Free entitlement ‘should be linked to parenting plans'

June O’Sullivan told CYP Now that government has missed a chance to enhance social mobility by failing to ask anything of parents in exchange for free nursery care.

She argued that efforts to improve the life chances of the 20 per cent most disadvantaged two-year-olds, who will be eligible for 15 hours of free nursery care from September 2013, would be better achieved if parents had to enter a “social contract” to receive the entitlement.

O’Sullivan added that referring to early education places for disadvantaged two-year-olds as “free” devalues the provision in the eyes of parents, suggesting that parents could be asked to attend back to work classes, child development workshops or literacy and numeracy classes to build their confidence.

She said this would encourage parents to work with early years settings to improve their child’s development, rather than seeing the provision as a right.

“If you’re targeting parents from poor areas where there is a possibility that their parenting is less secure, and we’re spending billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on this, shouldn’t we get something back?” she said.

“The risk is, and we’ve already seen it in the pilot, that because it’s a ‘free’ offer a lot of parents think they can just drop their kids off and go shopping. It’s not being sold as an educational benefit, it’s being sold as a free offer.”

The National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA) agreed with O’Sullivan’s comments, but said it would be better to try to encourage home learning through nursery provision, rather than obligatory parenting plans.

“The home learning environment has a much bigger influence on a child’s long-term outcomes, so you can’t look at the 15 hours in isolation,” said Claire Schofield, policy director of the NDNA.

“In terms of an integrated approach for the child and family, that might include supporting other needs the parent might have, such as linking up a two-year-old offer with Jobcentre Plus and supporting a return to work or training.”

Schofield said the NDNA had received comments from its members over misinterpretations of the label “free” for the two-year-old entitlement. 

“Providers suggest to us that we should be talking about it as a ‘funded’ place rather than a ‘free’ place,” said Schofield.

“Service users don’t always appreciate the significant investment from government, as well as providers, staff, and practitioners providing the early learning as well. Sometimes if we call something ‘free’ it's not valued.”