Early learning and childcare - parents' views and use: survey findings 2022

Summary and conclusions

This report presents the findings from a survey undertaken to explore use of, and views on, ELC services among parents and other primary carers of children who have not yet started school. This section provides an overview of the key findings and conclusions across the themes addressed by the study.

Use of childcare

The research found that most parents who responded to the survey used some form of childcare for their children, including funded ELC, paid-for and informal childcare. The type, mix and amount of childcare used varied depending on the age of the child, household resources and parental choice.

Use of childcare wass significantly higher for children aged two to five years than for children aged under two. Almost all parents used childcare for children aged two to five years compared with around two-thirds of those for children under two years.

Those with greater resources (higher incomes, greater access to employment) were more likely than others to use all forms of childcare. As might be expected these households with greater resources were more likely to use paid-for childcare, but they were also more likely to use informal childcare and, for three to five year olds, funded ELC. Conversely, those with fewer resources were less likely to use paid-for childcare. Those with young children (under twos) were more likely to not use childcare at all.

A similar pattern was observed in the amount of childcare used by parents: the number of paid-for childcare and informal childcare hours used was much higher among parents with greater resources than other parents.

Generally, parents tended to use more paid-for ELC during term-time and slightly less during school holidays. In contrast – or possibly, to compensate – use of informal childcare tended to be higher in holidays than during term-time.

Uptake of funded ELC

Given the recent significant increase in the amount of funded ELC, from 600 hours to 1,140 hours per year for all three to four year olds, the research focused on funded ELC. Almost all (97%) of the parents with three to five year olds and most (86%) of those with eligible two year olds had used funded ELC for their child since August 2021.

Uptake of the full entitlement was more likely for three to five year olds than for two year olds: around three-quarters used their full entitlement for their three to five year olds compared to half for their eligible two year olds. Related to this, parents with three to five year olds used more hours of funded ELC per week than parents of eligible two year olds (around 25 hours compared to 21 hours per week during term time).

Parents said the main motivations for using funded ELC were to benefit their child, for example their child's development, confidence/independence and learning, regardless of their child's age (around nine-tenths of parents gave this type of reason). Parents with three to five year olds also said that being able to work was a main reason for using ELC (mentioned by around three-fifths of parents). This was especially the case for parents in more 'advantaged' sub-groups – those with two parents in work, living in non-deprived areas, and so on (typically mentioned by around three-quarters of these parents).

Reasons for not using funded ELC

The variation in uptake of the funded entitlement was due in part to parental choice: many parents said they did not need or want the full entitlement or did not want their child in nursery for so many hours. However, some parents also mentioned barriers to using their full entitlement such as not getting the sessions that they wanted at their preferred setting.

The number of those not using their entitlement at all was small. Reasons given by parents in this group for not using their entitlement varied by the age of the child. The main reasons given by parents of three to five year olds were not being able to get preferred hours at their setting of choice and a lack of flexibility in childcare settings. The main reasons mentioned by parents of two year olds were that their child was still too young, and they preferred to look after their child themselves. Notably, a significant minority of parents of two year olds (25%) gave reasons related to lack of awareness: for example not being aware of the availability of funded ELC or not knowing how to apply for funded ELC.

Experience of funded ELC: quality and accessibility

The main factors that parents considered when choosing a funded ELC provider were location, the staff and provider reputation. Factors such as continuity (for example being the primary school the child will attend) and the opportunities available to the child were also important. However, some parents of children with ASN and some living in rural areas had little or no choice of provider in their local area.

Parents were very positive about funded ELC. Almost all (97%) parents were satisfied with the quality of their funded ELC provider. Most found it easy to travel to their main provider, indeed three-quarters said they found it very easy.

While levels of dissatisfaction with the quality of their provider were extremely low, some groups of parents were less likely to be very satisfied than others. These were parents with older children (three to five year olds), those with working parent(s) in the household; and, notably, parents of children with ASN.

Experience of funded ELC: flexibility

The flexibility of the funded ELC provider was an important factor for parents. Around a third of parents said that flexibility and reliability were important when choosing their provider. This was especially important for those households where both parents were in work and in high income households.

The research found that most parents (around nine-tenths) were generally satisfied with the flexibility to use funded hours. However, those most likely to be dissatisfied compared with others were parents from the more advantaged households (such as those with one or two working parents, on higher incomes and from the least deprived areas) – typically the households that use high levels of funded hours and childcare overall. Not being able to get the preferred setting at the required times was cited across the research as a reason for not using any/all of the funded entitlement, and again households with one or both working parents were most likely to raise these concerns.

Parents dissatisfied with current arrangements were broadly split as to how they would prefer to use their funded hours: a few long sessions each week, several short sessions, and provision outside normal working hours. Often this simply meant they wanted the flexibility to use their funded hours to cover their working hours in a way that minimised the amount of paid-top-up childcare they needed.

Experience of funded ELC: Additional Support Needs

Around a sixth of parents had at least one child eligible for funded ELC with ASN. Most parents (more than four-fifths) were satisfied that funded ELC meets their child's additional support needs. However, just under a third of parents of children with an ASN had experienced barriers accessing suitable funded ELC for their child. The proportion of parents reporting they had experienced barriers has decreased since 2018 (48%). The main difficulties mentioned were lack of staff time to meet children's needs, insufficient information from providers on how they would support children with ASN and staff qualifications, knowledge and experience. Notably, more disadvantaged parents, especially those on lower incomes and from deprived areas, were especially likely to experience these barriers.

The impact of funded ELC

The research demonstrated clear positive benefits from the increase in the funded ELC entitlement. The most common impact, mentioned by almost three-quarters of parents, was being able to work or look for work; with two-earner households and higher income households especially likely to appreciate this benefit. The increased entitlement also provided parents with an opportunity to think about their future. Again, almost three-quarters of parents mentioned this impact; and it was particularly welcomed by parents in more disadvantaged families, for example lone parents, no-earner households and young parents.

However, the increase in funded hours did not only impact on (moves towards) employment. Having more time to think about the future was a benefit mentioned by around three quarters of parents, while wellbeing impacts such as feeling happier, less stressed and being able to look after oneself more, were all mentioned by around half of parents. Parents in disadvantaged circumstances were especially likely to mention these benefits.

The impact of Covid-19

Covid-19 restrictions disrupted ELC provisions throughout most of 2020 and into early 2021. Critically, the pandemic delayed the full statutory implementation of the expansion of funded ELC by a year until August 2021. The research considered whether Covid-19 continued to impact on parents' use of funded ELC beyond August 2021.

For the majority of parents (around three-quarters) Covid-19 had not had ongoing impacts on their use of ELC. However, around a fifth mentioned they had reduced the amount of ELC they used since August. Often this was because their provider had cut back their hours or had closed for some reason. In some cases, the parents had cut back the hours used, for example to self-isolate, because of illness, or through personal choice.

Some parents mentioned other impacts. Just under 1 in 20 said they had increased their use since August. The main reasons mentioned were increased working commitments, improving availability and a desire to support their child's development and social skills after the pandemic restrictions. Other key impacts that parents highlighted were that some providers had become less flexible, and parents' access to premises was restricted which made it more difficult to settle their children and to engage with staff.

Affordability of childcare

The results show that 36% of parents pay for some of their childcare. Of those that do pay for childcare, parents spend on average £533 per month on their children aged under three years and £306 on their children aged three to five years. This large difference across the age groups appears at least because children aged three to five are entitled to funded ELC and, as discussed above, virtually all children aged three to five years use at least some of their entitlement.

Around three-fifths of parents who use paid-for childcare have experienced affordability difficulties in the last year. This includes a substantial proportion of parents who described these difficulties as significant: two-fifths of parents of children age under three years and a quarter of three to five year olds. This highlights the important role that funded ELC is playing in supporting families, especially those with children aged three to five years.

The most common problem parents experienced (around four-fifths of those having difficulties) was affording the overall cost of all the childcare they needed. Having to pay fees upfront also presented problems for a sizable minority of parents (around a fifth). It is worth bearing in mind that that the fieldwork for this research was completed in May 2022; when concerns about cost of living were very much in the news, but energy price rises and general price inflation were still to feed through.

Expanding provision

Finally, parents of children aged under three years not currently eligible for funded ELC were asked their views on expanding provision to this younger age-group. Most (around two-thirds) of these parents currently use some form of childcare, typically a private nursery. The two main reasons for not using any paid-for childcare were that the parents could not afford to pay for childcare and/or they wanted to look after their child themselves.

The research found that almost all of these parents would be interested in using funded ELC for their child aged under three were it available to them now. Indeed, most (80%) said they would be very interested. Households with working parents and those with older children were especially likely to be interested.

Conclusion

The majority of parents are very positive about funded ELC. The benefits to their child's social, emotional and educational development were regarded as main reasons for using the entitlement by almost all parents. Most parents valued the opportunity to work, look for work, or undertake education and training to improve employment prospects in the future. Linked to these, many parents also mentioned feeling less stressed, with more time for themselves and their family.

However, some challenges remain. There is a need to go further to improve the flexibility of provision so that it meets the needs of more families. Also to continue to address affordability as the cost of childcare for those not entitled to funded ELC or who need to purchase additional hours to meet their childcare needs remains high, with affordability for less advantaged households a particular concern. There were also challenges relating to equalities. First, more advantaged households (higher incomes, two parents in work) are most likely to use funded ELC and use more funded hours. Further work is needed to maximise take up of funded ELC among those who many benefit most. Second, there is a need to continue to ensure provision meets the needs of all children with ASN.

The survey clearly indicated that the entitlement to 1,140 hours is making a real difference to parents. Not surprisingly, therefore there was a very high level of support for an extension of age-appropriate, funded ELC provision to children aged one and two years.

Summary of sub-group analysis

Use of ELC

Deprived areas/low income households

Were more likely than others to use funded ELC (eligible two year olds only).

Less likely than others to say their reason for using funded ELC was to improve their work opportunities.

Single earner/lone parent households

Were more likely than others to use funded childcare (eligible two year olds only) .

Less likely than others to use all their funded ELC entitlement and less likely to say their reason for using funded ELC is to improve their work opportunities.

Rural areas

Less likely than others to use all their funded ELC.

Parents of children with ASN

Less likely than others to use funded ELC (eligible two year olds only).

More likely than others to say their reason for using funded ELC was to benefit their child's learning/development/etc., and less than others likely to give reasons relating to work opportunities.

Other sub-group differences

No other sub-group differences were noted.

Flexibility of funded ELC (three to fives unless otherwise stated)

Deprived areas/low income households

All more likely to use a LA nursery and less likely to use a private nursery.

Less likely than others to use their funded ELC hours across the whole year.

More likely to be satisfied with the flexibility offered by the funded hours.

Single earner/lone parent households

More likely to use an LA nursery, less likely to use a private nursery; and less likely to spread their funded ELC hours across the whole year than others.

More likely to be satisfied with the flexibility offered by the funded hours .

Rural areas

More likely to use an LA nursery, less likely to use a private nursery, and more likely than others to use their funded ELC hours across the whole year.

Parents of children with ASN

More likely to use an LA nursery, less likely to use a private nursery.

Other sub-group differences

Households with two working parents use more funded ELC hours than those with no working parents throughout the year for both age groups.

Parents with more than one child under six years more likely to use a LA nursery, less likely to use a private nursery; and less likely to spread their funded ELC hours across the whole year than others.

Quality and accessibility of funded ELC

Deprived areas/low income households

Were less likely than others to mention issues relating to continuity for child, location, and flexibility and reliability when choosing their funded ELC provider.

Were more likely to have used funded ELC to think about their future, to study, to care for others, and to have had more time to look after themselves. And less likely to have (looked for) work/increased hours worked.

Single earner/lone parent households

No-earner households more likely to be satisfied with the quality of their provider.

More likely to have been using funded ELC to think about their future, to study, to care for others and have had more time to look after themselves, feel happier and less stressed.

They were less likely to have used funded ELC to work/look for work, to (look for). work/increased hours worked. Households with no/one earner more likely than others to have taken up voluntary work.

Rural areas

More likely than others to have had restricted choices when choosing their funded ELC provider.

More likely than others to have used their funded ELC hours to increase the hours they are working.

Parents of children with ASN

More likely than others to have had restricted choices when choosing their funded ELC provider, and less likely than others to be satisfied with the quality of their provider.

More likely than others to be using funded ELC to have more time to look after themselves, and to have been feeling happier and less stressed.

Other sub-group differences

Parents with English as a second/additional language were less likely than others to mention continuity for child when choosing their funded ELC provider.
More likely than others to be using funded ELC to think about their future, to study, to care for others, to have undertaken voluntary work, and to have increased hours worked. More likely than others to be using funded ELC to have more time to look after themselves, and to have been feeling happier and less stressed.

Parents with eligible two year olds more likely to be satisfied with the quality of their provider.

Younger parents (under 25) more likely to have used funded ELC to think about their future, to study, to care for others, and have more time to look after themselves. Less likely to have (looked for) work/increased hours worked.

Parents with one child under six years were more likely than others to have used their funded ELC to work/look for work (76% vs 69%) increased hours worked.

Parents with a health condition that reduced their capacity a lot: less likely than those with no health condition to have used their funded ELC hours to work/look for work.

Summary of sub-group analysis: affordability

Deprived areas/low income households

0-2s: as might be expected, low income households tend to spend less on childcare than others.

Were most likely to report significant difficulties affording childcare costs, and were more likely than others to raise concerns about paying fees, deposits and other costs upfront.

Single earner/lone parent households

0-2s: Single earner households spend less on childcare

Were most likely to report significant difficulties affording childcare costs and were more likely than others to raise concerns about paying fees, deposits and other costs upfront.

Rural areas

No significant differences.

Parents of children with ASN

Were most likely to report significant difficulties affording childcare costs.

Other sub-group differences

Parents with English as a second/additional language: spending on childcare is higher for all age groups among households where English is a second language, and these parents were most likely than others to report significant difficulties affording their childcare costs.

They were also significantly more likely to raise concerns about paying fees, deposits and other costs upfront.

Older parents generally spent more on childcare than their younger counterparts.

Younger parents were more likely to report significant difficulties affording their childcare costs.

Funded ELC for young children (under three years) – key considerations

Deprived areas/low income households

More likely than others to be interested in settings where they could stay and play with their child and where they can drop in with their child.

Single earner/lone parent households

More likely than others to be interested in settings where they could stay and play with their child, setting convenient to get to from home, settings near to their other children's nurseries/schools and settings where they can drop in with their child.

Rural areas

More likely than others to be interested in settings where they can drop in with their child.

Parents of children with ASN

No significant difference noted.

Other sub-group differences

Those with English as an additional/second language more likely than others to be interested in settings where they could stay and play with their child and where they can drop in with their child.

Young parents aged under 25 more likely than others to be interested in settings where they could stay and play with their child.

Parents with 2+ children more likely than others to be interested in settings near to their other children's nurseries/schools; settings offering flexible sessions.