Communicating the 2 Year Old Offer to Parents
Key Messages
The information in this section is based on a thorough literature review of available evidence on parental attitudes to formal childcare – a summary of which is contained in Annex B of this toolkit. This secondary research has been supplemented by three focus groups with parents with pre-school aged children. The groups were held in three different local authority areas across England and included parents from a range of cultural and low income backgrounds.
We have drawn heavily on the material set out below and in the literature review in drafting the communications materials, including posters, leaflets and press releases that form the resources part of this toolkit.
Getting the basics right
Be Clear and Simple
It sounds simple but still too often we’re not getting it right.
Parents continue to say they have difficulty in understanding some communication from local authorities or other public bodies. They want language to be kept as simple as possible.
Parents told us that often councils tried to convey too much information on one leaflet/poster. They would prefer less information included in these documents, but with clear links to more information in a range of formats eg on-line, by phone or in person where possible.
One particular bug-bear was that parents feel a significant amount of irrelevant information is included in communication from their local authority. They highlighted that letters and leaflets often say why something has happened (e.g. the government has introduced XXXX) before they set out the key reason for the communication, and why it was relevant to them. They stressed that lengthy introductions, and what they considered to be irrelevant information, often caused them to switch off before they reached the central message.
ACTION – We have kept explanation of the background to the two-year-old offer to a bare minimum and focused on relevant details about the ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ – leaving the ‘why’ out of it.
We have largely used the term childcare because it was more widely understood among parents than early education – though we know that in policy circles the latter is often preferred and in many ways better describes the provision being delivered.
Keep it positive – nobody likes to feel judged, stigmatised or singled out
Many parents felt that some of the language used to refer to families was alienating and might discourage some parents who might be eligible from taking up a free place for their child. They expressed some concern about how they would be identified as eligible for the two year old offer, and whether there would be any stigma attached to taking up the places.
Strong opposition was expressed to the use of terms like ‘vulnerable’ and ‘disadvantaged’ and felt that highlighting the perceived low social status of eligible parents was very unhelpful.
Parents variously suggested either referring to those who may be eligible as ‘low income’, focusing on children’s eligibility – particularly those with additional needs or a disability, or simply targeting all parents and directing them to an online method of checking their eligibility.
ACTION – We are proposing to minimise any subjective use of the financial position of families who may be eligible and instead focus on the setting out the benefits that might indicate eligibility and overall level of household income that is likely to mean a family is entitled to a place.
We recognise that there is concern about raising expectations of demand amongst families who are not eligible but we believe this achieves the right balance.
Communicating the two-year-old offer
The literature review and our focus groups highlight that there is not a single answer to the question – how do you effectively communicate the benefits of formal childcare and early education to parents. Parents from different social and economic backgrounds have different concerns, priorities and cultural values. You can find out more about this from reading the Literature Review.
We have sought to balance some of the conflicting messages from different parents to create a set of key messages that are capable of resonating with a range of families and have focused on allaying some of the key concerns or misunderstandings.
Emphasize the benefits to children
Both the literature review and the parents we spoke to suggest that talking about the benefits of childcare in relation to the positive impact it will have on children is the best way to stimulate interest from parents. Talking about the evidence that good quality early education can have in supporting children’s development; promoting communication skills, social skills and independence were viewed positively. In addition, messages around providing additional support to those with special educational needs or disabilities were generally welcomed by most parents.
However, some parents did raise concerns that children would be exposed to a pressured, learning environment too early. The use of the term ‘formal childcare’ in parent-facing communications was also alienating. So it is important to highlight the opportunities for play and socialising alongside those for development. In addition, references to ‘school-readiness’ should be set in the wider context.
ACTION – we have sought to develop messages that highlight developmental benefits but also stress benefits of play and socialising.
Photos showing children having fun and smiling were positively received by parents.
Preference for parental or familial childcare
A closely linked issue is the strong preference among some parents to provide all the care for their children themselves, particularly when they were very young e.g. under 30 months. Where this was not possible familial care by extended family members was preferred.
Some ethnic and religious groups report strong social expectations that they are responsible for providing the early education to their children. The literature reports this as particularly strong amongst Muslim mothers. For these groups but also for other non-working parents childcare was almost seen as irrelevant.
These issues were intrinsically linked for some to concerns about the safety of their children if they are being left with ‘strangers’. Emphasising the quality of the care available is also important. Many parents discussed their fears that children would be left in unsuitable environments, or that if they were not able to access the best setting that children would be better off staying at home with them. Not all parents were aware of the training that the early years workforce gets, the existence of the EYFS or the extent of regulation and inspection for early years settings. When more of this was explained – in plain English – many parents’ fears were allayed to at least some extent.
Some parents placed great emphasis on information about childcare gained from trusted, informal networks. This reinforces the potential that utilizing parent champions and working closely with key community groups can play in building the trust of some parents in formal childcare provision.
ACTION - Any implied or intended negative messaging about informal or parental care being ‘less good’ for children was not positive so it is key to promote benefits of formal care but not promote that one is better than the other. Children will who take up free places will be getting plenty of both.
With this in mind we have sought to highlight that one of the benefits for parents of childcare is that it can give them more time to spend with any younger children in the family. Also that in childcare children can experience different activities and places – supplementing parental and familial care – and that parents may pick up inspiration for other activities they can do with their children at home.
We have included messaging around the professionalism, training and inspection of early years settings to provide some reassurance to parents for whom this is a top concern and barrier to accessing care.
The cost and convenience of care
Even though the free entitlement is free, there can be a perception among some low income families that childcare is too expensive for them to access with some fearing that they would be expected to pay for additional hours or other things.
Transport costs were also viewed as a significant barrier to some. This ran alongside concerns about convenience and compatibility with other commitments like school pick up times for older children and made childcare less attractive for some.
ACTION – The word ‘free’ is prominently used on all suggested materials.
Messages which stressed that childcare would be provided locally and that they would have a choice about the provider of it – subject to availability - was helpful. [Clearly there are particular issues here for rural areas and other areas with supply issues but we have refrained from complicating the messages with too much detail here given these are issues which can be discussed with individual parents].
Lack of awareness – getting the message out
Despite all the efforts that are made some families still do not feel well informed about childcare provision in their area. There were quite strong differences according to ethnic background found in the research around this area – with Asian families receiving the least information, and Black families reporting the highest dissatisfaction with both the quality and quantity of available childcare information.
This linked strongly to negative perceptions both about the quality and availability of childcare – particularly amongst black parents.
Many parents reported that the information they did receive was hard to understand, particularly where there was a language barrier.
ACTION – Information from informal networks and from peers was found to be particularly helpful. Where formal communications were being used then parents wanted them placed in every day places where they were, including supermarkets, GP surgeries etc. In addition, on-line and social media are increasingly being used by parents to find out information about what is happening in their local area. More information on this can be found in the other sections of this toolkit.
Childminders
With many local authorities looking to utilize childminders heavily in the provision of the two-year-old offer we have sought to understand parental attitudes to childminders and how this might affect take up of these places.
There was a mixed picture from the literature and our own research on this issue, with parents holding strongly different views.
Some parents preferred the idea of a ‘home from home’ type environment they felt childminders offered. For those that were concerned about childcare offering too formal a style of education for young children this could be attractive. For others this was tantamount to ‘babysitting’ which they did not need.
Trust in the safety of childcare provision is one of the biggest influences on parents and childminders – that were not personally known to the parents (childminders achieved the lowest level of trust amongst childcare providers in the relevant literature). That said, once there was better explanation of registration, training and inspection of childminders some parents were willing to change their view.
ACTION – We have explicitly sought to highlight the quality and professionalism of childminders alongside that of nurseries, pre-schools and play-groups in the key messages.
Personal recommendations for childminders and opportunities to get to know them will be key for some parents in building sufficient trust to use a childminder.
Childminder/parent ‘speed-dating’ and other examples of how this might be achieved are included elsewhere in this toolkit.
Key MessagesYour two-year-old could qualify for 15 hours of free childcare, funded by the Government.
This could either be at a local nursery, pre-school, play-group or childminder.
Childcare is good for children – research has shown that good quality early years care can:
- Improve children’s development – for example their communication skills
- Help them learn to socialise with other children and make friends
- Help them begin to get ready to go to school
- Give them access to new activities and exciting places to play- for example they will do painting and play with sand and water and other activities that you might not want to do at home because of the mess!
All the childcare – whether at a nursery, pre-school, play-group or by a childminder – isprovided by registered professionals who are fully trained in looking after children and have been police checked. They are inspected by Ofsted – the organisation that makes sure that schools, nurseries, pre-schools, play-groups and childminders are safe and providing a good education.
Your local council can provide you with a list of places that your child can attend and then you will be able to choose – as long as the place you choose has space.
There are more childcare places being made available so you don’t have to worry that all the nurseries, pre-schools or childminders will already be full.
At the moment the free childcare for two-year-olds is for certain groups. If you are in receipt of certain benefits, have a household income below about £16,000 per year, or if your child has a disability or special educational need then you may be eligible so contact your local Council to find out more. [Will change for year 1 and 2 and according to local criteria]