EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND CARE
PROGRESS REPORT
December 2006
Department for Education, Sport and Culture FOREWORD
The Council of Ministers’ overall vision is to enrich the quality of life for Islanders by ensuring that:
· Jersey has a unique and recognised identity;
· people living here enjoy a good standard of living based on a strong; environmentally sustainable and prosperous economy;
· we are an inclusive society where everyone has equality of opportunity and access to the services they need;
· our environment sustains a sense of well being;
· Government promotes self-sufficiency and enables enterprise.
Whilst the proposals set out in this paper are primarily about giving our youngest children the best start we can, they are inextricably linked with this broader economic and social vision. The benefits of early education and care for the growth and development of children and for society as a whole are well established. Investment in our youngest is an intelligent investment in the future.
This progress report provides a structure for keeping the development of early years under review. Recommendations in respect of 0-3 year olds are cautious; understandably so, given the impending introduction of Income Support and the proposed consultation on parental leave. With regard to provision for 3-5 year olds the report highlights some outstanding features of current arrangements. However, in spite of these, there remain issues around equity, access and affordability which need to be resolved.
As Minister for Education, Sport and Culture, I believe that integrated early education and care should be available for all children to support their development. With this in mind, I intend to bring forward to the Council of Ministers, a proposal to provide a free entitlement of 20 hours per week, 38 weeks per year for all three and four year olds. This would be achieved by investing in private sector provision to complement our nursery classes in provided schools.
However, given the current economic context, I realise that the timing of this proposal is not ideal. It will need to be considered against the possible introduction of charges for nursery classes and means testing. Each of these models has advantages and disadvantages but, in deciding which to choose, it will be important to ensure that the key principles underpinning early years policy are preserved; that provision is of the highest quality and accessible to all.
Senator Mike Vibert
Minister for Education, Sport and Culture
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The purpose of this paper is to inform States Members and members of the public about the progress made to review early years provision. The effectiveness of current arrangements to support parents are considered and recommendations made for future action.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 At its meeting of 27th July, the Council of Ministers received a presentation from the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture and a paper prepared by his Department which explored some of the complexities involved in developing a coherent early years strategy. The purpose was to stimulate Ministerial debate about the fundamental principles which might underpin future arrangements.
2.2 Both the presentation and paper focused on provision for children aged 3-5, thus reflecting the scope of R.C.54 ‘Investing In Our Future. A Vision for Early Childhood Education and Care for Children in Jersey’. However, it was recognised that such provision was only a sub-set of arrangements for children aged 0-5 and support for their parents/carers, which itself constitutes one element of Social Policy for the Island.
2.3 The outcome of the discussions held by the Council of Ministers was agreement that the:
‘Education, Sport and Culture, Employment and Social Security, Health and Social Services and Treasury and Resources Departments should work together, under the auspices of the Social Strategy Group to develop an Early Years Strategy for the 0-3 year age range by the end of 2006’
2.4 Consequently, an officer group was established and tasked to:
· bring forward recommendations for a comprehensive strategy for supporting early years childcare and education in respect of the 0-5 age group;
· consider the appropriate arrangements for financial support for the parents and carers of this age group, including benefits and tax allowances;
· take account of the potential impact of proposals on existing provision;
· ensure that any recommendations or options for development are fully costed;
· ensure that the recommendations balance the interests of private and public sector provision to create choice as far as possible within an efficient system of provision;
· work within the current strategic and business plan.
3. KEY PRINCIPLES & OBJECTIVES
3.1 In undertaking the work, the officers have taken account of research findings which suggest that:
i) quality childcare has a beneficial impact on the development of children and this is enhanced further where provision includes an element of early education. The benefits to children are sustained into adulthood and garnered by society as a whole by reducing the costs associated with educational failure and its consequences;
ii) high quality provision is more likely to develop where there is a strong partnership between the public and private sector that is founded on a clear partnership agreement;
iii) childcare supports mothers returning to work thus reducing the loss of their skills to the economy;
iv) childcare costs can be a barrier to labour force participation, particularly in respect of women;
v) support for childcare is warranted as an intervention measure aimed at children at risk because intervention of this nature has substantial economic benefits by reducing unemployment and crime in later life;
vi) skill shortages emerging in the economy may be mitigated by greater or more flexible parental participation in the workforce;
vii) failure to address issues to do with the affordability of childcare can lead to an increase in the use of unregistered childcare.
3.2 Consequently, in reviewing the current context it has been assumed that policies in respect of early years should:
· encourage the development and use of high quality provision thus maximising the educational and social benefits to children and the long term economic benefits to society;
· encourage parents to remain in the workforce and ease their return at an appropriate time which accords with their parental preferences.
3.3 The policy objectives would therefore be to:
· ensure that high quality early education and care is available and affordable for children 0-5 years;
· give parents greater choice in the way their children are cared for in their early years;
· provide targeted support for the most challenged families;
· establish a strong and stable partnership between all providers, public and private, to support the growth and development of early years services.
4. OBJECTIVE 1
4.1 To ensure that high quality early education and care is available and affordable children 0-5 years
4.2 Availability
4.3 Table 1[1] shows the numbers of pre-school children in Jersey in 2006 and Table 21 shows the equivalent number of places available including 235 family day care places (child minders). Although data is not currently available to provide a breakdown of family day care places by age, it is known that most cater for children 0-3 years old.
Table 1 - Pre-school Population 2006 by Age |
Age | 0-1 | 1-2 | 2-3 | 3-4 | Total 0-4 |
No of Children | 949 | 963 | 962 | 928 | 3801 |
Table 2 - Available Places for the Pre-school Population 2006 |
Age | 0-1 | 1-2 | 2-3 | 3-4 | Total 0-4 |
Day Nursery Places | 124 | 98 | 218 | 283 | 723 |
Pre-school Places | | | 152 | 152 | 304 |
Family Day Care | | | | | 235 |
Nursery Class Places | | | | 480 | 480 |
Total No Places Available | 124 | 98 | 370 | 915 | 1742 |
4.4 During school term-time, the supply of places is sufficient to meet the needs of 46% of the pre-school population. The most incongruent match is in respect of babies and children up to two. Although the indication is that insufficient places are available for this age range, the extent of the potential demand is not accurately known. This will be influenced by parental choice about whether one parent remains home to care for a very young child or whether both parents choose or need to work. However, whilst some parents may choose nannies[2], the high cost of provision for babies may lead others to seek informal or unregistered care.
4.5 The best match is in respect of 3 and 4 year olds with ample provision for 98% of the cohort but this reduces to 47% during school holiday periods. However, whilst there many parents who require no more than term-time provision, there are some indications, based on the demand for play scheme places, that there is a need to increase availability during school holidays. Again no accurate statistics are available to indicate more precisely what the demand might be.
4.6 Successful planning for early years should be based on accurate indicators of demand including demographics, trends in the use of childcare and parental preferences. Data in respect of 3-4 year olds is reasonably comprehensive although there are still unknowns around after school care and holiday provision. Data in respect of babies and children under two is less current. For this reason it recommended that:
4.7 The Department for Education, Sport and Culture works with the States of Jersey Statistics Unit and the Jersey Child Care Trust to determine a mechanism for collecting data to establish trends in the use of childcare, parental preferences and gaps in provision.
4.8 Affordability
4.9 As highlighted in ‘Investing in Our Future,’ the cost of child care can be a barrier to workforce participation. A typical full-time nursery place for a child under two now costs £258 per week, in excess of £12,000 per annum.
4.10 For a child over three the average full-time cost per week is now £191, over £9000. The cost of family day care is also high. Based on a survey of 62 respondents, 78% of family day carers charge in excess of £5 per hour. Twenty seven percent charge in excess of £6 per hour and 3% in excess of £7 per hour.
Table 3 - Hourly Child Care Cost – Day Nurseries[3] |
Age | 0-2 Years | 2-4 Years | 3-5 Years |
Average | £5.16 | £4.62 | £3.82 |
Minimum | £4.00 | £4.00 | £3.45 |
Maximum | £6.18 | £5.35 | £4.73 |
Table 4 - Hourly Child Care Cost – Pre-schools |
Age | 0-2 Years | 2-4 Years | 3-5 Years |
Average | - | £4.22 | £3.62 |
Minimum | - | £4.00 | £3.11 |
Maximum | - | £5.00 | £5.00 |
4.11 There are essentially two policy instruments available for increasing the availability and the affordability of early years provision with public finance. Demand side funding, which is directed towards parents through some form of tax relief, tax credit or alternative allowance and supply side funding which is directed to approved providers.
4.12 Demand side measures are usually the first choice in market systems that are designed to be driven by parental choice. Supply measures normally, although not exclusively, apply to public sector or non-profit making services where there is likely to be greater government involvement in establishing curriculum guidelines and monitoring quality.
4.13 Jersey employs both demand and supply side measures. Financial support is provided to parents through Child Care Tax Relief, the Child Care Allowance and, in respect of 5-12 year olds, the School Age Discount Scheme. On the supply side, States funded nursery education for 3 and 4 year olds is provided through the education system at no cost to the parents. These parents are not eligible to claim tax relief or the Child Care Allowance.
4.14 The rationale for this dichotomy is understandable. Demand side measures were introduced for economic reasons, to encourage female workforce participation, to ‘make work pay’ for the less well off and ‘provide a modest incentive’ to those in the marginal tax band. Nursery education was introduced for child development and educational reasons and is therefore fully subsidised.
4.15 Table 5 summarises the eligibility of the income groups to claim financial support for childcare.
Table 5 – Demand Side Measures Supporting Childcare in Jersey
Target Group | Measure |
| Child Care Tax Relief (0-12 Year Olds) | Child Care Allowance (0-5 Year Olds) | School Age Discount Scheme (5-12 Year Olds) |
Unemployed Households | No | No | No |
Low Income Households | No | Yes | Yes |
Middle Income Households | Yes | No | No |
High Income Households | No | No | No |
4.16 Childcare Tax Relief was introduced in 1998 for children 0-5 years and extended to children aged up to 12 in 2000. It is only available to those people paying tax at the marginal rate (27%), however it is not possible to say exactly what level of income this equates to as a number of factors are taken into account in making an assessment. Generally, childcare tax relief is available to middle earners. Actual costs may be claimed up to a maximum of £6150 which, at 27% is about £1660 per annum or approximately £30 per week.
4.17 In terms of access, Child Care Tax Relief seems to have been an effective measure. In 2005, 1601 taxpayers claimed a total of £4,857,069. Of these 909 were entitled to a deduction in their income tax assessment. The total in lost income to the Treasury was £766,512 (Total claim £2,838, 934 at 27%). However it is important to note that, of those who did not receive a deduction, some would have been exempt from tax due to lower earnings and some would have been higher earners above the marginal rate and paying tax at 20%.
4.18 Whilst raising the maximum child care relief claimable might seem a logical way to help parents further with childcare charges, this measure would not benefit the lowest earning households as they would not be paying tax. The 2007 budget decision to raise tax exemption thresholds by 2.5% per annum for three years from 2007 may bring more households into the tax exempt category, to the extent that earnings increase by less than 2.5%. However, it is not yet clear how the new Income Support System will operate and what level of benefits will be available. Until this is determined, it would not be practical to consider modifying Childcare Tax relief in isolation, as the combined effect of both measures on ‘middle income’ families needs to be considered. These families would gain from increasing the maximum Child Care Tax Relief claimable.
4.19 The Income Tax System will undergo a number of changes over the next few years and introducing further changes at this time is not recommended. However, even with the introduction of the ‘20% means 20%’ proposals, childcare tax relief will still be available to those paying tax at the marginal rate.
4.20 Child Care Allowance, School Age Discount and Income Support
4.21 At present, people who are beneath the tax threshold can claim either a Child Care Allowance for children in registered child care who are under the age of 5 or a School Age Discount allowance through the Jersey Child Care Trust for children aged between 5 and 12. The funding designated for the Child Care Allowance is approximately £335,000 and for the discount scheme £332,000.
4.22 These current systems are based on the requirement that child care is necessary to allow parents to find or maintain employment and therefore to remove the disincentive to work that child care costs sometimes produce. To be eligible for the Child Care Allowance the total family income must exceed £4,406 and not exceed £18,020 for a single parent and £24,680 for a couple. The maximum amount claimable is £110 per week in respect of one child under 5 and £220 in respect of one family.
4.23 A major criticism leveled at the Child Care Allowance is that, thresholds have been frozen since its introduction so it has failed to keep pace with increasing childcare costs. In any case, during 2007, both the Child Care Allowance and the School Age Discount Scheme will be replaced by Income Support. A number of factors will make this a more effective mechanism for helping low income families with the cost of early education and care for 0-5 year olds:
i. Once an assessment has made as to the whether the child care hours and income for the job are reasonable, the actual cost of childcare will considered when the level of support is determined;
ii. There will be three different support bands within the childcare component to differentiate between childcare costs for babies, two year olds and the 3 -5 age range;
iii. There will not be an income cut off point as with the Child Care Allowance. This will effectively provide a more tapered system and it is possible that some ‘middle income’ families, around £30,000, will be eligible for a child care component;
iv. More flexible enabling legislation will allow changes to be made by Regulation so that the system may be readily adapted to meet future needs, for example to include childcare costs where the parent is a carer or undergoing training.
4.24 Given that changes to the Income Tax System are imminent and the real impact of Income Support on the affordability of childcare is unlikely to be known until the scheme has become embedded, the Working Group recommends that:
4.25 The Departments for Social Security, Education, Sport and Culture and the Treasury Department monitor the impact of Income Support and tax relief for families with children 0-5 years and assess the effectiveness of these benefits in facilitating access to early education and care.
4.26 Nursery Education
4.27 Research suggests that a more unified approach to learning should be adopted in both early childhood education and the primary school system and greater attention should be paid to the transition challenges faced by young children as they enter school[4].
4.28 The first nursery class was established in Jersey in 1984 to provide children 3-4 years old with an educational experience designed to support their social and emotional development and prepare them for a seamless transition to school. Since then, 16 classes have been developed providing 480 free full-time equivalent places to 533 children. At 57% of the 3-4 cohort this is similar to the proportion of children who were attending free maintained nursery classes in England in 2002 (59%).
4.30 Since 1984, the growth in nursery class provision has been matched by a similar growth in private sector provision. The development of this ‘two-tier’ system has created inequity because 50% of children 3-4 years old have access to a free nursery place whilst the remaining half must pay. This led to the conclusion that:
4.31 ‘whilst there is a clear strategy for Early Years Education in Jersey there is no overall States strategy for integrated early education and child care [and] a perceived lack of investment in early education and child care services has resulted in criticism of the existing policy.’[5]
4.32 However, in spite of this it is important to recognise that there are some outstanding features of early education in Jersey. Whilst most other European countries are struggling to ensure that the availability for 3-4 year olds meets demand, apart from gaps during school holiday periods, this has been achieved locally.
4.33 The quality of provision, which is characterised by appropriate adult : child ratios, small group sizes, properly resourced facilities and well trained staff, has gained recognition by prominent researchers in the field of early education[6]. The introduction a Foundation Stage Curriculum across provided nursery classes and private nurseries has put Jersey at the forefront of moves to integrate education and care for 3-5 year olds.
4.34 Because of the long term benefits associated with provision of this quality, the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture supports the concept of a free entitlement for all 3-4 year olds and is committed to bring a proposal to the States during 2006, for investing in the private sector to achieve this. Whilst a full scheme has not yet been developed, the anticipated cost per child is likely to be £3040 per year, based on an average charge of £4 per hour, 20 hours per week, 38 weeks per annum. Assuming a cohort of 1000 children and taking account of the fact that 480 free places already exist in nursery classes, this would require an additional £1,580,800 in revenue funding.
4.35 The Working Group is aware that the timing of this proposal is not ideal and it will need to be considered against other models of delivery. It would require significant public funding when there is a need to maintain public sector expenditure within affordable limits that do not cause a rise in inflation or lead to increased taxation. In this context of considerable demands on States expenditure, the Working Party would draw attention to R.C. 54, Investing in Our Future which clearly stated that this development should be implemented from 2008. Therefore the recommendation is that:
4.36 The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture brings forward for consideration alongside other requests for 2008, costed proposals for both free entitlement and means tested models of delivery for 3-5 year olds.
5. OBJECTIVE 2
5.1 To give parents greater choice in the way their children are cared for in their early years;
5.2 Many families would like one parent to stay at home to care for their children when they are babies. Often this can be a difficult choice especially when a dual income is necessary to maintain a standard living. Apart from those benefits which apply before or soon after the birth of a child, Maternity Grant and Maternity Allowance, the Family Allowance is currently the main benefit for supporting low income families with children regardless of whether one or two parents are working. As with the Child Care Allowance this will be subsumed into the new Income Support System.
5.3 The mechanism usually employed to assist a parent who wishes to remain at home during the first year of a child’s life is parental leave. Parental leave differs from maternity leave in that its concern is not primarily the health of the mother but the care and upbringing of young children. Either parent may therefore be eligible for it. The European Commission’s 1983 Directive on parental leave defined it as:
‘leave granted to fathers and mothers during a period after the termination of maternity leave to enable parents in employment to look after their newborn child for a certain time, whilst giving them some degree of security in respect of employment, social security and remuneration … Parental leave is also granted to adoptive parents.’
5.5 There exists, at this time, no statutory obligation for employers in Jersey to provide parental leave although some pay groups have entitlements built into the Terms and Conditions of their employment. However, for people staying at home to look after a child in the family who is under 5 years, the Home Responsibility Protection Scheme provides help in the form of credits against the claimant’s Social Security account. These take the place of Class 2 contributions and protect entitlement to Pension and Survivor’s benefits. They do not give entitlement to incapacity or maternity benefits and can only be claimed for a maximum of ten years during a working life.
5.6 Policies on parental leave vary widely across European countries and are driven by different priorities which may be about[7]:
· the promotion of gender equality and equity in the workplace;
· facilitating mothers remaining in the labour force;
· reducing employment by encouraging parents to exit the labour force;
· increasing employment by retaining parents in the labour force after the birth of a child;
· the well being of children;
· women’s financial independence;
· the greater involvement of fathers in home and family life.
5.7 Clearly, some of these conflict with each other and this needs to be taken into account when assessing a model of best practice for Jersey. The key challenge will be to ensure that any statutory commitment balances the needs of families with the needs of the economy. Plans are already in place to take this work forward.
5.8 The Employment Forum has been tasked to consult widely on family policies in respect of maternity, paternity, parental and adoption leave and report to the Minister for Social Security by the end of 2007. Following this, appropriate recommendations will be drafted into Phase 2 of the Employment Legislation for agreement by the States and implementation in 2009. Consequently, the Working Group recommends that:
5.9 The Council of Ministers awaits the outcome of the consultation on family policy to be undertaken by the Employment Forum and considers the recommendations of the Minister for Social Security thereafter.
6. OBJECTIVE 3
6.1 To provide targeted support for the most challenged families.
6.1 Most recent research into what enables those children who are disadvantaged in childhood to succeed later in life[8] indicates that early interventions yield a high return. One of the most robust findings relates to the importance of parental interest in their child’s education which is often related to the parents’ own educational achievements and prior experiences. This implies that interventions which encourage parents to become more involved in their children’s education have a long term effect.
6.2 Some of the most ambitious projects in Jersey to date have been the establishment of the ‘The Bridge’ and the NSPCC ‘Pathways’ project. These centres offer support for parents from the pre-natal stage and deliver early intervention strategies through individual and cross-agency working. They have already been effective working with ‘hard to reach’ families who struggle to achieve success in their own lives and to meet the needs of their children. Since ‘The Bridge’ was first setup at the beginning of 2006, forty-four parents have accessed training for employment for the first time in their lives, increasing their self-confidence and encouraging them to strive higher. Many others have benefited from more focused agency support.
6.3 In spite of this there is still much that could be done to coordinate a more holistic and strategic approach to the development of services for children, particularly 0-5 year olds. Examples of such approaches exist in other countries; in the UK, ‘Every Child Matters’ and in the USA ‘No Child Left Behind’. These agendas set a clear framework into which government policies for the health, education, welfare of children and families have been drawn together to provide better coordinated support to the delivery of services. In the UK particularly this has precipitated a greater integration of public services working with children and families.
6.4 The strategic model of Corporate Parenting and the establishment of the Children’s Executive have, in a relatively brief period, created greater cohesion and coherence in the delivery of services for children with emotional and social difficulties. It is possible that this model could be adapted and developed to provide over-arching strategic leadership for a much broader children’s agenda that would embrace support for families with children 0-5 years old. Whilst it is recognised that this is substantial piece of work, it is recommended that:
6.5 The Department for Health & Social Services and the Department for Education, Sport and Culture begin to develop a framework that would support the greater integration of services for all children in Jersey and make recommendations for a strategic governance model to support its delivery.
7. OBJECTIVE 4
7.1 To establish a strong and stable partnership between all providers, public and private, to support the growth and development of early years services.
7.2 Although the inequity of the current system might suggest that there is tension between private and public providers, on a professional level there are many examples of joint working which indicate a shared commitment to develop an integrated approach to early education and care. The development of joint training initiatives for public and private employees has given early years practitioners access to high quality professional development, created opportunities for debate about professional issues and signified a clear ambition to ensure that people who work with our youngest children are well-trained and qualified. The appointment of the Foundation Stage Teacher, funded by the Department for Education, Sport and Culture and seconded to the Jersey Child Care Trust to work exclusively with private providers, is another example of effective partnership.
7.3 Nevertheless, there is a need to ensure that a formal forum exists for public, private and non-profit making providers and parents to contribute to the strategic direction of the early years agenda in Jersey. Therefore it is recommended that:
7.4 The Department for Education, Sport and Culture develops clear Terms of Reference for the establishment of a Jersey Early Years Partnership to involve key stakeholders who will work strategically with the States of Jersey to achieve its aspirations for children in the early years.
7.5 The Jersey Child Care Trust was set up by the States in 1997 to ‘coordinate, promote and facilitate the expansion of high quality and affordable childcare provision in the Island’. In 2004 the work of the Trust was independently reviewed[9] and it was recommended that it ‘‘re-focus its performance indicators against … core objectives’. In 2006, the Trust commissioned a further review of its role and function which was undertaken by the Comptroller and Auditor General.
7.6 This review noted that the Trust had re-focused on its original purposes but that concerns were still expressed about it by the childcare sector. However it was recognised that these concerns may in part be due to a number of the conflicts around the Trust’s current role. The review proposed three possible models for consideration; that the Trust should act either as:
· an agent for the States in serving as a conduit for providing funds to the [private] sector by way of grants;
· a campaigner and lobbyist for child care interests in the Island;
· an Executive Agency providing services to the sector.
7.7 Although the review also noted that, given the Jersey context, none of these models might be practicable, in line with the recommendations of the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Working Group agrees that:
7.8 The Department for Education, Sport and Culture should establish which model of organisation it would prefer the Trust to follow and to what extent it would be prepared to continue its funding.
7.9 The introduction of the Day Care of Children (Jersey) Law 2002 has provided the statutory framework necessary to ensure that private sector provision meets appropriate standards. The team responsible for monitoring and supporting quality development in the private and non-profit making sectors is located within the Lifelong Learning section of the Department for Education, Sport and Culture. The Foundation Stage Teacher who works with the private sector is seconded to the Jersey Child Care Trust and located at ‘The Bridge’. Quality development in school nursery classes is monitored and supported by the Early Years Adviser who is a member of the Schools and Colleges team.
7.10 Whilst it may be argued that there benefits from organising services in this way, such division of responsibilities does not properly reflect a vision of cohesive partnership delivering integrated early education and care. Therefore it is recommended that:
7.11 The Department for Education, Sport and Culture reviews its organisational arrangements for supporting early years so that they align with a vision for integrated early education and care across the public and private sectors.
8. Summary
8.1 In undertaking this review of provision for 0-5 years, the Working Group has concluded that, whilst many of the policy instruments available to support families with young children are already undergoing significant change, it would be unwise to make specific recommendations in respect of these at this time. To do so without understanding the full impact and effect of the changes already proposed could increase the risk of unintended consequences. Given that any changes, particularly to benefit systems, are likely to have significant financial implications, the recommendations in respect of these are cautious.
8.2 The inequity is in the current arrangements for 3-5 year olds and the Minister’s preferred option is to remove this by providing a universal free entitlement of 20 hours per week, 38 weeks per year. As this has significant funding implications for 2008, the Working Group recommends that the Minister’s proposals should be considered alongside a means tested model of delivery which would involve the introduction of charges for nursery classes.
[1] Department for Education Sport and Culture, Projects & Planning
[2] Nannies are not required to be registered
[3] Jersey Child Care Trust
[4] In ‘Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care, OECD 2006
[5] A Vision for the Future of Early Education and Child Care in Jersey, Spratt, J. 2004
[6] Professor Christine Pascal, University of Worcester; Professor Iram Siraj-Blatchford, University of London
[7] Parental Leave in Council of Europe member States 2005
[8] ‘Bucking the trend’ Blanden, Department for Work and Pensions (UK)
[9] A Vision for the Future of Early Education and Childcare in Jersey, Spratt, J. 2004
gov.je