The Foundation Years: preventing poor children becoming poor adults

The review on poverty and life chances was published on 3rd December. The title of the review from Frank Field MP is The Foundation Years: preventing poor children becoming poor adults. I have started reading the review with interest (although it is around 100 pages long, so, I'll need a while!) and I have also been looking through the various media reports. There appears to be a mixed reaction. Although the report seems to have been by and large well recieved, there are some concerned commentators. For example, blog Left Foot Forward cite the response from the Institue for Public Policy Research (IPPR) warning that Frank Field is wrong to ignore the importance of family income in improving the life chances of children under 5. The report claims that Field's review gives a false choice between improving early years services, or putting money into the tax credit and benefit system for low-income families. We are all aware of the current financial climate, but the IPPR advise that the Government would be wrong to make this choice. We need investment in both if we want to improve the life chances of our most vulnerable children. The recent UNICEF report The Children Left Behind states that income poverty has the greatest impact on child inequality in the UK.

However, If we look at summary evidence from the Effective Pre-School Provision (EPPE) research, their findings state that 'For all children, the quality of the home learning environment is more important for intellectual and social development than parental occupation, education or income. What parents do is more important than who parents are.' Which quite clearly places a bigger emphasis on the parenting a child recieves, than family income.
The same research states that 'Settings that have staff with higher qualifications have higher
quality scores and their children make more progress' and 'High quality pre-schooling is related to better intellectual and social/behavioural development for children.' Which seems to agree with Field's recommendations regarding the need for investment in the early years services provided.

Surely though, it is all related. Are families with a higher income more likely to be able to access this high quality pre-schooling? According to a recent survey entitled Towards universal early years provision: analysis of take-up by disadvantaged families from recent annual childcare surveys, the answer is yes. The report found that 'Children from lower-income and larger families (i.e. with three or more children), those whose mothers did not work and those whose mothers did not have any academic qualifications were less likely to receive early years provision.' I will continue to read the Frank Field review, and continue to read the media reaction, but from what I know now, I must agree with the IPPR. We cannot afford to choose one route or the other, we need to provide a truly holistic solution if we want to provide the best start in life for all, but especially for, the most vulnerable children in our society.