Early entitlement expansion fails to directly benefit the poorest families, says IFS
by Jess Gibson
The government鈥檚 plans to extend the early entitlement offers to one- and two-year-olds continue to prioritise supporting working parents rather than directly aiding the most disadvantaged, low-income families, according to a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).
forms part of the IFS鈥 annual series of updates on education spending, funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
The report states that 鈥渢he poorest third of families will see almost no direct benefit from the new entitlements鈥, while the volume of disadvantaged two-year-olds eligible for a funded early education place has halved between 2015 and 2023.
It also notes that while the new entitlements will directly benefit just over half of parents with a child aged between nine months and two years, families earning less than 拢20,000 a year will only account for a fifth of this, with the remaining four-fifths comprised of families with household incomes above 拢45,000.
The research additionally states that, while funding rates for children aged two and under are set to be significantly above what the private market charges in 2024-25, funding for three- and four-year-olds will be 11% lower in 2024-25 than in 2012-13.
The IFS warns that with government set to pay for up to 80% of early years provision in England, it is vital that funding rates for these entitlements are set at the correct rate.
Elaine Drayton, IFS Research Economist and an author of the report, said:鈥淐hildcare providers have seen significant increases in their costs over the last decade, but funding rates have failed to keep pace. Core hourly funding for 3- and 4-year-olds fell by 17% in the decade leading up to 2022鈥23, once rising costs of provision are taken into account. As the free entitlement expands, the government will be setting the price for more and more formal pre-school childcare hours 鈥 and the risks of getting the funding rates wrong will just get bigger and bigger.鈥
Commenting, Neil Leitch, CEO of the Early Years Alliance, said: 鈥淭here is a wealth of research showing that鈥痗hildren from poorer鈥痓ackgrounds benefit the most from quality early education and care鈥 and yet, as this report rightly highlights, the upcoming 30-hour expansion is set to exclude these children almost entirely. 鈥
鈥淔or all ministers鈥 talk of the need to 鈥榗lose the gap鈥 between disadvantaged children and their peers as early as possible, the government has made it鈥痸ery clear鈥痶hat this policy was created鈥痶o encourage parents to return to work,鈥痳ather than ensuring鈥痶hat all children鈥痗an access鈥痑 high-quality early education.鈥
鈥淟et鈥檚鈥痓e clear: early years provision is more than just childcare. It is vital鈥痚ducation, delivered at the most crucial period of a child鈥檚 learning and development.鈥
鈥淚n no other area of education would we accept鈥痶he idea of鈥痗hildren鈥檚 fundamental access to education being鈥痙etermined by鈥痶heir parents鈥欌痚arnings鈥 so why is it acceptable in the early years?鈥