level 2 attainment (other initiatives such as the EMA, Excellence in Cities showed no discernable impact on level 2 attainment).

- AimHigher, Gifted & Talented and Excellence Challenge showed a positive link to the point score of the eight best GCSEs for children.

- The EMA and AimHigher: Opportunity Bursary showed a positive impact on FE & HE participation and retention.

- There are few policies which are targeted at people and place simultanesouly and many policies have multiple objectives.

- For Academies, success was seen to be associated with strong, consistent leadership within schools and the availability of additional resources for buildings, ICT and equipment necessary to create more positive learning environments. For of Excellence in Cities, partnerships and co-operation between – ideally – small groups of schools were identifi ed as key to achieving positive results.

Sure Start Children's Centres - the impact

The report by the DCSF gives a summary of the research undertaken into the impact the Sure Start (later named Children's Centres) have and what lessons have been learnt. Drawing on the National Evaluation of Sure Start (NESS) research as well as ofsted and international research. A good read for anyone interested in Early Years!

The report is spilt into assessing the impact on:
- good outcomes for children
- reaching excluded and disadvantaged groups (BME, SEN-D)
- support for parents (including fathers)
- joined up working & partnership
- health
- governance, leadership, consultation
- workforce

Structure of Primary Education

The Primary Review released a interim report, this one examining the structure of primary education. By investigating changes to English education since the 1967 Plowden Report and comparing to international cases the authors found that:

- Most changes are a result of the 1988 Education Reform Act, which introduced competition between schools.
- Internationally there is a wide variation in the school starting age or point of starting school.
- Evidence suggests that school starting age or the school size has little impact on attainment, but overall evaluation of school structures on impact is limited.

Impact of Extended Schools and Children's Centres

Ofsted have reviewed 30 Children's Centres and 32 Schools across 54 Local Authorities to find:

- over 75% of those examined provided good or better service overall
- All those examined integrated education and child care effectively
- Both extended schools and children's centres need to better reach new parents and children
- Strategic guidance from the local authority assisted the children's centre and extended school, however there was no assessment of whether the centre was providing value for money as monitoring was weak
- Those using the centres found them to be beneficial and take up was best when consideration was given to transport and integrating health service provision
- Uncertainties around the finances of multi-agency partners threatened services and staffing especially in children's centres

For Children's Centres:
- In 23 (of the 30 examined) children's centres children were seen to be making at least good progress in sessions observed, however, none of the centres monitored the long term progress of children
- There was a positive link between the senior staff having qualifications in education and the children's attitude towards learning and their enjoyment of learning

For extended schools:
- 13 (of the 32 examined) provided the full core offer
- All schools examined provided a varied menu of activities but they also found it difficult to offer year round care or to support families in finding provision
- A positive impact on the child's achievement and personal development was evident, this was greatest for the most vulnerable children
- The most effective are those which integrated the extended school into the whole school improvement plan
- There was some radical thinking in the application of multi-agency working

Early years reform

Just a recap on the changes to the early years sector:

- Since October 2007 Local Authorities (LAs) have had a duty to provide information, advice training to all childcare providers
- DCFS published statutory guidance for LAs on the Early Years Outcomes Duty
- LAs are required to submit targets to DCFS by 31st January for raising standards of children that reach a good level of development at age five and for reducing inequality
- LAs must have completed its assessment of childcare sufficiency and ensure sufficient childcare for working parents and those looking for work by April 2008
- LAs must provide information and advice for parents about childcare and other services in their area by April
- LAs, NHS services and Job Centre Plus must work in partnership to improve all young children's outcomes and reduce inequalities by providing effective integrated services
- Ofsted's new early years inspection framework is published in April
- As from September the Early Years Foundation Stage becomes a requirement in all schools and registered early year settings
- Early years and compulsory Ofsted Childcare Registers take effect in September alongside the new early years inspection arrangements being in place

The experience of poverty

The NSPCC has coordinated research which interviewed 70 families in low income households from a mix of affluent and deprived areas.

Key recommendations:
- The risk factor checklist approach used to target interventions may hinder a holistic approach as it hides the complexity and uniqueness
- Poverty eradication and knowledge of the effects of poverty and social exclusion amongst professionals is needed
- Housing analysis need to be incorporated into planning
- Childcare is needed in all areas (not just the less affluent)
- Advice and information needs to be available from a range of sources
- Engaging parents with poor experiences and low expectations needs to be approached with care and patience
- Advocacy services are needed to support families in dispute with other services

Phase 3 Children's Centres

The DCFS have released guidance on the expansion of Children's Centres. The aim is that by 2010 there will be 3,500 Children's Centres. This builds on phase 1&2 which provided Children's Centres to the 30% most deprived neighbourhoods.

As the expansion is now focusing on less deprived areas the guidance calls for less intensive provision, however a universal and integrated service must still be offered which suits local needs.

Children's Centres - reaching the hardest

Esmee Fairbairn Foundation and Capacity have created a paper which identifies methods employed by Children's Centres which are successful in engaging parents:
- Good consultation with the community and hence secured trust.
- Effective monitoring and evaluation.
- Providing a personalised approach and appropriate support at different levels of progression.
- The leaders have expertise and knowledge and full understanding of poverty and disadvantage.
- Developed links with Job Centre Plus, employers and training providers to enable parents to progress to employment.