Editorial: Sure Starts must shout about their successes

The implication that Sure Start has actively harmed children is ofcourse a misrepresentation of the real finding, which is that childrenin the most deprived and at-risk families in some cases lost out becauseresources and services were fully taken up by families that were not asbadly off. It also ignores the researchers' own caveats about thedifficulty of collectively evaluating independent programmes that offerdiffering services according to varying local priorities (see Analysis,p12).

Although you wouldn't necessarily know it from the coverage, the fact isthat Sure Start is by and large wanted and appreciated, and held ingreat affection, by families in areas where programmes run. A great dealof good practice was identified, and perhaps the most important documentof the five that make up the national evaluation is the PracticeGuidance setting out the lessons that can be applied as children'scentres are established nationwide. With Sure Start gradually evolvingfrom a targeted local service into a universal one, the task now facinglocal authorities and their partners is to turn the best that localprogrammes have been able to offer into the norm for all families aroundthe country.