Developing effective monitoring, data collection and research agendas

1
Developing effective monitoring, data collection
and research agendas

• Indicators and Quality of Social Services in a
  European Context
• Berlin, 16-17 October 2002

2
Overview

• Incompatibilities and methodological problems of
  present approaches to data collection
• Recommendations for data and indicator
  development
• A stable framework and long-term agenda for
  research and evaluation  

3
1.    Incompatibilities and methodological
problems of present approaches to data collection

• General lack of cross-national consensus of what
  constitutes the policy field of ECEC services for
  young children
• - ECEC provision is divided into welfare and
  education systems. Models of ECEC
• Divided system - Children 0-3 years in
  welfare system/3 in pre-school under
  educational system
• Unified system Children 0-pre-school age
  either in educational or welfare system

4
- As a consequence, the provision for the
under-3s and the provision from the welfare
sector is neglected

• Present approaches to data collection in the
  ECEC fieldtend to focus on educational services
  for the over-3s.

5

• The relevance of ECEC services may depend on
  complementary cash benefits
• - Care needs may be met in other ways than
  providing a service.
• - National schemes vary greatly in terms of
  length of leave schemes, tax credits and cash
  for care benefits for the purchase of private
  services.
• - Relevance of ECEC systems may therefore vary.
  

6

• Private provision makes up an increasing bulk of
  the overall ECEC services
• - Pluralism of provision an increasing
  phenomenon.
• - National statistics, however, mainly report
  public provision.

7
2. Recommendations for data and indicator
development  

• Comparison of ECEC provision should be built on
  a perspective of functional equivalence in
  adopting a cross-sectional, cross-benefit
  approach of comparison
• - Taking into account pre-school and welfare
  provisions, cash as well as service benefits,
  including private as well as public
• - Enables comparisons where high or low
  coverage is not directly translatable to being
  either good nor bad

 
8

• Implications
• Comparisons should consider services from the
  educational/welfare/health sectors where the
  objective is to provide day-time ECEC services
  containing an element of care or educational
  development focussed on the child
• Organised - Day time - Containing an element of
  care or educational activity focussed on the
  child
• Centre-based activities Age-integrated, day
  centres and nurseries, nursery
  education/pre-school activities
• Part-time care Play groups
• Home-based Family day care

9

• Leave schemes should be included and evaluated
  according to accessibility, length and payment,
  and figures on take-up should be made comparable
• - Benefits Leave schemes which entitle parents
  to take time off to care for their children
  Maternity, paternity and parental leave, career
  leave
• - Made comparable weeks, formula for cash
  benefit, no. of beneficiaries
•  

10

• Private provision from voluntary organisations,
  employers and for-profit agents should be
  included
• - Services Regulated or publicly financed, or
  survey- based data

11

• The inherent structural difference in
  institutional design of the two ECEC models
  necessitates adaptation of hours of attendance
• - Measures to convert term-time and part-time
  provision into full-time equivalents

12

• Background indicators should be collected in
  order to understand the variations in need and
  demand for ECEC services and complementary
  benefits available, such as leave schemes
• - Need for ECEC depends on variations in
  employment patterns, family types and
  availability of informal care
• - Data required demographic, single parents,
  social need, employment and training patterns

13

• Indicators on availability and access to ECEC
  services should look at the objective of
  services, the age groups entitled, affordability
  and the number of children attending
• - Universal or selective services
• - Parental fees
• - No of children in ECEC and no of places
  available
• - Attendance of 0, 1, 2, 3... years old
• - Waiting lists

14

• Indicators on quality of ECEC should include
  quantitative data as well as qualitative
  variables
• - Economic indicators National investments in
  ECEC, per child in a full-time equivalent place
• - Structural indicators Opening hours, child
  staff ratio, training of staff, full/part-time
  employment, staff turn- over, physical
  surroundings
• - Soft indicators multi-diciplinary teams of
  staff, collaboration across ECEC provision

15
3. A stable framework and long-term agenda for
research and evaluation

• Developing a regional focus of social
  reporting
• - Social services are highly de-centralised (in
  policy- making, financing, administration and
  provision)
• - Sub- national reporting must be conducted also.

16
Necessary to develop a range of research and
evaluation instruments

• - Self-evaluation procedures and actions
• - Cost-benefit analysis
• - Dissemination procedures