Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Heather Rushton, C4EO

Aims: Improving outcomes for young children and their families with particular focus on most disadvantaged families in order to reduce inequalities in child development and school readiness supporting parents aspirations/self- esteem/parenting skills, child and family health and life chances.

C4EO funded from 2008 to 2011 by DFE (£13 million over three years) from 2011–13 sustainable through tenders and sales but further efficiencies were required and the programme’s tailored support has been embedded in NCB. The legacy of C4EO is sustained through NCB.

One historic element of the programme was to call for best local practice and through a process supported by NfER and challenged through the IOE, the validated local practice process was formed. The purpose was to distribute “what works” stimulate debate and generate confidence whilst inspiring change.

In short, the process required practitioners to submit in writing their practice, it was scrutinized through a filter process by NfER to ascertain that the evidence of impact was rigorous and met with research criteria. VLP was graded into three layers—Fully Validated—proven outcomes for children and families; Promising Practice- evidence of impact on outputs (service changes that appear to promise impact on children’s outcomes) and Emerging Practice—a category to collect what may be innovative practice, too immature to create evidence of impact on outcomes but has merit in stimulating alternative thinking.

The panel consisted of experts, C4EO Sector Specialists and NFER/C4EO staff/Sector specialists.

The practice outcome was fed back to the writer (submitting Authority) with constructive feedback and, where appropriate, copy edited and placed on the C4EO website. There have been in excess of 600 pieces submitted over the last three years, of which approximately 10% are validated; 15% judged as promising. C4EO had an Early Years Advisory Group with 13 members, and seven partner organisations, there were 18 sector specialists who delivered 46 tailored support assignments.

The evidence for today’s expert witness is taken from:

24 validated practice examples.

22 promising practice examples.

Four emerging practice examples.

The support of sector specialists.

The programme of Children’s Improvement Board Early Years Early Intervention demonstrator sites 2011–13.

The evidence represents 38 Local Authorities, a mixture of upper tier and unitary plus London Boroughs from all regions. (Ltd numbers from SW).

In many submissions there is a significant representation of the totality Children’s Centres and Sure Start Centres—some submissions cover small pilot initiatives. Children’s Centres are examples of complex systems that vary to meet the needs of the community.

The main foci of the practice submissions will have been limited by the nature of the calls for practice and essentially cover: narrowing the gap, parental engagement and quality home learning environments. A number of submissions address vulnerable children and families including issues addressing behaviour, health, emotional well-being.

All submissions cite significant research, quoting for example Godard Blythe, Doyla, C. Nutbrown, Feinstein (Dame Claire Tickell evidence March) to underpin the rationale and many are linked with HE institutions for rigorous evaluation. Replication guidance is provided alongside the barriers to overcome to implement the practice.

Emerging practice submissions include reference to the NESTA and Innovation Unit study based on radical efficiencies to be achieved in early years settings. More information is available on the Innovation Unit website.

Narrowing the gap addresses practice through a lens to support child development and school readiness:

Attachment—Tameside and Glossop Early Attachment Service impact 79.8% improvement.

Social skills—Southend on Sea—The Voice of the child.

Communication and thinking—Hampshire, Songs and Rhymes Barking and Dagenham Every Child a Talker, improvement of 20% achieving expected levels; Leicester Talk matters, improvement from 27% to 44% level 6 in PSED, CLLD; Islington Parents as First Teachers.

Developmental movement—Kent—8–10 month crawling in line with expectations.

0–2 provision (Big Lottery Better Beginnings, DFE)—Trafford.

Speech and language including ECAT—Hillingdon 70% improvement for 129 families, Bradford 73% improvement, Southampton, and Stoke on Trent.

Implementation of ECERS 9/Iters (Infant Toddler Environmental rating scale).

REAL/PPEL—Sheffield EYFS profile improved.

Boys attainment—Sheffield.

Star implementation—(data) Southwark improvement from 50% to 95% attaining expected levels in CLLD, PSRN.

Learning through Landscapes—Oxfordshire and Surrey.

Neuro physiological psychology movement programmes—North Tynside 50% improvement in the lowest performing 20% of population.

Multi disciplinary centres:

Training programmes—York.

Community inclusion programmes—Rotherham.

Partnership with Job Centre Plus—Blackburn with Darwin.

Multi-agency working—Staffordshire, Nottinghamshire, Kent.

Baby friendly initiatives—Havering, Barnsley, Blackpool.

NHS healthy accreditation—Tower Hamlets.

MAT meetings—including housing—Kent, Luton, Hackney.

Weaning- Luton, South Asian Families.

Family Action support—Nottinghamshire.

Payment by Results—issues, data and attribution—Oldham.

Identifying and reaching families at need—Reading.

Outreach—parents as partners/first educators

The child’s journey—Kirklees 67% improvement in parental engagement.

Home Learning environments—Penn Green 18–22% improvement.

Behaviour management—Hillingdon 98% reduction in incidents.

Raising parental self esteem and confidence—Southampton; Barnsley.

Relationships between babies and parents—Portsmouth.

Child development resource packs—Darlington 50% improvement of the lowest 30% achieving expected levels.

Parents as Partners in Early Learning- Sheffield; Tower Hamlets.

Family based initiatives linking across other initiatives ie troubled families, Islington.

CAF—Hackney.

Referral pathways—Luton.

Home talk programmes—Nottinghamshire; Bristol.

Stay and play—Lincolnshire.

Portage schemes—Lincolnshire.

Community ownership and development—Reading; Knowlsey.

Health targets smoking cessation etc.

There is evidence of a broad range of strategic providers through strong commissioning, clear outcomes and strong performance management. Clear strategic planning, Systems leadership, shared objectives and outcomes.

The broad range of providers continues—school—education child focused, PVI—care and adult focus, Sure start—family in need focus complex multi-agency provision. The majority are (2013) LA controlled, and through innovative work more are considering community hubs.

Effective providers represent all groups.

Evidence base:

Grasping the Nettle C4EO.

Authors Iram Blatchford, Sue Owen NCB, Caroline Sharpe NFER all colleagues who have presented to the Committee, Two year old evaluation for DFE, Ivana LaValle.

Children’s Improvement Board Demonstrator Sites:
Holistic Approach to Early Intervention in the Early Years Foci

6 sites , 0–5 years.

Tools developed include:

Self evaluation audit of provision tool.

Learning events to share best practice on recent developments including PBR.

Developing system leadership in the foundation years.

Evidence based programmes to improve outcomes for children.

Work with health colleagues to articulate what integrated learning for 0–5 working involves, how further progress can be made, integrated pathways through a Children’s Centre.

Develop shared integrated pathways for adult learning from initial engagement through to progression and into employment.

Families provision.

Big Picture.

Commissioning.

Data sharing.

Integrated working.

Innovative solutions.

All available through the LGA inform website.

June 2013