The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction and Background

1) Research suggests that a lack of affordable, accessible childcare is the single most important barrier to work for lone parents on Income Support. The Extended Schools Childcare Pilot aims to address that barrier through providing "a virtual childcare guarantee" to lone parents that are not in work. In doing so, the pilot aims to help lone parents and partners of benefit recipients into work.

2) The pilots commenced in October 2004 in two areas of Scotland, Aberdeenshire and Fife, and ran until March 2006. The pilots were co-ordinated by the Local Authority in close co-operation with other stakeholders (Jobcentre Plus and childcare providers). It was envisaged that a "virtual childcare guarantee" would be provided through existing childcare provision available in each area and through the development of additional childcare to meet identified gaps in provision.

3) Findings are presented from the evaluation of the Scottish pilot undertaken by York Consulting Limited ( YCL) in 2005-2006 and commissioned by the Scottish Executive. The evaluation comprised three distinct strands: a study of implementation, a 'survey' of lone parents and an analysis of available monitoring information. Methods of data collection included: qualitative interviews with delivery staff (Local Authority staff, Jobcentre Plus advisors, advisor managers and childcare providers), over 40 in-depth telephone consultations with lone parents and discussions with a small number (5) of parents using new childcare developed.

Findings

4) To supplement existing childcare, both areas developed new provision. In Fife this involved increasing formal childcare for the pre-five age group and developing Extended Hours provision (evening and weekends) for parents working unconventional hours. In Aberdeenshire the focus was on developing childcare for the over twelves by developing non-registered, activity-based provision and by enhancing a pre-existing Sitter Service for the full age range. In this way both areas sought to ensure a broad range of childcare was available during conventional and non-conventional hours.

5) It took considerable time to implement the pilot and establish new provision. This is not surprising given that both areas were pioneering inventive forms of childcare during unconventional hours.

6) Overall, take-up of existing and newly established childcare was mixed. Notably, take-up by lone parents on benefits referred by Jobcentre Plus was extremely poor. The available records show that over a hundred parents referred to the pilot via Jobcentre Plus elected not to access the pilot. Qualitative evidence suggests three lone parents were in employment due to the availability of formal childcare. Only one outcome (entry into work) can be directly attributed to the pilot.

7) The research identified a range of factors (supply-side and demand-side) that affect the extent to which the childcare barrier can be removed. On the supply-side this included factors such as:

• the available timescale that was considered insufficient to set up and deliver new forms of formal childcare and establish an effective relationship with lone parents
• difficulties in sourcing venues to accommodate provision and that complied with Care Commission requirements
• location and type of provision that matched the needs of parents and local labour market opportunities
• developing mechanisms to ensure childcare was affordable, that could be sustained post-pilot
• staff recruitment
• balancing the competing tensions of addressing childcare business viability with the desire to meet parent need.

8) On the demand-side, factors influencing lone parents' decisions about work and childcare included:

• economic factors: including employment levels and job opportunities, the financial viability of work, extent of employer flexibility and concerns over the tax credit system
• childcare factors: such as lone parents' preferences for parental or informal childcare
• parent factors: including low levels of confidence, skills and health issues
• child factors: such as the presence of additional support needs (for which parents perceived there was no childcare available) and the child's age and life-stage
• logistical factors: including transport and the level of contact between the lone parent and Jobcentre Plus.

9) Using the typology developed by Bell et al. ¹ the lone parents interviewed were classified into four key types to identify their orientations towards work and childcare:

• those that had high orientations to work and high orientations towards parental childcare (Type 1)
• those that had high orientations to work and low orientations towards parental childcare (Type 2)
• those that had low orientations to work and high orientations towards parental childcare (Type 3)
• those that had low orientations to work and low orientations towards parental childcare (Type 4).

10) Of the 41 lone parents interviewed, one-quarter (11) were of Type 1. They wanted to work but also wanted to look after their children. Around two-fifths (16) were of Type 2. They were keen to work and willing to use formal childcare to enable them to do that. These parents considered formal childcare to have positive benefits for their children. Around a third of lone parents (13) were of Type 3. These lone parents were not strongly motivated to work and saw their main role as the parental care giver. Only one (1) of the lone parents interviewed was of Type 4. These lone parents had low motivations to work but did not feel strongly obligated to provide full-time parental childcare. They were therefore amenable to using formal childcare.

11) Overall, around two-fifths of lone parents (17) were orientated to using formal childcare. These lone parents could therefore have benefited from the "virtual childcare guarantee" envisaged through the pilot. However, many of these lone parents had limited awareness of the provision available in their area. This, alongside other factors, such as the availability of part-time work during school hours, affected their decisions about work.

12) Conversely, three-fifths of lone parents (24) had deeply entrenched orientations towards the use of parental or informal childcare. Through focusing on formal rather than informal childcare (relative, friend), the pilot could not have assisted this group without changing parental attitudes towards childcare.

13) Both pilot areas worked hard to ensure that some form of childcare was available during conventional and unconventional hours. The evidence suggests that the pilot only partially met its aim to remove the childcare barrier in terms of its accessibility, affordability and quality. The extent to which childcare was considered accessible by lone parents depended on its location, type ( e.g. club versus Sitter Service) and the extent to which parents were aware of its existence. Affordability was addressed, although where this depended on tax credits rather than a subsidy, negative perceptions of the tax credit system may have adversely affected take-up. In relation to quality, much of what was developed was registered and therefore regulated. Activity-based clubs for children over 12 were not registered. This was because the activity-based clubs were testing a novel form of 'childcare' within the limited timeframe of the pilot.

14) It must be acknowledged that removing the childcare barrier is by no means a straightforward task, not least because parental preferences for the type and level of childcare vary. The childcare barrier can mean different things to different lone parents. This has implications for the extent to which the supply-side can respond by providing childcare that meets differing parental demands.

Conclusions

Developing the Childcare Infrastructure

15) Both areas worked hard to implement the pilots and develop new and innovative forms of childcare within a demanding timescale. To supplement existing provision, the Scottish pilots provided childcare that was additional ( i.e. operating outside of conventional hours and tailored to an older age group). In this way, enhancements to the local childcare infrastructure were a key outcome of the pilot.

Testing the Pilot Hypothesis: Is lack of childcare the single most significant barrier for lone parents?

16) Overall, the evidence suggests that the availability of formal childcare presents a significant barrier for some, but not all lone parents. For a considerable proportion of those interviewed (24/40), deeply-entrenched beliefs that it is a parent's job to look after their children affects their attitudes towards both formal childcare and work.

17) The evidence also suggests that childcare is not the only barrier affecting lone parents' entry into work. Often it is one of a number of complex and interlinked barriers. This suggests that childcare is perhaps not best addressed in isolation and that, given the heterogeneity of lone parents, different solutions are required for different lone parents.

« Previous | Contents | Next »