Early Learning and Childcare (ELC) – parents' views and use: research findings 2025

9 Quality of funded ELC

This section explores how parents perceived the quality of provision offered by their child’s funded ELC provider.

9.1 Quality of funded ELC provision

9.1.1 Overall quality of main provider

Survey respondents were asked how satisfied they were with the quality of the provision from their main provider of funded ELC. The majority (88%) were either very (62%) or fairly (26%) satisfied with the overall quality of their provider. This compared to 97% in 2022. Only 8% of respondents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the overall quality of their provider.

Those more likely to report that they were very or fairly satisfied were households:

• With single-parents (97%, compared with 90% of two-parent households).
• With no or one parent in work (97%, compared with 89% of households with two parents in work).
• In the 80% least deprived areas (94%, compared with 79% of those in the 20% most deprived areas (see the full breakdown in Figure 7.3).
• With two or three children (97%, compared with 75% of households with one child).
• With at least one child aged under six with ASN (96%, compared with 87% of households with no child with ASN).
• Living in remote areas (97%, compared with accessible areas 90%).

9.1.2 Quality of main provider across specific areas

In the survey, parents were asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements to assess perceptions of quality of provision across a few key areas. The statements are shown in Figure 9.1 along with the proportions of parents who agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, or disagreed with each. These questions were asked for the first time in 2025.

As shown in Figure 9.1, the majority (over two-thirds of respondents) agreed or strongly agreed with each of the positive statements regarding the quality of their ELC provider. Subgroup differences can be found in Supplementary Tables H2a-H7c.

Base: unweighted base, n=6,167 (except for 6,166 for the last two statements), weighted base, n=6,056.

9.1.3 Meeting the needs of children from diverse backgrounds

In interviews, parents were asked about the extent to which they think ELC settings meet the needs of children from diverse backgrounds and cultures. It was common for participants to not be aware of what, if anything, ELC settings did to support the cultural or religious needs of children. However, some said they were aware that the ELC setting organised activities to help all children learn about different cultural or religious holidays and practices.

My husband is Indian so I know they did Holi once or twice, the children are made aware of different festivals from different cultures like Ramadan or Eid. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

There were participants who gave examples of positive personal experiences where they felt their ELC provider had been helpful and respectful of their religious or cultural needs. These included parents who said the nursery asked about and were respectful of their religious needs, ensuring that appropriate food was made available and that clothing was respected.

Before he started going [to nursery] they asked for meal and stuff because we belong to Asian community so they said do we have any preference in religion and we told some of the religious beliefs – that we want [name of child] have that turban on and although he is in a different community we want our religion to be there. […] They respect our religion and they said we can make 100% our responsibility that he don’t take the turban off. (Parent of a two-year-old)

A number of the parents who participated in an interview had English as an additional language. For some, their ELC-aged children did not speak English, and some parents shared that their ELC setting was helping their child to learn.

9.1.4 Parents’ views and experiences of staff

In interviews, parents shared mixed experiences and views of the quality of staff within different ELC settings. Participants who were satisfied with their experience of ELC staff described the qualities they valued in the staff looking after their children, such as the ability to build positive relationships with their children and ensure they felt comfortable and safe. This also factored into parents’ decisions to have their children remain in their ELC settings.

I feel like our kids are in this very sort of homey environment where […] they’re with these people that they know really well and feel comfortable with and at the end of the day that’s the most important thing for me for the kids. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Participants highlighted the importance of staff who were nurturing, approachable and professional. They were appreciative of staff who would take the time to get to know their children and were invested in supporting their learning and development.

I think they do brilliant with her. She’s completely thriving and she’s learning so well and she’s developing as she should be. I think I couldn’t really ask for any more. I think they go over and above for all the children in that nursery. (Parent of a two-year-old)

Parental satisfaction with the quality of ELC staff was also related to the staff’s ability to support their children’s ASN. Participants valued ELC staff who had the knowledge and awareness to support their children effectively. This included cases of staff drawing on their own training or experience to implement support for children or implementing approaches shared by parents themselves.

However, there were also participants who were dissatisfied with the quality of ELC staff. A key challenge was limited staff capacity to accommodate and support the needs of children. Participants perceived that staff to child ratios affected the quality of provision. In some settings parents were concerned about whether there were enough staff to enable them to get to know and individually support their children. They felt the opportunities for one-to-one learning and support were limited and the number of children could be overwhelming for staff.

Some participants expressed dissatisfaction when they felt staff were not encouraging early learning within ELC settings. There were participants who felt the settings were more focused on childcare and managing the number of children rather than offering support to improve their children’s learning and development. Participants therefore would like more activities that support their children’s learning journey.

Participants’ experiences of staff were sometimes mixed. While some participants’ overall experiences were positive, they shared difficult interactions with particular staff members within settings. These included examples in which staff discussed private information about a child in an open setting with other parents present, were less supportive of their child’s development or were viewed by parents as inattentive or neglectful of their child’s needs which could jeopardise their child’s safety. Participants attributed this to a variation in staff’s skills and experience, resulting in some staff being more involved in supporting the children than others. An example of this was where a child was assigned a key worker to help meet their ASN, but when that worker was not available, their needs were not met by other staff.

I would say it’s very varied, there are some staff members in there that are very highly skilled, very motivated to do their job and very enthusiastic and then there’s other staff members that are maybe…could do with upskilling. They’ve maybe been in the job for so long and they’re just very set in their ways of doing things. But actually childcare is evolving all the time and it’s important to take on new guidance, new information […] And there’s also a few practitioners that have not long been in the role so they’re quite new into the career. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

As highlighted in Chapter 7, a lack of understanding of and experience in supporting children with ASN could lead to escalation in children’s behaviour. In these instances, participants did not fault the staff and instead emphasised the need for staff to receive training on a range of needs and suggested that settings should have at least one ASN trained staff member that could focus on children who require additional support.

Satisfaction with the quality of staff was sometimes dependent on the wider ELC setting. Participants described differences in the attentiveness of staff in different ELC settings and attributed this to staff capacity. There were participants who viewed settings with fewer children as more organised and structured, allowing staff to better oversee and support children, compared with larger settings with more children and that parents felt there were not enough staff.

9.1.5 Outdoor provision

In the survey, the majority (88%) of parents agreed or agreed strongly that their main ELC setting provided daily access to outdoor play. In interviews, parents expressed mixed views on the quality of the outdoor spaces provided in ELC settings. Good quality outdoor provision was described as spacious, safe, including large green spaces and a wide range of high-quality equipment and activities.

Interview participants also appreciated ELC settings which had unrestricted access to outdoor spaces for their children. Participants liked these “free flow” settings because they allowed their children to choose which environments they wanted to play and learn in. Free flow environments were facilitated by having enough staff to supervise both inside and outside spaces.

I’ve got one child that would want to be outside all the time and one child that would never want to be outside. So both of them are pretty good in that no child has to go out but no child has to stay in. They can kind of do what they want, they can go out in the rain and things as well. Yeah so really good with that. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

The role of staff also contributed to parents’ satisfaction with the quality of outdoor provision. Participants appreciated staff being involved in outdoor play and settings making considerations for children with ASN. For example, children that needed more support to ensure safety were closely supervised by staff when outdoors.

Some settings facilitated visits to outdoor spaces outwith the ELC setting, such as a local park or wooded area. There were also participants who used childminders and appreciated that they would take children outside and engage in different outdoor activities. In nurseries where outdoor access was restricted to only nursery grounds, participants expressed disappointment that their children were unable to experience new surroundings, nature or learn about road safety.

Although there were participants who viewed the outdoor spaces positively, they shared their disappointment that children did not spend as much or any time outdoors in poorer weather conditions. Participants valued their children spending time outside and would like ELC settings to accommodate this more routinely, if deemed safe.

The size of outdoor spaces also affected satisfaction with ELC provision. Participants described spaces as too small for the number of children within the setting. Participants therefore expressed concerns that these crowded spaces could potentially overwhelm children and lead to additional anxiety and stress. Some, but not all settings, staggered access to outdoor spaces to try and accommodate the number of children in the setting. Participants criticised outdoor spaces as being divorced from nature, such as only having spaces with fake grass or concrete, and limited facilities and equipment for children to play.

Again, that’s all kind of plastic grass and like fake plants so there’s no kind of nature aspect to it. It’s either flagstones or fake plants. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

I think that the building could [be] better and the garden could be better. They don’t have a lot of space outside. Like just a tiny garden and they don’t have like a playground. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Suggested improvements to the outdoor spaces in ELC settings included making spaces larger, with updated equipment and facilities. Participants appreciated where ELC settings had improved the quality of their outdoor spaces which gave their children more space to play outside.

9.1.6 Indoor provision

In interviews, parental satisfaction with the quality of indoor provision in ELC settings also varied. Space and capacity played a key role in whether parents found the indoor provision and facilities suitable for their children’s needs.

The inside classroom is quite small but again it’s only for half a dozen pupils really. So I think it’s still adequate, it’s still got little play areas, it’s still got a little kitchen and bathroom. Yeah I think for the size of it, it certainly has everything it needs. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

There were participants who shared positive changes made to the indoor provision at their ELC setting because of the extension of hours of funded ELC. For example, participants referenced settings expanding the area available for children to accommodate the increased number of children.

The layout of ELC settings varied, with some being open plan and others divided into separate rooms. Participants reported positive elements of both types of layouts. Separating children into different rooms allowed for smaller group activities and more individual time for each child with staff. However, open plan environments allowed children to socialise with children of different ages which parents felt supported their children’s development.

There is pros and cons to it all. There’s pros to having them all in the same group and all developing together. At [nursery name] because you’ve got ones that have just turned three and then you’ve got ones that are five so they’re kind of all learning off each other which I think is really good for their development. But then I quite like the idea of [other nursery name] too when they’re in their individual rooms because I feel then there’s more time allocated to their development because there is only so many kids. But there’s more of a staff ratio. (Parent of a two-year-old and a three- to five-year-old)

Finally, participants were satisfied with ELC settings which provided a variety of activities and toys to help their children play and learn. Parents with children with ASN particularly valued ELC settings with specific facilities, such as sensory rooms, since crowded and loud spaces were often described as environments that could overwhelm children with a range of ASN.

So it’s [sensory room] like up the other end of the nursery so it’s nice and quiet and it’s dark and the kids really enjoy going up there and they only put up a few kids at a time like maybe one or two kids at a time so they don’t get overwhelmed. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Participants who were dissatisfied with the quality of indoor provision had contrasting experiences of their ELC settings. They expressed concerns about the number of staff in their ELC settings as they did not feel there were sufficient staff to provide enough one-to-one support for their children, particularly those with ASN.

I think they could be doing with more people [staff] in the rooms especially with the fact that obviously, the first five years of their life is the most important and it’s the foundation for the rest of their life. So the fact that the classroom sizes and things like that are so big and there isn’t as many opportunities for them [staff] to have the kind of one-to-one with the children I think that could possibly be looked at to be able to help, especially with neurodivergent children and things like that because obviously they need a bit more support in regulating emotions and navigating social situations and things which obviously is a big part of helping them towards going to primary school. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Additionally, participants who were dissatisfied highlighted a lack of quiet spaces and spaces for children with ASN to play and learn effectively and safely. In terms of the layout and size, some parents reported that the ELC settings had insufficient space for equipment or the number of children in attendance. Others found the open plan design of the ELC setting disorganised with no designated spaces for play, learning, rest and food. When comparing experiences of different types of ELC, the setting participants preferred was not a specific type, but the one that balanced opportunities for socialising with one-to-one support, offered suitable environments and activities to support play and learning.

9.1.7 Meal provision

In the survey, over three-quarters of parents reported they were satisfied with the quality of meals and snacks that the setting provided (77%). In interviews, parents’ satisfaction with meal provision was dependent on the availability, choice and variety of foods, particularly around healthy meals and snacks.

Participants appreciated when settings had multiple meal options to choose from. They also liked ELC settings which provided a variety of healthy meals and snacks. This sometimes led to their children trying new foods, which could increase the range of food they were willing to eat at home. Participants thought that trying new foods was encouraged both by staff and by children seeing other children eating the same food. Being in an environment with other children also helped in improving their children’s table manners and in establishing mealtime routines.

It has opened up a wider variety of things that she’ll eat and I think because she’s in that environment where she’s with her friends and they’re all sitting down together, they’re all eating, it encourages her to actually eat and try these things. (Parent of a two-year-old)

Participants appreciated ELC settings being willing to accommodate food preferences and dietary restrictions. Whether children were fussy eaters, had requirements based on ASN, or had intolerances or allergies, participants shared that staff would do their best to accommodate them. Additionally, as noted in Chapter 7, there were cases of ELC settings accommodating cultural and religious needs.

Their food choices are really really good actually, [child’s name] has a gluten free diet at the moment, a wheat free diet so they changed his diet to everything…they were really really quick as well at responding. (Parent of a two-year-old and a three- to five-year-old)

He goes up there [ELC setting] every morning for breakfast and all this food is actually blended because he can’t eat full food. […] He gets the same food as everybody else but they actually blend it for him. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

In cases where it was more challenging to accommodate dietary needs, some ELC settings allowed packed lunches. This allowed participants to pack foods they knew their children were able to and would like to eat. However, the allowance of packed lunches varied across different ELC settings, though parents were understanding of this due to the risk to children with allergies.

Parental dissatisfaction was mostly due to a lack of variety and healthy options in the meals provided, as it didn’t allow for children to explore and try different foods. Additionally, small portion sizes and a lack of alternative meal options were viewed as challenging, as it could lead to children not eating much, or at all, while attending ELC and coming home hungry.

The nursery has one meal a day, like one option, and I don’t agree with that. I think we are at a critical stage where they should be allowed to kind of explore foods and explore different things and make choices about what they want to try and I feel like they’re very limited. (Parent of a two-year-old and a three- to five-year-old)

Staff also played a role in parental satisfaction with the quality of meal provision. Although there were settings with staff who were more involved during mealtimes and ensured children were eating, this was not always the case. Some participants felt that there was not enough staff supervision during lunchtimes, which they felt contributed to their children not eating or finishing their meals.

Whenever I pick [child’s name] up she’s absolutely starving […] They [ELC setting] have so many [children] it’s really hard for them to fit mealtimes in. She’s also said, ‘oh I didn’t have time to eat my packed lunch because we had to be moved on out of lunch’ and they hadn’t finished [...] I felt quite frustrated about [it] because obviously they need enough fuel in them to keep them going for the day. (Parent of a two-year-old and a three- to five-year-old)

Participants described cases of ELC settings attempting to make accommodations after concerns were raised by parents, but that this would taper off or suddenly stop. There were participants who sympathised with ELC staff who were also frustrated with the quality of meal provision, sharing instances of staff using their own money to provide snacks that they know the children would eat.

9.1.8 Parental involvement

The majority of parents in the survey agreed or agreed strongly that their ELC setting(s) communicated openly and regularly with them about their child’s progress and achievements (79%) and that families are meaningfully involved in influencing change at the ELC setting (68%). However, the extent to which parents in interviews were satisfied with the level of parental involvement varied.

Interview participants who were satisfied with the level of communication with their ELC provider stated that they were able to discuss their children’s development with staff both in person and through online platforms. Participants were appreciative of the detailed information, photos and videos shared, such as daily updates on children’s activities, learning, meals eaten and any challenges experienced. In turn, participants could also share information and updates with settings, allowing parents to keep staff informed of their children’s learning and development at home.

There is a Learning Journal that we have, that has the parents contribution as well so I can add in photos like he did this at home today and they can add in photos from the nursery. That’s kind of a good interaction too just to see how he’s behaving at nursery, how he’s behaving at home, it’s very helpful. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Parents who were satisfied with their ELC provider’s communication also tended to report having a good relationship with staff. Participants reported that staff were supportive and encouraging of feedback and made them feel comfortable sharing their opinions and concerns. In these instances, staff responded by making changes to their approach or how they communicated with parents. This could entail support being sought from external professionals to best meet the needs of their children (see Chapter 6). Participants with children with ASN said when this happened it made them feel involved in every aspect of decision making about their child and helped them to feel that their child was safe and looked after.

Parents who were dissatisfied with the communication with ELC settings argued that they received limited or generic information on their child’s participation in activities and the progress of their learning and development. Some participants expressed difficulties with not knowing what their child is doing, how they are feeling and if they are being appropriately supported by staff. A lack of communication could be difficult for any parent, but parents of children with ASN particularly expressed concern for their child’s safety and wellbeing (see Chapter 6). Participants wanted more detailed information specifically related to their children. Additional information that participants stated that they would like was meal monitoring to ensure their children were eating whilst attending ELC settings.

I sometimes wonder if they are doing loads more Early Learning activities and that’s not being communicated to me. I don’t think I get copious amounts of good quality communication, a lot of it is quite tertiary or surface level stuff that I’m getting told. It’s not actually that specific to my child. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Some participants who used multiple ELC settings shared there was variation in the quality of communication. For example, one parent described receiving detailed and daily feedback from their childminder, whilst the nursery would only inform them of problems that occurred.

Parents who were dissatisfied with their level of involvement and communication with ELC settings said they found it difficult to raise this with staff. Participants shared that there were few opportunities to approach staff to discuss concerns due to limited capacity within settings. When participants were able to raise difficulties, the response from staff varied.

Finally, participants reported difficulties in understanding the information provided to them by ELC settings. A parent gave an example of receiving feedback that related to the GIRFEC framework. The language used was not familiar to them so they struggled to understand whether their children were learning and developing as they should. Participants thought it was important that any communication was meaningful and understandable to all parents.

I think it’s called Getting It Right For Every Child, like the Scottish Government framework. So it will say like they’re using this skill and this skill but again there’s no context as to what the skills are and what that means. [...] Does that mean that they’re at the level they should be or they’re below? (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

9.2 Improving the quality of funded ELC provision

Challenges faced concerning the quality of funded ELC provision included poor quality outdoor spaces or lack of equipment, the indoor facilities not being suitable for the number of children, not having healthy meal options or alternative meals, and a lack of consistent or detailed communication from funded ELC settings.

Suggested improvements to outdoor provision included making spaces larger to accommodate the number of children at the setting and having additional and better quality toys, equipment and activities. However, participants did recognise the difficulty in improving outdoor provision in funded ELC settings with limited funding. Participants would also like funded ELC settings to offer more opportunities for children to spend time in local green spaces and experience nature.

Proposed improvements to indoor provision included having indoor spaces which were suitable for the number of children in funded ELC settings, smaller class sizes, and more staff to improve their ability to offer one-to-one support. Participants suggested that having fewer children per staff member within funded ELC settings would improve the quality of care provided to the children, particularly for children with more complex ASN. Participants also thought that distinct rooms with fewer children would reduce pressure on staff who were overwhelmed in larger open plan funded ELC settings and improve tailored support for their child. Parents of children with ASN suggested that it would benefit their children to have specific facilities such as sensory rooms, and smaller spaces to reduce potential anxiety or stress due to crowded and noisy environments.

The class sizes are huge so they could really be doing with being smaller […] I think it would be really really beneficial for the children. They would have more one-to-one so they would obviously be able to kind of regulate a little bit more easily. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

I definitely think there needs to be consideration for children’s Additional Needs and I think the ratio needs to be adjusted depending on that level of need that child requires. (Parent of a three- to five-year-old)

Suggested improvements to meal provision included providing healthier foods, more variety to allow children to explore different foods and having more choice or alternative meal options to accommodate children’s needs.

Participants also proposed ways in which communication with funded ELC settings could be improved. Participants wanted clearer and more consistent communication from their funded ELC provider about their child’s learning and development, daily activities, what they have eaten, and their overall behaviour. Participants believed this would help them support their child’s learning and behavioural development more positively at home. Participants would also like to see funded ELC settings respond more effectively to concerns raised about meeting their child’s needs.