Early learning and childcare funding: Primary 1 deferral pilot evaluation

1. Introduction and methods

Policy background

All parents and carers in Scotland have the legal right to defer their child's entry to primary school if they are not yet five years old at the start of the school year. Deferral rates in Scotland have been steadily increasing since 2014. They vary considerably across local authorities, however, and, overall, are higher among boys, children with Additional Support Needs (ASN) or with a disability, and children living in the least deprived areas (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintile 5)^[1].

Since 1 August 2021, all three and four year olds and eligible two year olds in Scotland have had a statutory entitlement to 1,140 hours of funded Early Learning and Childcare (ELC) a year. Currently, children born in January or February are automatically entitled to an extra year of ELC funding in either a nursery or childminding setting, should their parent/s or carer/s choose to defer the start of Primary 1 (P1). However, children born between mid-August (the start of the academic year) and December are only granted funding at the discretion of their local authority.^[2]

During a debate in the Scottish Parliament in October 2019, the Minister for Children and Young People announced that the Scottish Government "intend[ed] to introduce legislation to entitle all children whose school start is deferred to access funded ELC in their deferred year." Legislation was introduced on 7 December 2020 that would create this automatic entitlement to funding from 1 August 2023 and this was approved by Parliament on 3 February 2021. The aim of amending the eligibility criteria was to ensure that parents' decisions about whether to defer their child's P1 entry can be based on the best interests of the child and not whether they automatically qualify for access to funded ELC. Child-centred decision making is central to Scottish Government policy affecting children and families and is supported by the Getting it right for every child (GIRFEC) approach. GIRFEC is the Scottish Government's commitment to provide all children, young people and their families with the right support at the right time. This is so that every child and young person in Scotland can reach their full potential.^[3]

Piloting the entitlement

To monitor the impact of the policy and to inform full implementation from August 2023, five local authorities piloted the automatic entitlement of funded ELC for August-December^[4] born children during the school year 2021-2022 (August 2021 being the point at which children eligible under the pilot would begin either P1 or their additional year in ELC). These Year 1 pilot local authorities volunteered to be the first areas to trial the change. They were: Angus, Argyll and Bute, Falkirk, Scottish Borders and Shetland Islands. The Scottish Government then invited further local authorities to apply to take part in the second year of the pilot. Five were selected, taking into consideration the demographic profile of each (aiming to increase coverage in urban and more deprived areas). The Year 2 pilot areas were: Aberdeen City, Clackmannanshire, Fife, Glasgow City and Stirling.

Working in partnership with COSLA and local authorities, a Joint Implementation Plan^[5] was developed which set out the approach to implementing and evaluating these pilots as progress towards full implementation in August 2023 is made.

When interpreting the findings of the evaluation, it should be kept in mind that the ten pilot local authorities were not intended to be representative of all 32 local authorities across Scotland in terms of demographic profile, local authority resources / ELC capacity, and pre-pilot deferral policies. Furthermore, because of the way they opted in or applied to take part, they may be skewed towards local authorities that felt well positioned to deliver the pilot in terms of both administering it and having capacity in ELC settings. Some of these local authorities approved a high proportion of applications for funding prior to the pilot, and this may have allowed them to feel confident that it would create minimal change. This may mean that the national roll-out could be more challenging for some local authorities for reasons that have not come to light in this study.

Research aims and objectives

Ipsos Scotland was commissioned to carry out an evaluation on behalf of the Scottish Government. The overall aim was to evaluate the implementation of the new automatic entitlement in Year 1 and 2 pilot areas to inform the roll-out of the automatic entitlement across Scotland from August 2023. In particular, it was intended to:

1. Provide information about implementation of the pilot in order to inform the full roll-out of the policy, including implications for advertising and communications, admissions processes, overall capacity and parental choice in the pilot LAs (process).

2. Explore the impact of the pilot on parental awareness and perceptions of the entitlement (early impact; short- medium-term outcomes).

See Appendix 1 for more detailed objectives.

Methods

The evaluation was primarily qualitative in nature. This was felt to be the most appropriate design to meet the objectives of the research as it provides an in-depth understanding of attitudes towards, and experiences of, the pilot. The aim in qualitative research is to identify as much diversity of experience rather than attempting to achieve a sample that is statistically representative of the wider population. Estimates of prevalence based on qualitative data are therefore inappropriate and this report avoids quantifying language, such as 'most' or 'a few' when discussing findings from qualitative interviews. Furthermore, the evaluation was relatively small scale, particularly in terms of the number of staff spoken to, which should be borne in mind when interpreting the findings.

The evaluation involved three phases:

• Phase 1 - development of a logic model to map out the theory of change and intended impacts.
• Phase 2 - in-depth interviews with local authority pilot leads; review of local authority written communications aimed at parents.
• Phase 3 - online mini focus groups with heads and practitioners working in local authority ELC settings; in-depth interviews with parents/carers of eligible children; and analysis of deferral uptake data from local authorities.

The logic model created in Phase 1 was designed to map out intended activities and outcomes, and thereby provide a framework for the evaluation. The aim of Phase 2 was to gain an understanding of how local authorities delivered the expanded entitlement, and how they felt implementation had gone. It also examined the impact of the pilot on deferral uptake. The aim of Phase 3 was twofold. Firstly, it examined the views of ELC staff on the impact of the new policy on settings and on their roles, and their perceptions of impacts for children and families. Secondly, it involved speaking to parents to understand their experiences of the new entitlement and what that had meant for their children.

The study was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252.

Logic model development

In order to provide structure to the evaluation, a logic model was developed with the Scottish Government and the Deferral Working Group (at the beginning of the project). Logic models illustrate a 'theory of change' – that is, how an intervention or policy is expected to lead to the outcomes it is ultimately intended to create. Approaches to logic models vary, but they typically include:

• Inputs – the components and resources needed to actually deliver an intervention.
• Outputs – what the programme/intervention actually delivers.
• Outcomes – sometimes split into short, medium and longer-term – what the intervention is actually meant to achieve in terms of impact.
• External / contextual factors – things outside the intervention that might impact on how it works / its success in delivering its outcomes in practice.

The logic model content is detailed below. A diagram of the model has also been included in Appendix 5 of this report. It lays out the aims and intention for the new entitlement and has been used as a framework for this evaluation.

Inputs

• Scottish Government Funding
• Local authority staff team - time and training
• IT systems & other resources for applications

Outputs – activities

• Communication to local authority/ELC staff of the availability of ELC funding to parents/carers considering deferral
• Communication of the availability of ELC funding to parents / carers considering deferral
• Processing of requests to defer
• Provision of support and information for parents requesting deferral
• Provision of support for parents in decision making around deferral (from ELC professionals, teachers, local authority staff, other professionals supporting the child)
• Effective communications with families
• Provision of additional ELC funding (for use in ELC funded provider setting)
• Provision of additional funded spaces within local authority run settings

Outputs – participation/reach

• Children with August-December birthdays
• And their parents/carers and families
• Particular groups where an increased impact may be seen: children with ASN, children born prematurely, families that struggle to pay childcare costs

Outcomes – Process

• Deferral request process more straightforward
• Awareness of the availability of ELC funding to parents/carers considering deferral increases
• Local authority/ELC staff are well informed about the availability of ELC funding
• Local authority /ELC staff feel able to support parents in their decision making
• Parents are able to choose a funded ELC space in a suitable setting

Outcomes – Impact

• A more consistent approach to deferral across Scotland
• Increase in child-centred decision making
• Increase in parental choice
• Parents feel supported by ELC/local authority staff in their decision making
• Financial barrier of additional year of ELC removed or reduced
• Reduced stress and concern for parents over their child starting school
• Deferral rates become more uniform across Scotland (including by SIMD)

Assumptions of the model were: that parents / carers of children who are eligible hear about it and are able to apply; local authorities have capacity to provide additional spaces. Risks and external factors considered were: further policy developments leading to pressure on spaces in local authorities settings (e.g. expansion of funded spaces for more one and two year olds); increased publicity or promotion leads to an increase larger than local authorities have capacity for; the challenge of having a broader age range in those settings.

Interviews with local authority pilot leads

Pilot leads were invited by email to take part in in-depth interviews. These took place with all ten pilot local authorities between May and July 2022. In total, 14 members of staff took part in this phase of the evaluation (including four paired interviews). The paired in-depth interviews enabled staff involved in the administration of the funding to provide details on how that worked operationally whereas the pilot leads provided the overarching management perspective.

Mini focus groups with ELC setting heads and practitioners

Three Year 1 pilot local authorities were selected for the research with staff. These included a mix of areas in terms of rurality. Ideally a mix of deprivation levels would have been included too. However, most Year 1 local authorities have fewer very highly deprived areas. Year 1 pilot areas only were selected because they had been piloting the new entitlement for longer. Pilot leads emailed local authority ELC settings to invite both ELC setting heads and practitioners to opt in to take part in three mini focus groups. One focus group contained heads of ELC settings (five participants) to enable exploration of implementation from a managerial perspective. The two other groups were with ELC practitioners (four and three participants respectively), and these explored the impact of the pilot on the practice of frontline staff. Participants were offered a £30 Amazon voucher or bank transfer to thank them for taking part.

Although both childminders and private settings can provide funded spaces under the expanded entitlement, the sample of ELC staff did not include these providers. This was due to the staff sample size being fairly modest (three mini groups) and the fact that staff from local authority settings were felt more likely to be able to comment on the transition of children into P1, given the majority are part of a primary school.

It should be noted that the opt-in approach to the recruitment of ELC staff may have skewed the sample towards those with a particular interest in this area, or who were more experienced and confident about supporting parents with ELC policies, and what they might mean for their child. This has been somewhat mitigated through the parent interviews, as they provide insight into how different settings delivered communication and support around the entitlement.

Interviews with parents

Parents of eligible children in ELC settings were recruited via emails sent by six pilot local authorities. These were selected to provide a more in-depth picture of how implementation had gone in these areas while providing a mix of deprivation and rurality. The emails included information sheets (Appendix 2) explaining the purpose of the research, and inviting parents who were aware of the new entitlement to opt in by contacting Ipsos. A short screening phone call was then undertaken by the research team to ascertain whether the potential participant had heard about the pilot, and to record some information about their child and household. Although all invited participants were from pilot areas, there were a small number who had not heard about the pilot. These parents were screened out as it was more valuable to gather the views of those with some experience of the pilot, whether they had deferred or not.

Table 1.1 shows the sample profile of parents who took part. There was low uptake of the invitation to participate, meaning that it was not possible to meet all the target quotas set at the outset. These targets included: an equal number of parents in each local authority; at least half of the interviews with parents in the most deprived areas (SIMD quintiles 1 and 2) and around a third of parents who did not defer. The unequal split by local authority was kept in mind during analysis of the qualitative data to ensure that experiences in one particular area were not overly represented in the report. This has been mitigated by the fact that experiences tended to differ at a setting level rather than by local authority area.

Table 1.1. Parent sample

	Number of interviewees
Total	30
Year 1 areas
Scottish Borders	1
Aberdeen City	8
Shetland Islands	2
Year 2 areas
Fife	5
Glasgow City	10
Stirling	4
SIMD
1 or 2	9
3, 4 or 5	17
Rurality
1, 2, 3 (Large urban to accessible small towns)	21[6]
4, 5, 6 (Remote small towns to remote rural)	7
Deferral
Parents who did defer	23
Parents who did not defer	7
Family characteristics
Parents/carers with children with a disability or ASN	11
Parents/carers from an ethnic minority background	3
Male parent/carer	2
Female parent/carer	28

The opt-in approach to recruiting parents may have biased the sample towards those who wished to share experiences of the entitlement that were particularly positive or negative. The provision of information sheets, outlining the purpose of the research and the appeal to hear from a wide range of people whatever their experience, was intended to mitigate this risk. Because the sample of parents included more parents who did take up the additional funded year in ELC (in order to gather enough data on the experience of the new process), it may be somewhat skewed toward those with positive views of deferral (although both positive and negative views were captured among both those who deferred and those who decided not to defer).

Analysis of uptake data

One of the detailed research objectives of the evaluation (included in Appendix 1) was to draw together information from local authorities about uptake of the automatic entitlement, in relation to previous trends and the wider national context. Analysis of deferral rates across the 10 pilot areas over the past six years (2017/18 to 2022/23) was therefore conducted using data provided by each local authority.

The percentage of children who deferred was calculated by using National Records of Scotland birth records to establish how many children were actually eligible in each of the pilot local authority areas. This was done for children with mid-August-December birthdays and for those with January-February birthdays to ascertain how the pilot had impacted deferral rates for both. Given the start date for eligibility is the start of term, which falls in mid-August, a best estimate was created by dividing the births in August by two (and adding that to the number of births in September-December).^[7] School census data was then used to calculate national deferral rates for the past six years, to compare with average deferral rates for Year 1 and Year 2 pilot areas.^[8]

Pilot local authorities returned monitoring data to the Scottish Government detailing the number of children who had deferred once the new entitlement came in. This did not contain comprehensive data on household and child characteristics (for example, ethnicity or SIMD quintile). However, most pilot areas provided deferral numbers by sex so it was possible to explore trends by sex in pilot areas and nationally. National data on deferral by SIMD was also available.

Data collection and analysis

Discussion guides were created to ensure all relevant topic areas and relevant research objectives were covered in the interviews and focus groups (see Appendix 3). In-depth interviews were conducted either by telephone or video call and lasted 45-60 minutes. The focus groups were conducted online and lasted 60 minutes. Participants were asked at the screening stage whether they would like any support to participate. This included the offer of an interpreter, which one participant took up. All interviews/mini groups were facilitated by members of the research team and were recorded for subsequent analysis.

Data from interviews were summarised into thematic matrices (using Excel, with each column representing a theme and each row an individual interview, so that the data could be sorted in different ways for further analysis). These were developed by the research team and drew on the research questions and logic model. These thematic matrices were then reviewed to identify the full range of views and experiences under each theme. The research team undertook analysis meetings to consider the findings using the logic model to structure discussions.

Case studies have been included at relevant points throughout to bring parents' experiences to life (names and some details have been changed to protect anonymity of participants).

The Covid-19 pandemic context

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is thought by ELC staff and parents to have caused an upturn in deferral rates because children had missed out on time in nursery, and/or because they felt the restrictions may have contributed to developmental delays. It is not possible to ascertain exactly how much of the upturn in deferral in pilot areas is due to the pandemic and how much is due to the expanded entitlement. Tracking deferral rates over the next few years should provide further clarity around the impact of the change in policy.

Because the pilot overlapped with Covid-19 restrictions, settings were not always operating in a 'standard' way in terms of how they communicated with and supported parents generally. However, both parent and staff interviews provided data on how things have been since restrictions were removed. Further detail on this is provided in Chapter 4.

Report structure and conventions

The remainder of this report is structured as follows:

Chapter 2: Impact on deferral rates

Chapter 3: Implementation and processes

Chapter 4: Parents' experiences of the new process

Chapter 5: Impacts for parents and children

Chapter 6: Conclusions and lessons for roll-out

Boxed points for consideration as the pilot is rolled out nationally are included at relevant points within chapters. These are based on the researchers' reflections on the findings and are intended to highlight questions that the Scottish Government and its partners, particularly local authorities, may wish to consider.