A Strategic Assessment of the Children's Services Industry

More documents

Recommendations

Info

STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE CHILDREN’S SERVICES INDUSTRYThe ‘You Bet I Care!’ data set contains information from six Canadian provinces and oneterritory. It is structured in such a way that many different kinds of analysis can be performed.The researchers initially discovered fairly large differences in quality between the sectors.Separating their data into ‘thick’ markets (where there is a relatively high geographicalconcentration of children of the right age to use child care) and ‘thin’ markets (where there isa relatively small number) they discovered that there are especially large advantages for nonprofitsin thick markets. In thin markets, non-profit centres typically produced lower qualityservices than they did in thick markets perhaps because there is no opportunity to produce andsell a differentiated product (Cleveland et al. 2007, 15).Doherty, Friendly and Forer (2002), using the same data, identified two possible explanationsfor observed differences between the sectors: firstly, that commercial centres might haveaccess to fewer resources (government subsidies, donations etc) and secondly, that they mighthave different goals and organisation structures. They found that, even controlling forvariable inputs and resources, there were strong differences between the sectors. Thus, nonprofitstatus in itself is a predictor of higher quality, when inputs are held constant.Comparisons between the for-profit and non-profit have not been a major feature of UKresearch to date, but incidental findings on this issue have emerged from some of the largeevaluations conducted in recent years. Until recently, many British analysts have groupednon-government providers into a category of ‘private, voluntary and independent’ (PVI),blurring the distinction between for-profit and not for-profit. Some indications aboutdifferences within the PVI sector have emerged from recent evaluations of the NeighbourhoodNurseries Initiative and the EPPE project.Researchers from Oxford University, evaluating the Neighbourhood Nurseries Initiative,reported that ‘maintained’ nurseries (i.e. those funded by local authorities and not run forprofit) had the highest level of quality, offering ‘the most stimulating environment forchildren’s developing language and educational abilities, as well as the highest qualityphysical environment’. Several reasons were suggested for this. Firstly, maintained centresemploy more highly qualified staff than do those in the private or voluntary sector or thoserun as joint initiatives (Mathers and Sylva 2007, 53-54). Second, maintained nurseries wereseen to have advantages in terms of their access to ‘educational infrastructure’ e.g.professional help in supporting children with special needs. Finally, differences in pay andworking conditions were suggested as an explanation for the higher quality in the maintainedsector (Mathers and Sylva 2007, 55).Similar findings emerged from the Effective Provision of Preschool Education (EPPE)project. The Final Report from the EPPE researchers, discussing the outcomes for children onthe Early Childhood Environments Rating Scale (ECERS) noted that, while children attendingprivate day nurseries performed better than those serviced by playgroups, they were generallyrated lower than children in the five other educational or state sector service (nursery schoolsand integrated centres) types.Another finding was that children attending centres whose auspice was within the educationalor state sector had higher scores that those in the voluntary or private sectors (Sylva et al2004, 16).The EPPE project also found that integrated settings produced better outcomes for childrenthan services built exclusively around child care:37
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE CHILDREN’S SERVICES INDUSTRY… children who attended local authority day nurseries and private day nurseriesshow poorer behavioural outcomes than those who attended other forms ofprovision. Moreover children who attended integrated provision or nursery classestended to make greater gains in social/behavioural development during thepreschool period. Nonetheless, there was significant variation in effectiveness onsocial/behavioural gains within each type of provision; thus differences betweenindividual preschool centres and differences between types of provision are bothimportant 5 (Sylva et al. 2004, 31).These findings, as the EPPE team noted, were similar to those found by the UK Office forStandards in Education (OfSTED) which reported on variations in the quality of preschoolprovision across sectors. Similar results were found in a study using ECERS in 44 preschoolcentres in London (Lera, Owen and Moss 1996).This finding was also expanded upon in a report of quality in the Millennium Cohort Study:Local Education Authority (LEA) maintained status was linked to higher qualityprovision in almost all dimensions measured, with the exception of provision forpersonal care routines. Maintained settings offered higher quality interactions,provision for children’s developing language and reasoning skills, and highercurricular quality for literacy, maths, science and diversity. The relationships with‘interactions’ and ‘maths’ were only apparent when staff qualifications wereremoved from the regression model. This suggests that staff qualification may beone of the main factors driving the higher quality achieved by the maintainedsector in these areas (Mathers, Sylva and Joshi 2007, 8).How relevant are these findings to Australian conditions? There are no large-scale systematic,Australian studies that allow us to test these finding in the local context. However, the smallscalestudies conducted in Australia are consistent with international research. In 2006, theAustralia Institute conducted a mail-out survey of staff working in long day care acrossAustralia with the aim of eliciting staff perceptions about the quality of care in the centres inwhich they work. The Institute drew a random, stratified sample reflecting the proportion oflong day care centres between the States and the approximate balance between metropolitanand regional locations in each State. The sample matched the distribution of service types(community-based, independent private and corporate chain) across Australia (Rush 2006,24). The response rate to the survey was 15 per cent, which is considered relatively low.However, at least one valid response was received from a staff member at 45 per cent of thecentres to which questionnaires were sent which adds a measure of confidence. Nevertheless,it is appropriate to regard the findings of the Australia Institute survey as indicative ratherthan conclusive.The survey confirmed the widely held view that there is great diversity in the quality of careprovided in Australian long day care settings. Some staff from all three service types reportedthat their centre provided high quality care. In aggregate terms, there were clear trends instaff perceptions of quality. On a number of key measures, the perceptions of staff employedin community-based centres and the perceptions of staff working in independently ownedprivate services clustered together at the higher quality end of the spectrum. Staff working in5 The study also noted that proportionately more of the children in local authority day nurseries and private daynurseries started at their preschool centre before 2 years of age.38
Page 1 and 2: A StrategicAssessment of theChildre
Page 3 and 4: AcknowledgementsThe paper was commi
Page 5 and 6: STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE CHILDRE
Page 47: STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE CHILDRE

A Strategic Assessment of the Children's Services Industry

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?