Best Start Grant - interim evaluation: qualitative research (annex B)

4 Discussion

The discussion will seek to address the key questions outlined in the original invitation to tender document, as well as summarise key findings, propose potential modifications, describe the strengths and limitations of the study before the conclusions and implications of the study are considered.

4.1 Summary

It is important to recognise that the BSG was very well-received by the respondents in this study. The BSG recipients who participated in the study on the whole perceived that the application process was straightforward, they appreciated the grant payment and what it allowed them to do at key stages in their children’s life, they did not view the BSG as stigmatising and they intended to apply for BSG payments again, if possible, or to recommend the grant to other parents and carers. Due to BSG’s overwhelmingly positive response, interviewees did not always find it easy to suggest changes to its operation in the future. In addition, it was difficult to investigate differences in response by key respondent characteristics, given that there was very little variation in the views expressed by participant groups. Any changes to BSG that were proposed tended to be relatively minor, and suggest that modest, incremental modifications are considered in the future, as opposed to a radical overhaul of the entire benefit.

4.2 Research Questions

The application process

There was no research question in the Scottish Government’s invitation to tender related to the BSG application process, or indeed its promotion. However, the few proposed modifications of the current way the BSG operates relates to these areas. Respondents believed that more could be done to promote the BSG more widely. They gave examples of individuals they knew who were eligible for the payment, but were unaware of the BSG. It was also reported that BSG recipients were lucky as some health and social care professionals were knowledgeable and had shared the information about the BSG, whereas others did not appear to be aware of its existence. There were some minor criticisms of the application process, with suggestions that delays in payment should be communicated to claimants, the application form may be challenging for those with literacy issues and the process might be streamlined to allow applicants to apply in advance for a second BSG payment where it would prevent two separate claims for BSG payment types for the same family to happen in a short space of time. However, these were not voiced by respondents as requiring urgent action, these were suggestions for consideration if the BSG continues to run in the longer term.

To what extent and in what ways have BSG payments impacted on the household finances of recipients at critical transition points in their child’s life?

The respondents reported a positive impact of the BSG on the household finances at the key transitional stages (birth, toddlerhood, preparing for school) of their child’s life, when it was reported there was a greater financial strain. The parents and carers appreciated the greater financial freedom it afforded them in terms of what they could purchase and when, and in a number of cases it was said that it stopped them going into debt. The respondents also spoke positively of three payments available at different stages of the early years of their child, and that the BSG was not dependent or restricted on the size of the family. There was also evidence of a longer-term impact on household finances, as some purchases were made with future planning in mind, for example, children’s clothes in larger sizes, developmental toys and larger beds. In a minority of cases, the payment had also been used to set up bank accounts. There was no evidence of there being any variation in the perceived impact of the BSG on household finances by family characteristics.

Only one minor change was suggested. Claimants proposed that the first Pregnancy and Baby Payment a family receives should be £600, even if it not the family’s first child.

To what extent and in what ways have the goods or services families bought with their BSG payments, and their reasons for choosing these goods or services, varied by family circumstances/ characteristics?

There was no real evidence of there being any variation in what the respondents were purchasing with the BSG, or their reasons for doing so, by family circumstances or characteristics. The parents and carers tended to report using all or most of the grant to buy what were deemed to be a range of essential items for their children at the key transitional stages. Those who had not used all of the grant in one go stated that they used the remaining money on the payment of items for the household, household bills and social activities. However, this did not seem to vary by, for example, familial employment status, single versus dual parent households and number of children in the household.

To what extent and in what ways have BSG payments enabled children to participate in social and/or educational opportunities available where they live?

As might have been expected, the BSG being used to fund social activities for the family did not tend to be the primary purpose of the grant, according to respondents. However, social activities did appear to be a relatively common use of the grant, especially when utilising remaining grant funds after essential items had been bought. These events tended to be one-off events for the family, for example, to visit amusement or leisure parks, and were viewed as creating positive memories for the family unit. Without the BSG it was reported that these social events would not have happened, though the parents and carers may have sought out cost-free local parks.

There was also evidence of the BSG purchasing a series of activities for the child, such as swimming lessons.

Although there was not a strict delineation expressed between social and educational activities, it did appear as if educational outings (e.g. trips to museums) and purchases (educational/developmental toys) were less frequently purchased overall, though if they were they tended to be the main BSG grant purchase.

To what extent and in what ways have BSG payments impacted on recipient families’ experience of stress and anxiety?

There was evidence in this evaluation that the BSG relieved the financial stress and anxiety in the parents and carers who received it. It has already been stated that individuals admitted that they would have experienced debt without access to the BSG. The respondents agreed that the key transitional stages of a child’s life could be stressful times, not only because of the financial implications for the family. However, the fact that they were able to buy essential items at these key times, such as for a new-born baby, or nursery and school uniforms, resulted in the parents and carers feeling as if they had prepared for these key stages, and were providing for their children. Respondents added that this feeling of preparedness and provision for the family boosted their own self-esteem and gave them confidence as a parent, as it showed that they were capable of providing for their family and were not reliant on, for example, donations from others. Related to this is the fact that the respondents did not view receiving the BSG as being stigmatising in any way – they viewed the payment as their own entitlement which also allowed them the freedom to spend the grant in a way they thought was most appropriate. As purchases were made with future planning in mind, such as beds suitable for older children, and parents also set up bank accounts for children, it is likely that the BSG was alleviating stress and anxiety for some over a longer time period, and not solely at the time of purchase of essential items.

To what extent and in what ways have BSG payments led to families making behavioural changes that are known to increase health and well-being (e.g. healthy food choices, participating in sport and exercise)?

In the relatively early stages of the operation of the BSG, there was little evidence of the grant leading to behavioural changes that might benefit health. The grant was used by some parents and carers to purchase clothing and footwear to facilitate outdoor play. Similarly, it has been noted that swimming lessons had been bought for the child using the BSG. It is difficult to conclude from these examples, though, that there has been an increase in physical activity in the children or their families as a result of receiving the BSG. Best Start Foods was not a part of this evaluation, and similarly there is little evidence from this current study of a change in dietary practices. It might be argued, though, that the social and educational activities enjoyed by the children and families alike, frequently cited as creating memories for the future, are likely to impact favourably on mental well-being.

4.3 Strengths and limitations

There were a number of strengths and limitations associated with this evaluation. The key ones were:

Sampling/recruitment

• In the absence of the preferred sampling frame, recruitment was facilitated by the promotion of the research via national and local organisations and groups who provide support to and/or are in contact with parents and carers in Scotland. This recruitment approach can give the research credibility in the eyes of their members, resulting in them being more willing to participate. Where organisations agree to assist in setting up interviews, it can also provide an opportunity to sample on a number of different criteria. There are also many such groups across Scotland, often catering for different interests (e.g., fathers, kinship carers, single parents, and families where parents and/or children live with disabilities), which allows for a diverse sample to be obtained.
• In total, over 70 national and local organisations and groups were approached to support the recruitment for this study, and the research team augmented this recruitment approach through promotion via Facebook and Twitter. This approach resulted in the successful recruitment of a wide range of parents and carers in terms of age, household composition, geographical area and employment status.
• Despite approaching relevant organisations and using social media only one male respondent was interviewed and only two kinship carers took part. However, Scottish Social Security data on BSG and Best Start Foods recipients state that the vast majority of BSG claimants are female and are parents (as opposed to kinship carers).
• It is also possible that those who choose to participate in such studies are more likely to have had a positive experience, though it could be argued that those with more polarised views are more likely to participate. If it had been possible to interview claimants whose applications had been unsuccessful this may have given a different perspective on the BSG application process. The evaluation focused on those who had applied for and used the grant in order to assess the experience and impacts of payments.

Findings

• The qualitative research was able to give great insight into the views of a range of BSG recipients in relation to the grant; its promotion, application process, use, perceived impact and ways it might be changed in the future. However, it is unable to demonstrate how prevalent these views are across Scotland, which would require a nationally representative quantitative survey (which in turn could not elicit the depth of response of qualitative interviews). As such, it is unwise to generalise the findings from this evaluation to the whole BSG client base, though the consensus reached from a range of respondents across Scotland adds confidence to the results.
• The Covid-19 pandemic had an impact on the research methodology. The first interview was conducted face-to-face prior to lockdown. After lockdown, interviews were postponed and the national and local organisations the research team were using to recruit participants were initially largely unresponsive as they adjusted their ways of working. However, it was relatively straightforward to conduct interviews by telephone during lockdown, and respondents appeared to enjoy the opportunity to give their views in this way. In addition, the interviewees were able to recall their experience of the BSG prior to lockdown, and were able to separate the impact of the pandemic on their lives in their accounts of the grant.