The programme was found to deliver ‘long-lasting’ health benefits for children through to their teenage years.
The savings from reduced hospitalisations up to age 15 offset around 31 per cent of spending on Sure Start.
Funded by the Nuffield Foundation, the research is the first evidence of how the Sure Start programme affected children’s long-term health.
Focusing on the 2000s, when the programme was expanding, the research finds Sure Start:
- Reduced hospitalisations of five-year-olds by 7 per cent, the equivalent of 2,900 a year.
- Prevented over 13,150 hospitalisations of 11-15-year-olds each year – an 8 per cent reduction on pre-Sure Start hospitalisation rates.
The benefits for child health were likely due to stronger immune systems (which prevent infections in later childhood), less risky environments (reducing poisonings and accidents), improved mental health and potentially better behaviour during adolescence, states the report, which found no evidence that Sure Start affected mothers’ employment.
The IFS says the results ‘highlight the importance of integrating a range of services during the early years to improve child health immediately and longer term.’
And, they should ‘inform the Government’s approach to the recommendations in the recent Leadsom report on the first 1,001 days of life.’
Other findings include:
- Boys enjoyed longer-lasting benefits from Sure Start than girls, which the IFS says reflects their ‘greater sensitivity to disadvantage in the early years’. After the end of primary school, the impact of the programme on girls’ hospitalisations fades out, but the benefits continue to grow for boys.
- The effects of the programme were also longer-lasting in more disadvantaged neighbourhoods.
'Policy makers should consider a programme's potential for long-term savings'
Sarah Cattan, IFS associate director and a co-author of the report, said, ‘The savings from reduced hospitalisations up to age 15 offset around a third of the cost of the Sure Start programme – and that’s before considering any potential benefits in education, social care or crime. Ahead of this autumn’s tight Spending Review, these results are a reminder that policymakers should consider a programme’s potential for long-term savings, not just its up-front costs.’
The Early Years Alliance said the research confirmed that ‘investing in young children is a sound financial decision’.
Chief executive Neil Leitch explained, ‘Recent governments have shamefully let down children and families by not only cutting Sure Start services which reduce hospitalisations, and do much more good besides, but also by allowing funding for under-five education to dwindle to far less than the cost of delivering it.
‘If the Government genuinely cares about our national finances, it should have no hesitation in making a significant investment into early childhood development, since the high-quality early years provision all children deserve will more than pay for itself in the years to come.’
The National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA) echoed the call for increased funding.
Director of policy and communications Jonathan Broadbery said, ‘The Government must take this evidence on board ahead of the spending review later this year. Ministers need to ensure they fund early education and childcare, as well as the services that support families, at a level which ensures settings are sustainable and can deliver the high-quality provision we all want for our youngest children.’
The shadow minister for children and early years Tulip Siddiq said, 'Ministers must start listening and come forward with a proper plan to rebuild this essential infrastructure after a decade of neglect.'
The Department for Education has been contacted for a response.