Publication - Research and analysis

Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare: Phase 6

Published: 24 November 2025
From: Director-General Education and Justice
Directorate: Children and Families Directorate
ISBN: 9781836919957

This report outlines findings from the 6th phase of the Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare (SSELC), focusing on 3-year-olds who were accessing up to 1140 hours of funded ELC. The SSELC forms a major part of the strategy for the evaluation of the expansion of funded ELC in Scotland

Supporting documents

Introduction

Background

This report outlines findings from the sixth, and final, phase of the Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare (SSELC). The SSELC surveys, together, form an important part of the evaluation of the expansion of funded early learning and childcare (ELC) in Scotland. The Evaluation Strategy, published by the Scottish Government in October 2022, set out plans to evaluate the impact of the expansion of funded ELC from 600 to 1140 hours (referred to as “the expansion of funded ELC”) on outcomes for children, parents and carers^[3], and families.

The ELC Expansion Programme

From August 2021 the entitlement to funded ELC in Scotland increased from 600 to 1140 hours per year for all three- and four-year-olds, and eligible two-year-olds. From then, families have been able to 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 followed a number of smaller expansions since the introduction of funded ELC in 2002. Currently, two-year-olds are also eligible for funded ELC if they, or their parent, are care-experienced or they have a parent who is in receipt of one or more qualifying benefits. Local authorities are also able to provide discretionary access to funded ELC for any other child^[4].

In October 2022, the Strategic Childcare Plan for 2022-2026 was published. The plan set out the Scottish Government’s vision for ELC and school age childcare, including planned actions to realise the benefits of the expansion to 1140 hours of funded ELC. Three outcomes for children and families in Scotland were outlined in the plan. These were:

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 Scottish Study of Early Learning and Childcare

The SSELC has been designed to provide key evidence on the extent to which the expansion of funded ELC has achieved the above aims. It does this by measuring outcomes for children and parents receiving some or all of the current entitlement of 1140 funded hours and comparing them to those who received the previous entitlement of 600 hours. The Evaluability Assessment and Evaluation Strategy for the expansion of funded ELC details how findings from the SSELC will be considered, along with other sources of information, to assess the contribution and effectiveness of the expansion of funded ELC in relation to the above aims.

Aims of the SSELC

The SSELC aims are to measure the extent to which the expansion from 600 hours to 1140 hours has:

improved outcomes for children between the ages of two and five, particularly those at risk of disadvantage.
closed the gap in child development outcomes between children who are most and least disadvantaged between the ages of two and five.
improved outcomes for parents, particularly parents of children at risk of disadvantage.
increased family wellbeing, particularly for families in disadvantaged circumstances^[5].

Phases of data collection

Data were collected across six phases of the SSELC, from 2018 to 2024. In 2018-19, Phases 1 to 3 collected baseline data on the outcomes of samples of children and their parents accessing up to 600 hours of funded ELC. During 2023-24, Phases 4 to 6 of the SSELC collected “post-expansion” data on the outcomes of samples of children and their parents accessing up to 1140 hours of funded ELC.

The methodology of the SSELC is made up of three main linked components:

1. an assessment of sampled children’s development by their ELC keyworker

2. a survey of parents of sampled children

3. observations by Care Inspectorate staff of the quality of experience within ELC settings attended by sampled children. At Phases 3 and 6, new observations did not take place, as most of the participating settings had had a chance to be observed at Phases 1, 2, 4 and 5^[6].

The SSELC is both cross-sectional and longitudinal. For the longitudinal component, data were collected at Phase 1 on a cohort of two-year-olds (and their parents) who were eligible for 600 hours of funded ELC when they began accessing their funded entitlement. The same children were followed up at Phase 3 after they had received one year of ELC. Post-expansion, data were collected at Phase 4 on a new cohort of two-year-olds eligible for 1140 hours of funded ELC and again, after one year, at Phase 6. This longitudinal element provides evidence on the impact of one year of ELC on the children who need it most both pre and post expansion. In the report these children are described as ‘Eligible 2s’.

The cross-sectional component of the study compares the outcomes of groups of children and their parents accessing up to 600 hours of funded ELC in 2018/2019, with those accessing up to 1140 hours in 2023/2024. This includes comparing outcomes of three-year-olds at Phase 3 with outcomes for children of the same age at Phase 6. Similar comparisons are also made with two-year-olds and four- and five-year-olds in other phases.

A report has been published following each phase of data collection. The previous five reports published to date are available on the Scottish Government website.

Overview of Phase 6

The aims of Phase 6 data collection were to collect data on two groups of three-year-olds:

Children who had already received a year of up to 1140 hours of funded ELC, as they became eligible at age two (described in the report as 'Eligible 2s'). Data was also collected about these children one year before, at age two (Phase 4).
A nationally-representative group of three-year old children, most of whom began receiving funded ELC at age three – to allow comparisons with the Eligible 2s. (These children are described in the report as ‘Comparator 3s’).

The aims of Phase 6 of the SSELC were:

To gather robust, nationally representative data on child outcomes for ‘Eligible 2s’ who took part at Phase 4 after receiving a year of funded ELC provision.
To gather robust data on child outcomes for the nationally-representative sample of 'Comparator 3s’ who were receiving 1140 hours of funded ELC.
To gather robust, nationally representative data on parent outcomes linked to the above samples of children.
To ensure the comparability of these data with data collected at Phase 3 for a cohort of three-year-olds who were receiving 600 hours of funded ELC provision.

Ultimately, Phase 6 aimed to report on any changes for Eligible 2s (and their parents) after a year of funded ELC, as well as discussing how those children and their parents sit in relation to average national outcomes for children aged three.

Methods

Sampling

As above, Phase 6 comprised two separate samples of three-year-olds. The age range of the children at Phase 6 was the same as those involved at Phase 3: between age three and three years six months. The distribution of ages within the range were similar for the two samples. The average age of the Comparator 3s was three years and four and a half months at the time of the keyworker observations. The Eligible 2s were older by 13 days on average, at just short of three years and five months. This difference is well within the bounds of normal sample variation and not large enough to affect comparisons between the two groups.

Follow-up of Eligible 2s

At Phase 4, data were collected on 500 children aged two, including 486 for whom keyworker observations were completed, and 341 for whom a parent/carer questionnaire was completed. In summer 2024, settings were re-contacted to remind them about the plan to recontact parents/carers one year after the initial data collection exercise. Settings were asked which of the Phase 4 children were still in attendance, and, if any had moved to another setting, the name and contact details for the new setting were requested.

Of the 500 children who took part at Phase 4, 415 were believed to either still be attending the same setting at Phase 6 or attending another setting which took part at Phase 4 (155 separate settings); 75 were traced to new settings (59 settings) and 10 could not be traced (mostly recorded as not attending ELC in Scotland).

Sampling of Comparator 3s

The sample of Comparator 3s was drawn from settings across 30 local authority areas. A two-stage, "cluster" sampling approach was taken. The first stage involved the random selection of settings, and the second stage involved the random selection of children within settings. Settings were selected from the sample drawn for Phase 5 (in May/June 2024, when the focus was on four- and five-year-olds). This was for three main reasons:

As most of these settings had previously participated, or attended an information session at Phase 5, efficiencies were made by not repeating information sessions for these settings.
Similarly, many of the settings involved at Phase 5 had also been observed by the Care Inspectorate and assessed using the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-3), which was designed for evaluating ELC provision for children from age two and a half to five. Hence, further efficiencies were made by not repeating this exercise.
The sample drawn at Phase 5 was nationally representative of four- and five- year-olds attending ELC settings across Scotland^[7]. All of the Phase 5 settings also catered for children from the age of three, as well as four- and five-year-olds, and the distribution of children across settings was similar for both age groups.

At Phase 5, all group settings^[8] providing funded ELC for four- and five-year-olds – including local authority, private and third sector settings – were eligible for inclusion in the sample. Settings in deprived areas were deliberately oversampled. This was not an aim of the Phase 6 sample, so proportionally fewer settings from deprived areas were selected at Phase 6, with the aim of achieving a nationally representative sample. The sample of settings for Phase 6 comprised all of the settings from the sample for Phase 5 in non-deprived areas, plus a random quarter of those in deprived areas. This provided an even distribution of settings across all deprivation quintiles.

The second stage of sampling was carried out by staff in the selected settings. Up to 10 children aged between three years and three years six months in receipt of funded ELC provision were selected within each sampled setting. The ages of these children matched the ages of the Eligible 2s cohort.

For the reasons above, with small adjustments to the weighting of data, the Phase 6 sample of ‘Comparator 3s’ can be said to be nationally representative of three-year-olds attending ELC settings and the parents of those children. More details of the sampling process are provided in Appendix B.

Data collection

Data were gathered on children in the sample via two methods: a survey of the children’s ELC keyworkers (primarily to measure child development) and a survey of the children’s parents/carers. Fieldwork was conducted between October and December 2024.

Parents of selected children were contacted by ELC staff and provided with information about the study. They were then asked to complete a paper questionnaire^[9] that collected a wide range of information about themselves, their child and their household. Parents were also asked for their permission for the child’s keyworker to complete a questionnaire about their child. This largely consisted of the Ages and Stages (ASQ) and Strengths and Difficulties (SDQ) ^[10] questionnaires, but also collected administrative information, including the number of hours the child attended the ELC setting in the previous week.

For the Eligible 2s at age three:

Questionnaires were sent out for 490 children in 123 settings. Estimated response rates were 33% for the parent questionnaire, 58% for the keyworker questionnaire and 33% for both.
At least one questionnaire was returned for 289 children in 123 settings^[11], including 285 keyworker questionnaires and 164 parent questionnaires; 160 children had both questionnaires completed.
278 children had keyworker questionnaires for both phases – 57% of the 486 keyworker questionnaires returned at Phase 4.
137 children had parent questionnaires for both phases – 40% of the 341 parent questionnaires returned at Phase 4.
In total, 129 ‘eligible 2s’ children had both questionnaires completed at both phases – 39% of the 327 with both questionnaires completed at Phase 4.

For the Comparator 3s:

Questionnaire packs were sent to 260 ELC settings and at least one questionnaire was returned from 144 of these.
Response rates for this group of children are not as easy to estimate because information about the number of eligible children in every setting was not available.
At least one questionnaire was returned for 910 children, including 870 keyworker questionnaires and 521 parent questionnaires^[12].
In total, 469 ‘comparator 3s’ children had both questionnaires completed.
Based on the limited available evidence response rates among keyworkers in the 144 responding settings was around 95%, while for parents/carers it was around 57%.

For both samples, nearly all the parent questionnaires (89% and 90%) were completed by the child’s mother or a female carer within the household. Therefore, where the terms “respondent” or “parent” are used throughout this report, they refer mostly to a mother or main female carer.

Data analysis, statistical significance and reporting conventions

The data used in the analysis in the report differs between sections. The following limits apply for the data used for analysis and reporting:

for the follow-up of Eligible 2s between Phase 4 and 6 the data is limited to those for whom we have questionnaires from both phases (i.e. 278 children when keyworker data is used, for the analysis of ASQ and SDQ scores; 137 when parent questionnaire data is used, for the analysis of parent outcomes as well as most other child outcomes; or 129 children when both are used, for example in the supplementary tables analysing ASQ and SDQ scores by household income)
for the comparison of Eligible 2s aged three and the comparator group aged three, the data is included in the analysis for all children with the relevant Phase 6 questionnaire (i.e. 285 Eligible 2s and 851 Comparator 3s children when keyworker data is used, 164 Eligible 2s and 516 Comparator 3s when parent questionnaire data is used, or 160 Eligible 2s and 469 Comparator 3s when both are used).

Data analysis has been conducted using the statistical analysis software SPSS version 29. All analysis uses weighted data, except where discussing the characteristics of the participating sample or the characteristics of the settings. Data used in the analysis is weighted so that the achieved sample better represents the population it was drawn from. Different weights were applied, depending on the variables included in the analysis (see Appendix B for more details on weighting).

A test for statistical significance allows us to estimate how confident we can be that two percentages we wish to compare are actually different in the population, given the amount of uncertainty we are prepared to accept in our sample. All comparisons reported in the text have been tested for statistical significance through the use of logistic or linear regression, although levels of statistical significance are not reported. Where a difference between subgroups at Phase 6 is noted in the text, this difference is statistically significant at the 95% level^[13]. Differences that are not statistically significant are generally not reported in the text unless it is considered noteworthy that no such difference can be identified in the data between the groups of concern.

Percentages are reported to the nearest whole number. In the tables, a dash (-) signifies that no cases fall into the particular category, whereas a zero (0) signifies at least one case falls into that category, but less than 0.5% of all cases. Base descriptions refer to the group who were eligible for inclusion in the table. Missing data are excluded from all figures, including the base. Tables with base sizes under 30 have not been included in the report.

Supplementary tables

All figures mentioned in the text of this report can be found in the supplementary tables. These also contain some additional data from Phase 6 of the SSELC which is not discussed in this report. Comments regarding the data analysis above and the potential limitations below are applicable to these tables.

Phase 6 analysis and reporting

The focus of this report is mainly descriptive, and data are used to provide a general summary of findings for a wide range of parental and child outcomes. This includes, in Section 4, a discussion of how child and parent outcomes have changed after one year of funded ELC for the Eligible 2s and their families, using data from Phase 4 as well as Phase 6. The report also compares, in Section 5, the same outcomes for Eligible 2s at age three with national figures for all three-year-olds (Comparator 3s). Comparison of the two groups tells us how the outcomes for Eligible 2s at age three compare with national average outcomes.

While a separate report will pull together the findings from all six phases, this report covers the following specific outcomes of interest, for Phase 6 only. The child outcomes explored in the report are:

general health and long-term conditions
cognitive and language development, and
social, emotional and behavioural development.

Information reported by parents is used to gauge the presence of development risk factors, such as sleep patterns and breastfeeding, child’s general health and long-term illnesses and concerns about speech and language. Development outcomes are measured via ELC keyworker observations which used the Ages and Stages (ASQ) and Strengths and Difficulties (SDQ) Questionnaires:^[14]

The ASQ is a structured assessment of a range of developmental domains to identify children at increased risk of developmental difficulties. The instrument includes 30 items split into five different domains: communication, gross motor, fine motor, problem solving and personal-social. Each domain produces a summary score that can be used to indicate whether the child's development is ‘on schedule’, ‘needs monitoring’ or ‘requires further assessment’.
The ASQ is intended to identify developmental delays and hence is specific to the age of the child. At Phase 4, three questionnaires were used, one for children aged 24 months to 25 months 15 days; one for children aged 25 months 16 days to 28 months 15 days; and one for children aged 28 months 16 days to 30 months. At Phase 6, two questionnaires were used, one for children aged 36 months to 38 months 30 days; and one for children aged 39 months to 42 months. While the ASQ has been carefully calibrated with a broad range of children so that we might expect the proportion demonstrating delayed development to be similar for each questionnaire / age group, we should remain cautious in stating that any apparent changes over time identified by this study are real, rather than artefacts of the questionnaire or due to keyworkers being more familiar with the children than they were at Phase 4.
The SDQ is a commonly used behavioural screening questionnaire designed for use with children aged between two and 16. The questionnaire includes 25 questions about a child's behaviour. Responses can be combined to form five different measures of the child's development, namely emotional symptoms (e.g. excessive worrying), conduct problems (e.g. often fighting with other children), hyperactivity/inattention (e.g. constantly fidgeting), peer relationship problems (e.g. not having close friends) and prosocial behaviour (e.g. being kind to others). The first four measures can be combined into a “total difficulties” scale.
A slightly modified version of the original SDQ has been validated for children between the ages of two and four. This was used at both Phase 4 and Phase 6. As children are developing rapidly at this age, scores on the scales may be expected to differ for two-year-olds and three-year-olds. Thus, we cannot claim that changes in the scores over time identified in the data are due to the child receiving ELC rather than the natural development of the children over the course of a year. Further details of these measures are included in Appendix C.

Parent and family outcomes included in this report are:

Employment, training or study
Physical and mental health and wellbeing
Parental confidence and home environment
Parental engagement in their child’s learning and development

Considerations

Avoiding pre-expansion comparisons

The results from Phase 6 provide robust standalone evidence about the experience of funded ELC for three-year-olds and their parents across Scotland. They will also contribute to the overall evaluation of the impact of expanded ELC provision. This report’s focus is mainly descriptive: its purpose is to provide a general summary of findings from the data collected and identify some basic relationships between variables. For Eligible 2s, comparisons with outcomes at Phase 4 are made. Comparisons with the Phase 6 equivalent baseline phase (Phase 3 in 2019) are, however, not included in this report. This report is intended to provide an overview of Eligible 2s’ changes between Phase 4 and 6, after a year of up to 1140 hours of funded ELC and a comparison of outcomes for Eligible 2s at age three with Comparator 3s (a nationally representative sample of three-year-olds). Full comparative analysis, which will control for relevant factors and assess whether differences found pre- and post-expansion are statistically significant, will form part of the final SSELC report later in 2025.

Impact of Covid-19 and the cost-of-living crisis

The Covid-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the lives of families in Scotland. While the long-term impacts of the pandemic on families and the economy are still not known, the growing evidence from a range of research studies suggests many young children and their families have been negatively affected, especially those who were already disadvantaged^[15].

For some families, the pandemic has had short-term impacts on parental employment and household income. Increases in stress and reductions in parental wellbeing have been found, especially for mothers. For example, the Scottish Health Survey 2023 showed that levels of wellbeing in the population had not, in 2023, returned to pre-pandemic levels^[16].

The direct impact of the pandemic on children involved in this phase of the study should be fairly limited. The children were born between May and November 2021, after the main lockdowns. However, their parents may have experienced some restrictions in their first year in terms of maternity/post-partum care and in accessing parent support groups. The cost of living crisis which emerged in the aftermath of the pandemic is also likely to have affected many of the families.

This report does not attempt to untangle the impact of Covid and the cost-of living-crisis from that of the expansion of funded ELC in Scotland. Instead, the data will contribute to the overall evaluation of the expansion. The final report on the ELC expansion will consider these wider issues.

Sample sizes

Fewer than anticipated Eligible 2s took part at age two, thus impacting on the number available to follow up at age three. However, it remained a sufficiently large sample to identify differences in outcomes between key subgroups, such as boys and girls, and those living in deprived areas compared with those living in other areas. Further information on the statistical significance testing carried out with this group can be found in Appendix B.

Contact

Email: socialresearch@gov.scot

Thanks for your feedback