Torbay Childcare Sufficiency Assessment - Torbay Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1 Torbay Ward Boundaries Torquay 1 Wellswood 2 St Marychurch 3 Ellacombe 4 Tormohun 5 Watcombe 6 Shiphay with the Willows 7 Cockington with Chelston Paignton 8 Preston 9 Roundham with Hyde 10 Clifton with Maidenway 11 Blatchcombe 12 Goodrington with Roselands 13 Churston with Galmpton Brixham 14 Berryhead with Furzeham 15 St Mary’s with Summercombe 11 10 8 12 7 9 13 Geography This assessment is required to analyse the childcare market at a local authority wide level, but must also take into account the pattern of supply and demand below local authority level. Given that Torbay is a small local authority, the sub-local authority areas used in this assessment are the administrative wards. The number of providers across Torbay is not great, so analysing patterns of supply and demand at ward level allows us to draw more meaningful conclusions than had the geography identified been any smaller. Information has also been easier to collate at ward level and because Torbay is a small authority, ward level data allows this assessment to conduct thorough analysis without identifying individual providers. An outline of the ward boundaries are shown in Figure 1. 5 In most cases throughout this assessment, analysis 6 2 has been conducted at ward level, where data has not been gathered at this level then analysis has 4 been conducted at town level (Torquay, 3 Paignton and Brixham). 1 Where new data has been collected for this assessment, it has been aggregated to ward level using the postcode or super output areas (SOAs). 15 14 Demographic Data Demographic data for this assessment has largely been collected from the 2001 Census, where it has been possible to use more up to date information then this has taken preference over the Census data. Information about the population has been collated from numerous national sources, including the Office for National Statistics and HM Revenue and Custom (for information on Working Tax Credits claimants). Further data and local information has been collated from Torbay Council’s Research Team. For this assessment it was particularly important to identify the cohort of children on which the analysis would be based (for example, when identifying the number of places per 100 children). The data used for this was the 2001 Census, given that it is still widely regarded as the most accurate measure of numbers of children at the required geography (ward level). This assessment must take into account the needs of children aged 0 to 14 and up to 17 for disabled children and has to be broken down further into specific age groups. These age groups and the number of children within each age group are outlined in Figure 2 below. The total number of children in the cohort for this assessment is 21,909. Figure 2 Number Of Children By Age Group 0 to 2 3 to 4 5, 6 & 7 8, 9 & 10 11, 12, 13 & 14 2.0 METHODOLOGY 14 to 17 (disabled children) Total 3,620 2,690 4,241 4,816 6,498 44 21,909 6
2.0 METHODOLOGY Consultation The consultation with parents and carers was a key factor in this assessment being able to analyse and establish the demand for childcare. A number of methods were used to ensure that parents had the opportunity to have their say about the local childcare market. The main route through which parents were consulted was a questionnaire. This questionnaire asked parents to identify their current use of childcare, what they looked for when choosing childcare and whether they thought more childcare was needed. Given the importance of this survey for this assessment, it was decided that an incentive would be offered to parents to ensure as high a return rate as possible. Parents who consented were entered into a prize draw to win one of five £100 gift vouchers for a high street shop. In total 4,000 surveys were issued to parents using a variety of existing structures. The majority of the questionnaires were distributed through Torbay’s Children’s Centres and staff in these settings went through the surveys with parents to ensure they were completed. The survey was distributed through nurseries / pre-schools and schools and was also available on the Torbay Council website. The most successful mechanism for getting parents to complete the surveys was via family events held throughout the summer. The Early Years and Childcare Service made use of Children’s Week held in August on Paignton seafront. This event provided a captive audience and the team offered incentives for completed surveys (free goody bags for children on completion of a questionnaire). From one day at this event, just fewer than 200 surveys were completed. Building on this success the Early Years and Childcare Service organised another event, a Family Fun Day at the end of September which was free for all families to attend. ‘Free goody bags’ were again used as an incentive for parents to complete the questionnaire. In total, 946 parents completed the questionnaire, which equates to a response rate of 23.7%. The majority of respondents who completed the survey were female (91%) and aged between 25 and 44 years old (86%), 8% of the respondents were aged under 24 years old. The majority of parents 7 who completed the survey lived in Torbay and the surrounding towns, although through children’s week, the consultation inevitably reached a small number of parents who lived further away (see Figure 3). In terms of the ethnic origin of respondents, the survey was fairly representative of the population of Torbay (see Figure 4). The same can be said for the make up of households, the sample was fairly representative of the population (Figure 5). In addition to the questionnaires, parents were invited to be a part of focus groups which were arranged at children’s centres. In total eight focus groups were arranged and 125 parents were invited to participate, unfortunately take up was low and only 14 parents attended. The parents who were able to attend came from different backgrounds and one group in particular involved parents who all had English as their second language. A focus group session was also arranged with parents of disabled children, this made use of an existing parents’ group that the Early Years Inclusion Service organised regularly. A further group the research team made use of was the disabled parents’ parent and toddler group. These focus groups provided the opportunity to gain more in-depth information from parents about any issues they had relating to childcare. Children were also consulted through this assessment across all ages from 3 to 18. The research with 3 to 5 year olds was small scale and coordinated by the Integrated Nursery Manager. The children all attended children’s centre nurseries and received integrated care and education, they attended nursery for at least 1.5 days a week. This piece of research involved 12 children and aimed to assess their views / feelings about attending nursery. In order to do this, consent was first gained by the parents and then three activities were undertaken: ■ Observation of children, on arrival and on departure from nursery ■ Asking children what makes them happy and sad at nursery ■ Small world play activity Figure 3 Respondents By Home Town Town Torquay 408 43.1 Paignton Brixham Newton Abbot Totnes Other No. % 296 31.3 72 7.6 30 3.2 9 1 132 14 Figure 4 Ethnic Origin Of Respondents 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 White British Figure 5 Make Up Of Household 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Two parent family Survey Respondents Other Ethnic Group Single parent family Census
Page 1 and 2: March 2008 Torbay Childcare Suffici
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS 1. 1 Introduction ........
Page 5 and 6: 1.0 INTRODUCTION Under the Childcar
Page 7: 5 METHODOLOGY 2.0 This assessment o
Page 11 and 12: 9 3.0 DEMOGRAPHICS There are a numb
Page 13 and 14: 3.0 DEMOGRAPHICS Figure 8 Distribut
Page 15 and 16: 3.0 DEMOGRAPHICS Population Forecas
Page 17 and 18: 3.0 DEMOGRAPHICS Housing Developmen
Page 19 and 20: 4.0 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY Working Patte
Page 21 and 22: 4.0 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY Average earni
Page 23 and 24: EARLY YEARS EDUCATION 5.0 21 This c
Page 25 and 26: 5.0 EARLY YEARS EDUCATION Figure 26
Page 27 and 28: 5.0 EARLY YEARS EDUCATION “ The S
Page 29 and 30: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY Number Of Chil
Page 31 and 32: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY the numbers of
Page 33 and 34: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY 31 Figure 39 D
Page 35 and 36: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY Figure 41 Numb
Page 37 and 38: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY are run throug
Page 39 and 40: 6.0 CHILDCARE SUPPLY Comparisons wi
Page 41 and 42: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND Figure 51 Rate
Page 43 and 44: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND Doesn’t “
Page 45 and 46: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND Figure 56 Main
Page 47 and 48: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND a week. Nurser
Page 49 and 50: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND Figure 61 Pare
Page 51 and 52: 7.0 CHILDCARE DEMAND Our observatio
Page 53 and 54: 51 8.0 MATCHING SUPPLY TO DEMAND Th
Page 55 and 56: 8.0 MATCHING SUPPLY TO DEMAND 53 Fi
Page 57 and 58: 8.0 MATCHING SUPPLY TO DEMAND Type
Page 59 and 60:
9.0 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS 57 Acro
Page 61 and 62:
Acknowledgements The Early Years an
show all

Torbay Childcare Sufficiency Assessment - Torbay Council

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

Delete template?

Save as template?