Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare: Phase 5 Report

Executive Summary

Background

From August 2021 the entitlement to funded early learning and childcare (ELC) in Scotland increased from 600 to 1140 hours per year for all three- and four-year-olds and for eligible two-year-olds. This means families can access up to 30 hours of funded ELC per week per child in term time, or around 22 hours spread across the calendar year. This report outlines findings from the fifth phase of the Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare (SSELC), focusing on four- and five-year-olds who are accessing funded ELC.

In October 2022, alongside the Strategic Childcare Plan 2022 to 2026, Scottish Government published an Evaluation Strategy, which set out plans to evaluate the impact of the expansion of funded ELC to 1140 hours on outcomes for children, parents and carers (from hereon in referred to as 'parents' for brevity), and families as a whole. Three high-level outcomes for the expansion were highlighted:

1. Children's development improves and the poverty-related outcomes gap narrows

2. Family wellbeing improves

3. Parents' opportunities to take up or sustain work, study or training increase

The SSELC has been designed to provide key evidence on whether the ELC expansion has achieved these aims by measuring outcomes for children and parents who received the 600 hour entitlement (Phases 1 to 3) and comparing them with those who received the increased 1140 hour entitlement (Phases 4 to 6).

Methods

The SSELC methodology comprises three linked components at each phase:

1. an assessment of sampled children's development outcomes by ELC keyworkers

2. a survey of parents of the sampled children

3. observations by Care Inspectorate staff of the quality of experience within ELC settings attended by sampled children.

A survey of managers or heads of sampled ELC settings, introduced at Phase 4, was also included at Phase 5.

The Phase 5 sample consisted of children of four or five years of age who were receiving up to 1140 hours of funded ELC, and the parents of those children. Participants were recruited via local authority, private and voluntary sector group ELC settings (childminders were not included) in 30 local authority areas. Fieldwork was conducted between May and June 2024.

Comparisons with the equivalent baseline phase of the SSELC (Phase 2) are not included in this report. Full comparative analysis, which will control for relevant factors and assess whether differences found between 2019 and 2024 are statistically significant, will form part of the final SSELC report in 2025.

Key Findings

Use of ELC

One in five households (20%) paid for additional hours at the participating ELC setting on top of those that were funded. A similar proportion (18%) of children attended the setting for fewer than 22 hours a week.

Around a third of children (37%) also received (formal or informal) childcare from a provider other than the participating ELC setting. Where informal childcare was used, this was most commonly provided by the child's grandparents: 91% of those using informal childcare received help from grandparents (27% of all families), sometimes in addition to further providers. One in six (15%) children received formal ELC from another provider.

Most parents engaged with the ELC setting to some extent, with 96% having discussed their child's progress with staff. Half (51%) had talked to someone about how to support their child's learning at home. Four in ten (42%) received advice or information to support their child's speech, language and communication development.

Parents saw a lot of advantages in having their four- or five-year-old in ELC, including it being good for them to interact with other children (99%), good for their independence/confidence (96%), because they enjoy it (94%), and because it enables parents to work, study or train (80%).

Child health and development

The majority of children (95%) were described by their parent as in "good" or "very good" health. Around one in eight (13%) had a long-term physical or mental health condition or illness that limited their day-to-day activities.

Most parents (84%) reported having no worries about how their child talks and 91% reported having no concerns about what their child understands. Speech and language concerns were more prevalent among parents of boys and among parents living in more deprived areas. Twelve percent of children were receiving some specific support for speech and language from their ELC setting. A sizeable group of the parents reporting that they had concerns about how well their child talked or what they understood said that their children were not receiving specific support for this (25% and 22% respectively).

Keyworkers' observations of the child's development using the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) showed that the majority of children were developmentally on schedule across all five domains. In each domain, girls were more likely than boys to be assessed as "on schedule" in their development. Eighty-seven percent of girls were on schedule for the communication domain, compared with 78% of boys. The gap between girls and boys was widest for the fine motor skills domain, with 88% of girls on schedule, compared with 67% of boys.

On each of the five domains, children living in the most deprived areas were least likely to be assessed as developmentally on schedule. For the problem-solving domain, eight in ten (79%) of those in the most deprived areas were on schedule, compared with nine in ten (90%) of those in other areas. Boys living in deprived areas were particularly at risk of not being on schedule.

Children's keyworkers also completed observations of the child's development using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Most children had a "close to average" (78%) or "slightly raised" (11%) SDQ total difficulties score. With the exception of emotional symptoms, across all the domains girls tended to have fewer difficulties than boys. The gap between scores for boys and girls was largest for the hyperactivity domain (82% of girls close to average compared with 62% of boys). On the "total difficulties" score, 85% of girls were close to average compared with 72% of boys.

Parent employment, education and training

Eight in ten respondents to the parent questionnaire (most of whom were women) were in employment, with a fairly even split between those working full-time (41%), and those working fewer than 30 hours a week (38%). Partners (mostly men) were more than twice as likely to be in full-time employment (88%), with a further 7% in part-time employment.

Two thirds (67%) of single parents were in employment, training or full-time education, while both parents were in employment, training or full-time education in 86% of two-parent households. Those living in deprived areas were less likely to be in employment or study: 90% of two-parent households living in the most deprived areas had at least one parent in employment, training or full-time education, compared with 99% in other areas.

Fourteen percent of respondents reported they had entered or re-entered employment as a result of their child starting funded ELC. In addition, 17% said they had been able to increase the hours they work, and 17% said they had had an increase in income/pay.

Overall, 18% of respondents were not currently in employment and this was more common in single parent than couple households (36% compared with 14%).

Respondents had also reported being able to do a number of other things beyond working or looking for work because their child was in ELC. Six in ten respondents (62%) agreed they had been able to think about what they may do in the future. Over a third (37%) had been able to study or improve work-related skills.

Parental and family wellbeing

Most parent respondents (84%) said their health was "good" or "very good". This proportion was lower in deprived areas (69%, compared with 87% in other areas). One in five respondents (19%) reported having a long-term health condition. The large majority (73%) of these said the condition affected their mental health.

Seventeen percent of respondents were recorded as having "low wellbeing", using the short form of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale. Mental wellbeing was higher among respondents living in two-parent households than single-parent households.

Six in ten (59%) respondents reported that their child looked at books or stories every day at home. All home learning activities, including looking at books, were more common for girls than boys. For example, for reciting nursery rhymes or singing songs, 61% of girls did this every day, compared with 41% of boys.

Views of setting managers

Most settings offered support for parents on parenting concerns (90%) and help with their child's speech, language and communication development (88%). Some settings were also able to offer other forms of support, such as provision of clothing for children and maximising benefits take up.

Close to half (48%) of setting managers agreed that the expansion had led them to work more closely with families for whom they provide support. Forty-four percent agreed that it had led them to spend more time providing support to families. Two-fifths (42%) agreed that the expansion of funded ELC had helped them to provide a broader range of support for families.

Setting managers were asked what their setting had done in order to meet the requirements of the ELC expansion. The most common activities chosen related to staffing, with almost three-quarters (73%) saying they had taken on extra staff and almost half (48%) providing additional training to staff. Some said they had increased fees for unfunded children (23%) or cut expenditure, for example on play materials (16%). Setting managers were then asked to select up to three main challenges that they had faced in meeting the requirements of the expansion. The most commonly mentioned were recruiting good quality staff (62%), staff training (48%) and accommodating children with additional support needs (47%).

Characteristics of ELC

Reviewers from the Care Inspectorate conducted observations of 150 settings using the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-3). The ECERS tool was used to provide a snapshot of the experiences of children in their ELC settings. ECERS-3 has 6 different subscales and, for each, settings were scored either inadequate, minimal, good or excellent.

Settings scored highest on the Interaction subscale, with 87% of settings scoring 5 ('good') or above. Settings also scored highly (scoring 5 or above) on the Personal Care Routines (77%), Programme Structure (75%) and Space and Furnishings (64%) subscales. On the Language and Literacy subscale 38% of settings scored 5 or above. The Learning Activities subscale stands out as an area where many settings were performing less well, with only 14% of settings scoring 5 or above.

It is important to note that the ECERS tool is not the only method of assessing setting quality in Scotland. Indeed, Care Inspectorate ratings provide a broader measure of the quality of practice and policy within settings that have also been found to be related to children's outcomes in Scotland.