CYP Now - Should ‘free’ childcare be for the most disadvantaged only?

An NAO report suggests funded childcare may damage social mobility because better-off families make better use of entitlements. Three experts assess if it should only be available to disadvantaged families.

Quality childcare can make a major difference to outcomes, particularly for the most disadvantaged children. Picture: Lordn/Adobe Stock

‘We must offer everyone more, not less’

James Hempsall, chief executive, Hempsalls

The solution to this problem must be to fund early years differently and more generously. Rather than 15 hours for disadvantaged two-year-olds, 15 universal hours for three- and fours, and 30 hours for working families, we should be offering 30 hours for all two-, three- and four-year-olds for at least 48 weeks of the year (rather than the anachronism that is 38 weeks of the year).

What’s more, this new entitlement and funding regime should include an enhancement for disadvantaged families – and more of them too. This could be given through an increase of the funds and the scope of the Early Years Pupil Premium (EYPP).

Register Now to Continue Reading

Thank you for visiting Children & Young People Now and making use of our archive of more than 60,000 expert features, topics hubs, case studies and policy updates. Why not register today and enjoy the following great benefits:

What's Included