1. society
2. work
3. unemployment

p
Chi
ld
tcomes m
u
o
y
od
t
r
e
els
v
o
education
childcare
health
family
support
housing
neighbourhoods
money
employment
skills
An international review
Child poverty outcomes models
An international review
Becky Fauth, Rachel Blades and Chloe Gill
National Children’s Bureau: working with children, for children
Registered Charity Number 258825.
8 Wakley Street, London EC1V 7QE. Tel: 020 7843 6000
Connect with us:
© NCB, October 2012
Facebook: www.facebook.com/ncbfb
Twitter: @ncbtweets
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Contents
1.
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
2.
Child poverty in Northern Ireland ............................................................................................ 5
2.1 Recent statistics and trends .............................................................................................................. 5
2.2 The factors underlying child poverty ................................................................................................ 6
3.
Policy responses to child poverty ............................................................................................. 8
4.
Child poverty outcome models and strategies....................................................................... 10
4.1 Denmark .......................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 United States – focus on State of Connecticut and New York City ................................................. 16
4.3 Scotland........................................................................................................................................... 24
5.
Lessons for Northern Ireland .................................................................................................. 29
6.
References .............................................................................................................................. 31
Appendix A. Brief methodology ..................................................................................................... 34
Also included:
Appendix B. Denmark ................................................................................................................35
Appendix C. United States ............................................................................................................59
Appendix D. Scotland.....................................................................................................................92
www.ncb.org.uk
page 2
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
1.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Introduction
We know from decades of research that poverty unfavourably affects children’s outcomes. Indeed,
a recent analysis using Northern Ireland (NI) data from the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS)
reported that poverty was significantly associated with a range of children’s outcomes at age five
years, including lower cognitive and foundation stage profile scores (Sullivan, Cara, Joshi, Ketende,
& Obolenskaya, 2010).
The NI child poverty strategy Improving children’s life chances (Northern Ireland Executive, 2011)
was published in March 2011. The strategy sets out the actions proposed by the Government to
address child poverty in fulfilment of its obligations under the Child Poverty Act 2010, which
provided a statutory basis for joined up action across the UK to reduce child poverty and eradicate
it by 2020.
Focusing on education, childcare, health, family support, housing, neighbourhoods, financial
support and parental employment and skills, the strategy identifies four priorities to reduce child
poverty in NI:
support more parents to be in work that ‘pays’
target financial support to be responsive to families’ situations
ensure that poverty does not thwart children’s life chances (via early interventions)
build environments that help children to thrive.
The NI Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) is currently developing a
delivery plan detailing the key initiatives and signature projects to progress these priorities. The
implementation plan must include measurable outcomes to ensure that actions ultimately have an
impact on child poverty levels – and the factors underlying child poverty.
In February 2012, the National Children’s Bureau NI (NCBNI) was appointed by OFMDFM to support
NI government departments to develop ‘child poverty outcomes models’.
Development of these outcome models first entails identifying the underlying factors associated
with child poverty (i.e. the circumstances and stressors that tend co-occur with or exacerbate
existing child poverty). In line with NI’s strategic priorities, these include parental unemployment
and inactivity; in-work poverty; lack of affordable and accessible childcare; low educational
attainment; poor health; and residence in deprived neighbourhoods or in substandard housing.
Second, the policies and programmes effective in alleviating child poverty directly (e.g. tax and
benefits system), but also indirectly affecting child poverty via their influence the above factors,
need to be identified. After identification, relevant government departments need to set aside
funding to continue, expand or implement these policies and programmes.
Finally, the outcomes models need to include a detailed measurement framework to assess
progress towards reducing child poverty and its underlying factors. This measurement framework
needs to define key indicators, identify data sources and establish a timetable for reporting.
As NI begins to develop their child poverty outcomes models, there is learning to be had from
examining the successful models and strategies used in other developed countries (and regions
within countries) to maintain relatively low child poverty rates in some countries, or to reduce ever
increasing rates in others. This rapid review pulls together evidence from three very different
countries on how each has conceptualised the problem of child poverty and how they have tried to
prevent or reduce it. The various strategies used are in line with the particular countries’ overall
www.ncb.org.uk
page 3
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
social policy practice and view towards people living in poverty. The countries were selected based
on their diversity to one another and the unique lessons each can bring to bear on NI.
The remainder of this paper briefly highlights some recent statistics on child poverty in NI, and then
outlines the key factors underlying child poverty. Subsequently, we summarise the three primary
policy responses aimed at reducing child poverty. Finally, we describe child poverty strategies in
Denmark, United States (focusing primarily on the State of Connecticut and the City of New York)
and Scotland, highlighting which of the policy responses is paramount in their strategy and some
key programmes included within the strategy. The paper concludes with lessons for NI.
Each of the full case studies is presented in Appendices B-D. Each case study includes a country
overview; demographic summary; child poverty statistics; details of the child poverty strategy (and
related strategies); summary of the key government departments; policies, programmes and
initiatives to achieve strategy objectives; and information on monitoring and evaluation.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 4
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
2.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Child poverty in Northern Ireland
In this section we provide a brief overview of some key statistics and trends in Northern Ireland (NI)
to provide some context for their child poverty strategy. We then take a closer look at the key
factors underlying child poverty.
2.1 Recent statistics and trends
According to a recent analysis, 21 per cent of NI children were living in poverty in 2010/11, down
from 27 per cent the previous year (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2012).1 These
rates are slightly higher than those for the UK as a whole – 17.5 per cent in 2010/11 (Cribb, Joyce, &
Phillips, 2012). Although the child poverty rates in NI and the UK as a whole declined in the past
year, a recent analysis suggests that this decline was due to a reduction in median income, which
subsequently reduced the relative poverty line, rather than real declines in child poverty (Cribb, et
al., 2012).
Unemployed and economically inactive families with children and families headed by lone parents
are more likely to live in poverty in NI than other families, which is similar to trends among
developed countries (Oxford Economics, in press). Unique to NI, Catholic households are more
likely to live in poverty than Protestant households.
Although the median hourly (full-time) wage in NI is £11 per hour, higher than estimated £9.39 per
hour (if both adults work full-time) needed to afford a minimum ‘acceptable’ standard of living in
the UK (Davis, Hirsch, Smith, Beckhelling, & Padley, 2012), there has been a 13 per cent increase in
low paid jobs in the past decade (i.e. less than £7.50 per hour) and the median part-time hourly
wage is £8 per hour (MacInnes, Aldridge, Parekh, & Kenway, 2012). Thus, tackling in-work poverty
is key goal for NI.
NI has seen increases in the number of women in employment, particularly part-time jobs over the
past decade (MacInnes, et al., 2012). Yet, there still remain strong disincentive for lone mothers to
work in jobs for less than 16 hours per week, as they do not qualify for tax credits and risk losing all
important housing benefit (Horgan & Monteith, 2009). Further, childcare in NI is scarce and very
expensive (Horgan & Monteith, 2009; McLaughlin & Monteith, 2006).
Finally, a higher proportion of NI residents claim benefits (e.g. Jobseeker’s Allowance, Incapacity
Benefit/Employment Support Allowance, Income Support) relative to the rest of the UK - 14.6 per
cent of Great Britain’s working-age population claim a key benefit vs. 22.7 per cent in NI (MacInnes,
et al., 2012). The recent and upcoming changes to the benefits system in the UK will likely have
large effects on NI – possibly even more so than for the UK as a whole. The benefit cap will have
serious implications for large families, of which NI has a sizable percentage.
Overall, then, NI has a higher child poverty rate (before housing costs) than the UK as a whole. They
also have some clear barriers to maternal employment, which is frequently viewed as a crucial
element of poverty reduction (for reviews see OECD, 2012; TARKI, 2010). In-work poverty is also an
issue, with NI, at least prior to the recession, seen as a ‘low wage economy’ (Horgan & Monteith,
2009).
1
Statistics based on standard relative poverty measure in the UK: the proportion of children living in a
household whose income is less than 60 per cent of the UK median household income before housing costs
(BHC).
www.ncb.org.uk
page 5
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Addressing child poverty requires a long-term and comprehensive solution. The solution requires
keeping a careful eye on some of the factors underlying child poverty, which is what we turn our
attention to below.
2.2 The factors underlying child poverty
Although there are country and regional differences, there is a core set of factors that underlie child
poverty in developed countries (Hoelscher, 2004; Horgan & Monteith, 2009; McLaughlin &
Monteith, 2006; OECD, 2012; Social Protection Committee, 2012; TARKI, 2010). These are the
various circumstances and stressors experienced by children or their family members that tend to
co-occur with or exacerbate existing child poverty. The factors include:
unemployment and economic inactivity
in-work poverty
lone parenthood
low parental educational attainment
teenage parenthood
lack of affordable and accessible childcare
lack of qualifications among young people
poor health
problem behaviour
abuse and neglect
residence in deprived neighbourhoods or in substandard housing.
Joblessness is the most important cause of family poverty in developed countries: the incidence of
poverty is six times higher among workless families than families with someone in employment
(OECD, 2012). In NI, 31 per cent of the working-age population is not in paid work – higher than any
UK region (Horgan & Monteith, 2009).
In addition to the factors listed above, analyses of factors specific to NI include (Horgan &
Monteith, 2009; McLaughlin & Monteith, 2006):
disincentives in the benefits system to part-time work for mothers
high prices for food, fuel and travel given benefit and tax credit income levels
limited public transportation system hampering access to employment
high rates of disability and limiting long-term illness.
When thinking about these factors, it is important to note that they may be causes (i.e. the factors
come before poverty), correlates (i.e. the factors co-occur with poverty) or effects (i.e. the factors
come after poverty). It is generally not helpful only to frame these factors only as ‘causes’ of
poverty, insinuating that by reducing, say, lone parenthood, child poverty rates would subsequently
reduce. While lone parenthood may make individuals particularly vulnerable to poverty (i.e. due to
high unemployment and low educational attainment), it also could be that poverty undermines
people’s marriage prospects. Further, the strong link between poverty and family structure may
due to an outside factor that drives both likelihood of marrying and the likelihood being in poverty,
such as poor health.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 6
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
It seems more helpful to think about these factors in so far as they help to frame the policy
responses to reducing child poverty. An effective child poverty strategy needs to demonstrate an
understanding of the various economic, social and demographic factors related to child poverty and
what policies and programmes can influence these factors.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 7
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
3.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Policy responses to child poverty
Taxes and transfers have an important role in influencing poverty rates. Yet, while recognising the
importance of taxes and transfers in ‘levelling the playing field’, raising employment rates and
wages is the only long-term solution to reducing child poverty directly (i.e. not via one of the
underlying factors) (Hoelscher, 2004; OECD, 2012). Several analyses have found that the countries
with the lowest child poverty rates worldwide are those defined by high labour market
participation of parents (particularly mothers), low in-work poverty and effective income support
policies (Hoelscher, 2004; Social Protection Committee, 2012; TARKI, 2010). This is the common
approach in the Scandinavian countries, of which our Denmark case study is an example. These
countries combine generous universal benefits, active employment policies, and widely available
and accessible free or low-cost childcare and service provision.
A principal goal of child poverty strategies is to break the link between families’ poor resources and
adverse child outcomes (Williams Shanks & Danziger, 2011). Anti-poverty policies and programmes
should thus provide material support to parents, which indirectly affect their children, as well as
resources and opportunities directly to children.
Though countries have their own views and perceptions of child poverty and social exclusion, by
and large, there are three types of public policies that aim to tackle child poverty directly – or
indirectly via impacts on some of the factors underlying child poverty (Hoelscher, 2004; Ryan,
Fauth, & Brooks-Gunn, 2012). These will provide the framework for the remaining sections of the
report, and each is described below.
The first type of policies are those that aim to increase families’ financial resources through
employment, notably work that ‘pays’, and cash transfers. Particular policies and programmes may
focus on:
job creation
job training programmes
support of maternal employment
reduction of barriers to labour market
incentives to employers
work incentives (e.g. tax credits)
minimum wages
wage supplements
tax exemptions
cash assistance
benefits and allowances
unemployment insurance
child support enforcement
child asset development
debt reduction.
The second group of policies are those that aim to reduce families’ expenses including ‘in-kind’
benefits, such as:
childcare allowances
access to flexible and affordable childcare
housing allowances
access to subsidised housing
www.ncb.org.uk
page 8
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
food assistance
community and neighbourhood programmes
public transportation
public health insurance
disability benefits
rehabilitation services.
The final group of policies are those that promote child well-being and early intervention and
prevention including:
child protection services
specialist services and support
high-quality education
positive activities.
The first programme types aims increase families’ economic resources, while the third aims to
alleviate (or prevent altogether) the impact of poverty (or the factors underlying child poverty) on
children’s and families’ outcomes. The second group is somewhere in the middle, as the free or
affordable nature of such services help families’ financial resources, but the nature of the services
may also promote positive outcomes.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 9
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
4.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Child poverty outcome models and strategies
As Northern Ireland (NI) begins to examine in detail how it will implement its child poverty strategy,
including selecting the key policies and programmes to increase families’ resources and reduce
their expenses and promote their well-being, as well as establishing a measurement framework
that will enable NI to assess the effectiveness of these principal policies and programmes on
poverty rates and the factors underlying poverty, it is useful to explore what other countries – in
both similar and dissimilar circumstances – have approached these decisions.
Denmark provides an example of how policy can help to maintain historic low poverty rates. In
particular, Denmark’s focus on enabling parents to effectively balance work and family life is an
exemplar to NI. The US case studies in the State of Connecticut and New York City are useful
because of the strong American tradition of monitoring and evaluation at the heart of social policy,
as well as their focus on prevention and intervention, rather than on tax and benefits policy. Finally,
we look to Scotland to provide a UK counterpoint to NI to explore how Scotland has managed its
devolved powers vis-à-vis their child poverty strategy (including where they align themselves with
wider UK policies and programmes).
We provide a summary of each case study below. The full case studies are available in Appendices
B-D.
4.1 Denmark
The child poverty rate in Denmark is frequently cited as one of the lowest among OECD countries,
although the rate has begun to rise.
According to the most recent UNICEF report, which defined poverty as the percentage of
children living in households with equivalent income lower than 50 per cent of the national
median, the child poverty rate in Denmark is 6.5 per cent (UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre,
2012).
The relatively low child poverty rates in Denmark are considered to be a result of a combination of
three main factors:
high labour-market participation of parents: Nearly three-quarters (73 per cent) of the adult
population in Denmark is in work (vs. OECD average of 64 per cent).2 Most children live in
households where both parents are in full-time employment. High labour market
participation is facilitated by the wide availability of free or low-cost childcare, high child and
family benefits and comparatively generous maternity benefits and parental leave.
low in-work poverty: In-work poverty is minimal and is generally not perceived to be a
problem in Denmark (Christiansen & Nielsen, 2010), although rates are rising. The share of
workers earning less than two-thirds of median earnings has increased from 8.8 per cent in
2000 to 13.4 per cent in 2010, but the incidence of low pay still compares favourably with the
OECD average of 16.3 per cent.
effective income support: The at-risk-of-poverty rate in jobless households is relatively high
(49 per cent), but a disproportionate share of social transfers goes to children in these
households (almost four times the share of all children) (TARKI, 2010).
2
OECD Employment Outlook 2011 http://www.oecd.org/els/oecdemploymentoutlook2011.htm
www.ncb.org.uk
page 10
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Not surprisingly, Denmark’s public expenditure on labour market policies is high: active measures
(e.g. training, job creation) are 1.9 per cent of GDP in 2011 (relative to OECD average of 0.7 per
cent) and passive measures (e.g. income support, early retirement) are 1.6 per cent of GDP (relative
to OECD average of 1 per cent).3
4.1.1 Background
Denmark is a relatively (by UK standards) non-diverse country. Of its population of 5.5 million, 90
per cent are of Danish descent.
Responsibility for welfare tasks is divided between various ministries, and there is strong devolution
in Denmark to its five regions and nearly 100 local authority areas. The five regions are responsible
for ensuring the quality of the Danish Healthcare System and specialised social services, and the
regional development of education and employment, among other areas.4
Local authorities carry out a considerable number of welfare tasks, including assessing the need for
social services and ensuring that public welfare services are organised with respect for individual
circumstances and needs and the interests of local conditions.
4.1.2 Child poverty strategy
While Denmark does not have a child poverty strategy per se (given historical low child poverty
rates), they are an exemplar for their focus on active labour market policies and universal family
support, which enable work and family life to be complementary rather than conflicting. It is these
policies we focus on below, drawing on relevant national strategies that aim to re-establish
progress in the Danish economy and foster an educated and inclusive society.
4.1.2.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
The secret to Denmark’s high employment rates is flexicurity, the important mix of active
employment policy, a flexible labour market and social security. The model is based on the
assumption that public interventions are necessary to ensure adaptability among both employers
and employees.
Active labour market policy (ALMP): includes guidance, training and education to unemployed (or
employed) adults, who are expected to look actively for work or participate in programmes that
promote their job prospects – the so-called ‘mutual obligations’ or ’right and duty’ approach.
Flexible labour market: includes flexible rules for hiring and dismissing employees. In 2012, the
Government introduced initiatives to promote employment and labour supply (by 5,000 people in
2020) and help ensure that the vast majority of people who become unemployed quickly find a new
job (The Danish Government, 2012a). These include changes to the flex-job scheme for those with
permanently reduced working ability as an alternative to disability pension. The largest subsidies
are now paid to unemployed people on the lowest wages and with the least working capacity.
Rehabilitation teams have been introduced in local authority areas to deliver holistic and
individualised support to vulnerable people under the age of 40 and support them to stay in work
rather than receive disability pension.
3
http://www.oecd.org/els/employmentpoliciesanddata/howdoesyourcountrycompare-denmark.htm
http://www.regioner.dk/In+English/Publications+and+Policy+Papers/~/media/Filer/Om%20regionerne/Regi
onerne%20-%20kort%20fortalt%202011%20-%20engelsk.ashx
4
www.ncb.org.uk
page 11
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Social security: includes a range of universal and targeted benefits, such as:
social assistance and starting allowance: This family-based benefit is offered when an adult
person is temporarily without sufficient means to meet their needs.
unemployment insurance: Eligible individuals must be out of work, have registered with a
public employment service (Jobcenter), be actively looking for work and be available for the
labour market.
family allowance: This allowance is given to all families with children under the age of 18. On
1 January 2011 this amounted to €2,281 (0-2 years), €1,806 (3-6 years) and €1,421 (7-17
years) annually per child.
child allowance: Ordinary child allowance is payable to lone parents and to parents who both
receive a pension under the Social Pensions Act.
cash benefits and parental leave: Parents are entitled to 52 weeks of maternity benefits.
During the first 14 weeks, normally only the mother may receive the benefits. During this
period, the father is entitled to paternity leave with daily cash benefits for two weeks.
Parents may decide for themselves how they will distribute the remaining 32 weeks. During
parental leave, an amount equivalent to 60 per cent of the unemployment benefit is payable.
reduced taxes: Tax on earned income was reduced in 2004, in 2007 and in 2010 in
connection with a comprehensive reform of taxes that abolished the middle-bracket tax for
all tax payers, reduced the number of people paying top-bracket tax, and introduced a
special earned-income tax credit for those in employment.
Family policy in Denmark aims to support families to improve work-life balance and outcomes
through the range of benefits described above in conjunction with extensive leave rights, universal
childcare and flexible working hours.
4.1.2.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Childcare: All children older than six months of age can take up a full-time place at a publicly
supported childcare facility until they reach school age (The Ministry of Social Affairs and
Integration, 2011). There is large take-up of childcare: 70 per cent of children from birth to two
years (91 per cent of children between 1-2 years) and 97 per cent of all children between 3-5 years
attend childcare. Parents pay a maximum of 25 per cent of the budgeted gross operating
expenditure for childcare services. Fees are relative to income so lower income families pay at a
reduced rate or receive services free of charge.
Recent legislation has promoted a stronger focus on education in the early years, with an agreed
curriculum that supports children’s language development and socialisation. Most childcare
facilities have managed to implement the curricula, with largely positive results (Ministry of Social
Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention, 2008). Approximately 70 per cent of staff are
pedagogues5, though not all are qualified.
Housing: Housing benefit is normally granted as rent allowance to pensioner households or as rent
subsidies to people in active employment, and social housing is available for unemployed
households and lone parent households. While high levels of Government investment and public
expenditure on housing have created good housing stock, there are problems associated with poor
quality in older areas of private renting and 1960s multi-storey housing estates. The Government is
5
Pedagogues have a very broad qualification and are employed in childcare services, in centres for people
with physical disabilities and services for older people, although most work in early childhood education and
care.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 12
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
now trying to improve the physical infrastructure and social mix in these areas, to support tenants
who are at risk of eviction and reduce the number of homeless people.
4.1.2.3 Policies to promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
Many services and support for children and families is universal in Denmark, although some
targeted initiatives do exist, and more are planned. We review some of the key features below,
noting their active focus on prevention rather than intervention.
Generic early intervention policies: The following policies are integral to everyday practice in
Denmark:
Local authorities have a statutory requirement to formulate child policies linking general and
preventative work with targeted initiatives. For example, from 2012 primary and lower
secondary schools are required to strengthen the inclusion of all pupils with special
educational needs. Concurrently, local authorities have been given greater freedom and
responsibility to offer learning and pastoral support to children they identify as being most in
need.
Early identification of socially disadvantaged children is imperative to ensure support begins
as early as possible.
Contact with health visitors starts immediately after birth.
Transition interviews from health visitor to childcare centre and from childcare to school
offer opportunities for information sharing, advice and guidance. Guidance at key transition
points is also central to youth education policy and practice to support learner choice,
retention and achievement and completion rates.
Education as the foundation for child and family well-being: The Government places great emphasis
on improving children’s experiences of education and enhancing educational outcomes. The most
relevant education programmes and activities from early years up to lower secondary education6
are summarised here:
a ‘reading pledge’ to ensure that all children are able to read well before they leave primary
education
language assessment of all three-year-olds
compulsory language stimulation for bilingual children
supplementary training courses for early childhood educators on socially disadvantaged
children in daycare facilities
Book Start programme
action plan for reading
a 360 degree examination of primary and lower secondary school to raise standards across
the board
a number of initiatives initiated in recent years to strengthen the transition from primary and
lower secondary schools to upper secondary schools.
According to new rules introduced in 2009, education is the first priority for unemployed young
people who do not have a qualifying education (The Danish Government, 2009). To ensure that the
Government meets its target to increase the number of young people completing an upper
6
Primary school is the first stage of primary education for children, targeting those aged 7-13 years. Lower
secondary school is the second stage of primary education for children, targeting those aged 13-17 years.
Upper secondary education normally caters to 16-19-year-olds and includes general education to qualify for
access to higher education and vocational or technical education to qualify for access to the labour market.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 13
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
secondary education, an inter-ministerial committee has been established to identify evidencedbased and cost effective initiatives. The work of the committee builds the Government’s efforts in
recent years including:
strengthening vocationally orientated youth education programmes
increasing the number of practical training placements
differentiation by ability
introducing individualised action plans and mentor schemes (particularly to support
transition)
improving early information, advice and guidance
enhancing social and psychological support services
in-service training for teachers
improving data collection and monitoring
introducing class size limits of 28 students in general upper secondary education.
Supporting parents is one of the Government’s key actions in its national strategy for 2020. Below
are some parenting programmes, which have been funded on solid evidence of success in the US
and Australia (Olesen, 2011):
Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY; HIPP HOPP in Denmark): a
parenting programme aimed at improving school readiness for children between the age of
3-6 years
Ready for Children: a programme to prevent harsh parenting
Parent Management Training the Oregon model (PMTO): a parenting programme that offers
one-to-one counselling to parents of children 4-12 years with severe behaviour difficulties
The Incredible Years (IY): a series of programmes designed to help children with severe
behaviour difficulties
Multi Systemic Therapy (MST): a parenting programme for parents of adolescents 12-17
years displaying severe behaviour difficulties and criminal behaviour
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC): a treatment programme for adolescents
12-17 years displaying severe behaviour difficulties and criminal behaviour, who needs a
temporary out of home placement
Also following the introduction of the Parental Responsibility Act in 2006, a wide range of initiatives
has been introduced to tackle parents’ ability to support their children, for example, with school
attendance. These include family treatment units for parents with drug and alcohol misuse
problems, and homework cafes.
Targeted initiatives: Each year (via the Rate Adjustment Pool7) considerable funds are earmarked
for the most vulnerable groups in society. For example, a total of DKK 5.3 billion8 has been set aside
in the period 2009-2013 for initiatives targeted at substance abusers, sex workers, the homeless
and people with mental health problems, as well as vulnerable children and young people. These
include initiatives designed to improve educational standards and achieve greater ‘open
mindedness’ in schools for the following groups:
children who experience academic problems (e.g. with learning difficulties)
pupils with social problems (such as loneliness, bullying and behavioural difficulties)
7
The pool comprises transfer payments to fund social, health and labour market policies to help benefit
claimants and vulnerable groups. The size of the rate adjustment percentage is determined annually based on
salary trends in the labour market.
8
One Danish krone (DKK) equals approximately .11 GBP.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 14
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
absent pupils
children in care.
Support methods include peer-to-peer counselling and adult friends for children, a form of
mentoring support.
A prevention strategy is currently in development in response to the global economic crisis, rising
poverty and social inequalities. It will extend efforts to strengthen provision for children and young
people at risk of deprivation in daycare, schools and leisure activities. New initiatives will aim to
share best practice, improve guidance on transition for local authorities and develop better links
with health services. There will also be more targeted support for families with school age children,
children who have been in contact with the youth justice system and children with behavioural
difficulties via the establishment of local action teams, more support and better education.
4.1.3 Measurement, monitoring and evaluation
Denmark does not currently have an official definition of poverty or a poverty line; typically both 50
and 60 per cent of the median are used for international comparisons (European Commission
Employment Social Affairs and Inclusion DG, 2010).
In light of growing economic pressures, the Danish Government has introduced a social policy
objective to reduce poverty and ensure equal opportunities for all (The Danish Government,
2012b). An expert committee has been set up to analyse various methods to calculate poverty and
prepare suggestions for an official poverty line. The committee is tasked with:
identifying definitions of poverty in other countries
analysing and evaluating the relevant criteria to calculate poverty in Denmark
developing proposals for the methods and data that can form the basis of a Danish poverty
line
identifying and highlighting the factors underlying poverty and the policies and programmes
that can bring people out of poverty.
Now in development, poverty indicators will be created to identify poor families, with particular
focus on children living in poverty and people who live in long-term poverty (Regeringen, 2011).
Expected to be published in 2013, probable indicators include (The Danish Government, 2010):
low income
housing situation
education level
employment opportunities
health situation.
4.1.4 Messages for NI
give greater flexibility to local authorities to respond to local needs and help mobilise and
involve everyone in society
work together
combine universal provision (make it the norm not the exception) with targeted efforts for
specific vulnerable groups - old adage that prevention is better than cure
make work pay for parents by tackling disincentives to work and in-work poverty
integrate information, advice and guidance to support individual choices and transitions
between education, employment and unemployment
adapt and respond to socio-economic changes at national, regional and local levels.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 15
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
4.2 United States – focus on State of Connecticut and New York
City
In order to understand the wider context in which social policy at the state- (Connecticut) and citylevel (New York City) operate, it useful to have some background of federal social policy in the
United States (US).
Social policy in the US is exemplified by its focus on individual responsibility and employment-based
policies. Shying away from universal benefits, most benefits are stringently means-tested (i.e. have
very strict eligibility criteria), targeting poor families. Although many anti-poverty programmes are
federal in scope, they are administered by states, which often set eligbility criteria and decide how
to allocate federal funding. Thus, it is very difficult to talk about a US-wide child poverty strategy, as
such.
According to many estimates (Hoelscher, 2004; OECD, 2012; UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre,
2012), the child poverty rate in the US is highest among OECD countries (although rates vary
considerably from state to state).
The most recent UNICEF report, using the percentage of children living in households with
equivalent income lower than 50 per cent of the national median to assess poverty, puts the
US child poverty rate as 23.1 per cent (UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2012).
The official poverty measure in the US is an absolute threshold, based on expected food
expenditures for families of varying sizes and adjusted annually for the Consumer Price Index cost
of living. The federal poverty level (FPL) for a family of three in 2011 was $18,530.9
According to the official estimates, 22 per cent of children under 18 years were in poverty in 2010
(DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2011). Black and Hispanic children are considerably more likely
than White families to live in poverty, as are children living in single parent families, children whose
parents have less than a high school degree and children who reside with parents who do not work.
Child poverty rates are lowest in the Northeast region of the US, the location of our two US case
studies.
Based on criticisms of the poverty threshold, a supplemental poverty measure (SPM) has been
created (see Appendix C for more information). In 2010, the child poverty rate using the SPM was
18.2 per cent (Short, 2011).
Given the high child poverty rates in the US, the most notable social programmes often focus on
prevention and intervention – to help improve outcomes for children and families at-risk, or to
minimise poor outcomes. Monitoring and evaluation is often at the centre of social programmes,
with government funding (whether federal, at the state-level or local), typically available only for
social programmes with solid evidence of success. The use of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or
other rigorous research is the gold standard.
9
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/figures-fed-reg.shtml. One USD ($) is approximately .63 GBP.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 16
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
4.2.1 Background – Connecticut
Although it has the second lowest child poverty rate in the nation, Connecticut was the first state in
the US to enact a law setting a poverty target.
Using the official FPL, the child poverty rate in CT in 2010 was 12.8 per cent (relative to 22 per cent
across the US), and 26.8 per cent of children were living at or below 200 per cent of the FPL. This
second measure roughly corresponds to the income necessary for a family to meet basic needs in
Connecticut.
More than three-quarters of the state’s residents are White (77.6 per cent), with 10.1 per cent
Black or African American and 13.4 per cent Hispanic. Connecticut ranks first in the US for per
capita income, although there is a great disparity in incomes throughout the state. Connecticut
ranks second (lowest) among states in income inequality.
4.2.2 Child poverty strategy – Connecticut
In 2004, Connecticut became the first state in the US to enact a law setting a poverty target,
bringing together disparate state agencies together to work toward a common goal (Foley, 2012;
State of Connecticut, 2011). The poverty target is managed by the Child Poverty and Prevention
Council, whose purpose is to:
develop and promote the implementation of a 10-year plan to reduce the number of children
living in poverty in Connecticut by 50 per cent (by 2014)
establish prevention goals and recommendations and measure prevention service outcomes
to promote the health and well-being of children and families.
The council reports annually on progress toward the goal of cutting child poverty in half, as well as
on poverty and prevention reports from state agencies with membership on the Council (see
Appendix C for a summary of each agency’s aims, key programmes, outcomes and monitoring
arrangements).
Below is a brief summary of some of the state’s actions in 2011 to address child poverty and
promote children’s well-being.
4.2.2.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
State Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC): In 2011, Connecticut began offering a state EITC. This fully
refundable credit provides a benefit of up to approximately $1,700 annually to approximately
190,000 low-income working families.
Job Creation: A recent public act promoting economic growth and job creation in the state
established new and existing business assistance, economic and workforce development, and job
training programmes, and another created the Connecticut Bioscience Collaboration programme to
support establishment of a bioscience cluster, which will enable nearly 7,000 permanent jobs.
4.2.2.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Contingency Funding: Connecticut received $32.4
million in new federal funds to provide short-term emergency room services to families, subsidised
employment opportunities to individuals, baby supplies, school supplies, support services to assist
families to remain in their homes and summer camp opportunities for children.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 17
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Supportive and Affordable Housing: Across the state, 150 new units of supportive housing were
developed, providing permanent, affordable housing matched with support services for families
and individuals at risk of homelessness. The state budget included $100 million for housing
development and rehabilitation projects to increase the availability of affordable housing options
for low-income families.
Federal Emergency Homeowners Loan Program (FEHLP) and Emergency Mortgage Assistance
Program (EMAP): The Connecticut Housing Finance Authority (CHFA) approved a total of 1,070
assistance loans to homeowners and 280 loans to homeowners facing foreclosure.
4.2.2.3 Policies to promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
Early Childhood System: A coordinated early childhood system in Connecticut was created in 2011.
Academic Achievement Gap: The Achievement Gap Task Force was created to consider effective
approaches to closing the achievement gaps in elementary, middle and high schools and develop a
master plan to eliminate gaps.
Board of Regents for Higher Education: This Board was created to improve coordination, expand
transparency and streamline administrative structures across the state’s HE system.
4.2.2.4 New programmes and initiatives
In 2009, the state contracted the Urban Institute to provide an economic analysis of which
strategies would reduce child poverty in Connecticut most significantly, using a model that
simulates the effects of different programme rules on families’ incomes and poverty. The analysis
identified three recommendations:
1. increase enrolment in subsidised housing, energy assistance and nutrition assistance
2. increase attainment of Associates Degrees10
3. guarantee child care subsidies.
The analysis estimated that if these recommendations were instated, reductions in poverty would
range from 10 per cent to 29 per cent (using various poverty measures). Based on this quantitative
analysis and further discussion, the Council’s recommendations for action in 2012 are:
1. Reduce homelessness:
increase Rental Assistance Program certificates (RAPs) available to families with children
re-open the Security Deposit Guarantee Program
continue to implement supportive housing for families with children.
2. Enhance Early Childhood Education
allow low-income parents up to 75 per cent of the state median income (instead of the
current 50 per cent) to enroll in Care4Kids, the programme that provides child care
assistance to low- to moderate-income families
create a ‘bridge’ programme to cover Care4Kids costs for providers between the time an
application is submitted and approved.
10
In the US, an associate degree is equivalent to the first two years of a four-year college or university degree.
They are typically obtained at community and junior colleges.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 18
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
3. Post-secondary education
expand Western Connecticut State University’s Bridges programme to all community
colleges, in which professors work with students, administrators and teachers in priority
school districts to reduce the need for remedial education
collect and distribute data on a biennial basis to inform all public school districts of remedial
education needs and six-year college graduation rates
expand financial aid strategies to cover cost of living expenses.
4. Enhance access to supplemental nutrition program
increase enrolment for federal energy and nutrition assistance programmes including
streamlining applications, improving access to offices, increasing efficiency of application
processing, enhancing outreach and creating ‘one-stop shopping’.
Other key recommendations include:
continue to promote use of federal and state EITC
enforce existing truancy laws and support efforts to address truancy to help lessen youth
dropout rates
enhance General Educational Development (GED)11 and literacy programmes for TANF
participants including piloting ways of expediting attainment of high school diplomas or GEDs
or supplementing income for parents who move from welfare to work
provide support for young mothers on TANF including developing programmes of support for
pregnant and parenting teens.
11
GED tests are a group of tests assessing high school-level academic skills. They are often taken by people
who no longer attend high school, but wish to receive a high school equivalency diploma.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 19
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
4.2.3 Measurement, monitoring and evaluation – Connecticut
As summarised above, each state agency included in the prevention strategy also measures
outcomes related to their service. Table 4.1 below summarises some of the key outcomes for
Connecticut.
Table 4.1 Key outcomes aligned with child poverty strategy
FPL
Poverty
200 per cent FPL
Alternative poverty measure (similar to SPM)
Reduction in welfare dependence and increase in employment
Welfare and employment status
Reduction in in-work poverty
Increased take-up of state and federal EITC
Increased job-readiness
Increased enrolment in subsidised and supportive housing
In-kind benefits
Increased enrolment in nutrition assistance
Increased eligibility for child care subsidies
Reduction in child abuse and neglect
Family relationships
Reduction in placements away from home
Improved parent-child interactions and parenting skills
Improved developmental trajectories and achievement for all
children
Increased enrolment in preschool education
Child development and
achievement
Improved home learning environment
Increased achievement test scores
Increased high school graduation rates
Increased attainment of Associate’s Degrees
Substance use
Reduction in substance abuse rates
Reduction in retailer violations for underage sales
Increased pre-natal care
Reduction in low birthweight
Reduction in lead poisoning
Health
Increased breastfeeding initiation
Reduction in suicides
Increased infant and child immunisation
Increased healthy eating
Reduction teen pregnancy
Criminal justice
www.ncb.org.uk
Reduction in recidivism
Increased engagement in needs-based treatment
page 20
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
4.2.4 Background – New York City
In 2006, the New York City Mayor’s office established the Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO),
which designs and tests new anti-poverty initiatives in collaboration with city agencies.
New York City is the most populous city in the US, with an estimated 2011 population of 8,244,910
distributed over a land area of 305 square miles. It is also an extremely diverse city: in 2010, New
York City’s population was 33 per cent White, 26 per cent Black, 26 per cent Hispanic and 13 per
cent Asian. Approximately 36 per cent of the city's population is foreign-born.
Using the official FPL, the child poverty rate in NYC in 2010 was 29.5 per cent (relative to 22 per
cent across the US) (NYC Center for Economic Opportunity, 2012). Income inequality is greater in
New York City than any other metropolitan area in the US (New York State ranks highest among
states) (Bee, 2012).
4.2.5 Child poverty strategy – New York City
In 2006, Mayor Bloomberg established CEO to implement, trial and evaluate new, innovative and
promising anti-poverty programmes and initiatives in New York City. CEO manages an Innovation
Fund that provides city agencies funding to implement such initiatives.
CEO includes a rigourous monitoring and evaluation agenda to enable replication (and expansion)
of programmes that demonstrate impact and elimination of programmes that do not. When
initiatives show positive results, they move from pilot status to permanent programmes, the latter
of which are housed at city agencies that subsequently hold funding and decision-making authority.
To date, CEO has funded and tested over 50 programmes. Some successful and promising CEO
programmes relevant to children or families with children are summarised below.
4.2.5.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (CUNY ASAP): This programme aims to increase
community college graduation rates by removing barriers to graduation by offering participating
students a prescribed course to degree completion and a variety of academic and financial
supports, including advisement and tutoring, tuition waivers, free textbooks and public transport
cards.
Financial Empowerment Centers: These centres offer free one-on-one professional financial
counselling at community-based organisations and mobile sites. Financial Empowerment Centers
served more 13,500 clients during the first three years and helped residents to pay off more than
$4.2 million in debt.
$aveNYC: The programme enables eligible low-income tax filers to use a portion of their EITC to
build savings by earning a 50 per cent matched contribution for maintaining the account balance
for one year. At the end of the first year pilot, 76 per cent of participants earned their matched
funds, saving an average of $624 (New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, 2009).
Nursing Career Ladder: This initiative prepares low-income individuals for careers in nursing,
offering programme enrolees full tuition and support services to obtain their professional licenses Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) or Registered Nurse/Bachelor of Science in Nursing (RN/BSN). Once
they complete the programme, participants are placed local hospitals or health care facilities.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 21
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Opportunity NYC-Family Rewards: This family-focused flagship programme offered rewards for
activities related to educational effort and achievement, preventive health care, and employment
and training. Preliminary results from the evaluation showed that the programme reduced poverty
and improved a number of child outcomes, including rates of school attendance and grade
advancement, standardised test results, and preventive dental and health care.
4.2.5.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Child Care Tax Credit: The New York City Child Care Tax Credit provides eligible low-income families
with a refundable tax credit to help pay for child care expenses. When combined with the federal
and state child care tax credits, eligible families can receive over $6,100 annually to help offset the
cost of childcare.
4.2.5.3 Policies to promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
School-Based Health Centers: New School-Based Health Centers (SBHCs) were established at six
high-need high school campuses, providing a comprehensive range of free services including
primary care, acute care, health education, vaccinations and chronic disease management, and
offer a non-stigmatised environment for obtaining reproductive and mental health services.
Healthy Bodegas Initiative: This programme aims to promote healthy eating by increasing the
availability, quality and variety of healthy foods at food retailer located in targeted low-income
neighbourhoods.
Teen ACTION (Achieving Change Together In Our Neighborhood): This is an after-school programme
designed to help young people cultivate an ethic of service; develop life skills and critical thinking
skills; reduce risky behaviours that may result in teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases;
encourage use of health and mental health services; and promote commitment to academic
achievement.
4.2.5.4 Other programmes covering all policy areas
Jobs-Plus: This is a place-based comprehensive employment services programme for residents of
targeted New York City Housing Authority developments. The programme serves all working age
residents of a targeted housing development or cluster of developments using a three-part
strategy: (1) on-site access to employment-related services, (2) rent-based and other work
incentives that allow residents to keep more of their earnings, and (3) activities that promote
community support for work through neighbour-to-neighbour outreach.
Young Men’s Initiative (YMI): YMI is a multi-agency initiative comprised of over 30 programme and
policy initiatives in four key areas: education, employment, health and justice. This $43 million
annual public-private partnership funds the expansion of CEO programmes and a number of new
initiatives designed to improve outcomes for young men of colour.
Social Innovation Fund (SIF): The national SIF effort is funded by an annual grant of $5.7 million and
other matching funds that support the replication and rigorous evaluation of five programmes
across eight cities. The five programme models being replicated are:
Family Rewards targets families with high school aged children in Memphis, Tennessee and
New York City.
Jobs-Plus provides job and career support, community building and rent incentives to public
housing residents. Jobs-Plus is being offered in New York City and San Antonio, TX.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 22
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Project Rise offers education and paid internships to young adults who are out of school, out
of work and who lack a high school diploma or GED in Kansas City, MO, New York City and
Newark, NJ.
SaveUSA offers a matched savings account to low-income tax filers in New York City, Newark,
NJ, San Antonio, TX and Tulsa, OK.
WorkAdvance connects adults to career ladders in Cleveland, OH, New York City, Tulsa, OK
and Youngstown, OH.
4.2.6 Measurement, monitoring and evaluation – New York City
CEO created its own fit for purpose New York City poverty measure (comparable to the SPM) to
better reflect the cost of living and of work supports, and assist agency efforts to target
programmes to individuals in need. CEO issues annual reports updating the poverty measure and
poverty rate for New York City.
As summarised above, each CEO initiative is extensively monitored and evaluated, and programmes
that do not demonstrate successful outcomes are discontinued. Table 4.2 below summarises some
of the key outcomes for New York City CEO.
Table 4.2 Key outcomes aligned with CEO’s programmes
Poverty
FPL
CEO poverty measure (similar to SPM)
Increased employment
Employment and savings
Increased job training and job readiness
Increased take-up of EITC
Increased savings and asset building and decreased debt
In-kind benefits
Increased take-up of childcare tax credits
Increased educational outcomes and achievement
Education and attainment
Increased high school graduation rates
Increased community college graduation rates
Increased preventive health care
Increased healthy eating
Health
Reduction in young people’s risky behaviours
Reduction in teen pregnancy
Increased engagement in needs-based treatment
4.2.7 Messages for NI
high-quality monitoring and evaluation should be at the heart of anti-poverty strategies
set targets and outcomes
regularly measure performance against targets and outcomes
set up a group, agency or council responsible for organising child poverty strategy, setting
targets and holding agencies responsible for delivering their targets
understand the factors underlying poverty – in your country overall and in particular regions
don’t be afraid to innovate
continue successful programmes with demonstrable results and discontinue unsuccessful
ones
www.ncb.org.uk
page 23
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
create targeted programmes for specific vulnerable groups
work across agencies and departments.
4.3 Scotland
Child poverty more than doubled in the UK between 1979-1997 (TARKI, 2010), a growth attributed
to a steep rise in unemployment, changing demographics (including an increase in the number of
lone parent families) and welfare policy that reduced the real value of state benefits. By 1997, the
UK had the highest rate of child poverty in the EU.
Based on the proportion of children living in households with incomes less than 60 per cent of the
current median income (before housing costs), recent estimates put the UK child poverty rate at
17.5 per cent in 2010/11 (Cribb, et al., 2012).
The most recent UNICEF report, using the percentage of children living in households with
equivalent income lower than 50 per cent of the national median to assess poverty, puts the
UK child poverty rate as 12.1 per cent (UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2012).
In Scotland, the child poverty rate in 2010/11 was 17 per cent, which is slightly lower than the
overall UK figure (and NI) (National Statistics, 2012).
Scottish children of single and younger mothers were more likely to be living in poverty than other
children (Bradshaw, Martin, & Cunningham-Burley, 2008). Relative to other mothers, lone mothers
and young mothers were more likely to receive benefits, be unemployed or inactive, live in local
authority rental housing and live in areas of deprivation. Further, children from families with these
characteristics were also most likely to experience persistent poverty (i.e. experienced poverty in at
least three years of a four-year period) (Barnes, Chanfreau, & Tomaszewski, 2010).
4.3.1 Background
The Scottish Parliament was established in 1999 following devolution through the Scotland Act
(1998), which sets out policy responsibilities ‘reserved’ by the UK Government, including trade and
industry, social security and UK foreign policy and defence. Anything not explicitly laid out in the
Act is a devolved responsibility including health, education, home affairs, rural affairs, economic
development and some aspects of transport. Scotland currently remains part of the UK, though a
referendum on full independence is due in autumn 2014.
Scotland’s population was recently estimated at 5.2 million, and nearly 98 per cent of its population
is White.
Scotland, along with the rest of the UK, has experienced a recession. Although recent data indicates
a return to growth since 2009, it also shows a gap between economic development in Scotland and
the UK as a whole. For example, while GDP in Scotland in the second quarter of 2011 grew by 1.1
per cent, it grew by 1.5 per cent in the UK as a whole12. Unemployment in Scotland in 2011 stood at
7.7 per cent (slightly lower than the UK rate of 7.9 per cent). Women in Scotland have the highest
employment rate amongst all the UK nations.
12
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About/Performance/scotPerforms/purposes/economicgrowth
www.ncb.org.uk
page 24
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
At a local level, Scotland consists of 32 unitary authorities, represented by the Convention of
Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA). Since 2009, each local authority Community Planning
Partnership (CPP) is required to draw up a three-year Single Outcome Agreement (SOA), which
outlines the key strategic priorities for the area, the outcomes these should achieve, and how these
local outcomes would contribute to Scotland overall.
4.3.2 Child poverty strategy
The UK Child Poverty Act stipulates that the UK parliament publish an overarching child poverty
strategy every three years, and that devolved nations each produce a separate strategy taking in to
account devolved powers held. In line with these stipulations, the Scottish Child Poverty Strategy
was produced in 2011 (The Scottish Government, 2011),13 with the aims of increasing household
income and well-being and opportunities for children. Three principles underlying the strategy are:
prevention and early intervention, developing individual and community capacity for self-reliance,
and a child-centred approach to meeting need.
The strategy is clear in recognising that drivers exist at both UK and Scotland levels, but is explicit in
the view that Scotland would be better placed to tackle poverty if powers for tax and credits were
more or fully devolved.
Below we outline a number of policies, programmes and initiatives implemented by both the UK
and Scottish Governments, bearing in mind the reserved and devolved responsibilities of each
administration. In this summary, we focus primarily on Scottish policies and programmes.
4.3.2.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
Community Jobs Scotland: a job creation programme, in which the Government provided up to
£6,175 to third sector organisations to employ young people and provide training and support for
at least 25 hours per week for six months.
Scottish Living Wage: The campaign for ‘living wage’ rather than a ‘minimum wage’ 14 has been
adopted by the public sector to set a precedent to employees. The minimum wage is currently
defined as £7.20 per hour, based on rigorous modelling by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation to
determine the minimum income required to achieve a ‘decent’ standard of living (for most recent
report see Davis, et al., 2012).
More Choices More Chances (MCMC): is the overall Scottish strategy for young people not in
education, employment or training (NEET) from 2006, which includes developing flexible and varied
learning opportunities and information for young people (with young people in and leaving care
and young offenders specifically referenced), and working with Jobcentre Plus to ensure support
and information for young people.
16+ Choices: part of MCMC was rolled out across Scotland in 2010 following an initial
implementation phase in 2008. The model proposes that every young person has a 16+ learning
offer made to them. This requires local partners to work together to develop appropriate learning
13
The child poverty strategy is linked to, and builds upon, a number of policies that have been developed
since devolution including the Early Years Framework, the Equally Well Framework and the Achieving our
Potential Framework. Details of these and other relevant strategies can be found in the full case study in
Appendix D.
14
The minimum wage was introduced for the UK by the Labour government in 1997.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 25
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
provision, effective advice and guidance, and the financial support in place to remove barriers to
continuing education.
Activity agreements (piloted 2009- 2011): an intense and targeted programme to engage young
people at risk of NEET in learning or other activities that help them to become ready for formal
learning or employment.
4.3.2.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Funded childcare places: Currently, local authorities are required to provide funded childcare places
for 3-4-year-olds, up to a maximum of 12 hours per week (475 hours per year). The Children and
Young People’s Bill currently in development proposes that this be extended to 15 hours per week
(600 hours per year) and offered to looked-after two-year-olds.
Childcare Vouchers: Some employers provide childcare vouchers (in return for some tax and
national insurance exemptions). The Scottish Government has promoted their use across all
employment sectors.
Free school meals: Free school meals are now available to school children in Scotland of any age
whose family meets certain income criteria (e.g. they are in receipt of income support, Job Seekers
Allowance and maximum child and working tax credits). Further, free school meals are now
available to all children aged 5-7 years (Key Stage 1 in England).
Free higher education: In February 2008, the Graduate Endowment Abolition Bill was passed in the
Scottish Parliament, removing all tuition fees for Scottish students studying in Scottish universities
(prior to this partial payment of fees was deferred until a graduate’s income hit a certain
threshold).
Free prescriptions: In April 2011, Scotland introduced new regulations that removed the £7.40 fee
for Scottish prescriptions.
Energy assistance package (fuel poverty): The scheme, set up by the Scottish Government and
delivered by the Energy Saving Trust in Scotland, provides a free energy check for anyone who
requests it. Further, the scheme can provide eligible parties (generally those in receipt of particular
benefits) with free or subsided home insulation or heating systems to minimise fuel bills and ensure
maximum household fuel efficiency.
4.3.2.3 Policies to promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
Sure Start: Sure Start was introduced in Scotland in 1999 with four key objectives: (1) improve
children’s social and emotional development; (2) improve children’s health; (3) improve children’s
ability to learn; and (4) strengthen families and communities. Local authorities subsequently
developed a range of centre-based and mobile Sure Start provisions. A mapping exercise in 2002
was positive in terms of take-up of services. There were also reports of positive impact, though
little of this was evidenced. More recently, the Scottish Government has stated it will focus more
on the Early Years Framework placing greater emphasis on effective early intervention, strong
universal services and parenting (a strategy for the latter is currently in development).
Family Nurse Partnership: this parenting programme targets young, vulnerable first time mothers,
providing intensive support from early pregnancy until the child reaches two years with the aim of
breaking the cycle of poverty and poor outcomes. The programme has currently been piloted in
two Scottish NHS health boroughs.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 26
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
4.3.3 Measurement, monitoring and evaluation
The overall ‘purpose’ of the Scottish Government is to “focus government and public services on
creating a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through
increasing sustainable economic growth.” This purpose is underpinned by a 10 year (2007-2017)
outcomes-focused framework that incorporates five key strategic objectives for Scotland to be:
wealthier and fairer, healthier, safer and stronger, smarter, and greener. Eight high level ‘targets’
sit beneath these objectives to:
improve Scotland’s economic growth
improve productivity
improve economic participation
increase population growth
increase healthy life expectancy
reduce income inequality
reduce inequalities in economic participation
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
A further set of 16 national outcomes and 50 national indicators sit beneath these objectives. The
four indicators identified as specifically linking to child poverty are:
reduce the proportion of individuals living in poverty
reduce children’s deprivation
increase the proportion of babies with a healthy birth weight
increase the proportion of young people in learning, training or work.
Progress towards achieving these outcomes is measured independently and communicated publicly
through the ‘Scotland Performs’ website.15 This is a continually updated accessible resource that
illustrates key indicator data and direction of travel in relation to target and indicator baseline
measures.
In addition to these national targets and indicators, an annual report on progress on the child
poverty strategy is produced, the first of which was published in March 2012 and describes a range
of programmes underway. The strategy itself will be refreshed every three years.
15
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About/Performance/scotPerforms/glanceperformance
www.ncb.org.uk
page 27
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Recent data on the child poverty indicators from the ‘Scotland Performs’ website16 indicated:
Table 4.3 Scottish National Indicators incorporated in the Child Poverty Strategy
Distance of travel since
2010/ 11
NI 12: Increase the proportion of young people in learning, training or work
(data from the School Leavers Destination Survey; baseline 07/08)
Performance improving
NI 16: Increase the proportion of babies with a healthy birth weight (data from
the Scottish Morbidity Record; baseline not clarified)
Performance maintained
NI 35: Reduce the proportion of individuals living in poverty (data from the
Family Resources Survey; baseline 99/10)
Performance improving
NI 36: Reduce children’s deprivation (data from the Family Resources Survey;
baseline 04/05)
Performance maintained
4.3.4 Messages for NI
‘rights’ and ‘equalities’ based approach to child poverty and children’s services
acknowledge the interlinked nature of factors that underlie child poverty
focus policies on removing barriers to achieving equality and well-being, in addition to
increasing income
develop policies and strategies that are interlinked, promote joint accountability and focus
on equality of opportunity
develop systematic mechanisms for measuring progress
have a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities held by both the UK and Scottish
administrations
acknowledge the tension between balancing requirements to provide a ‘safety net’ for nonworking individuals and families, while also incentivising and rewarding work.
16
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About/Performance/scotPerforms/performance, accessed 05/09/12
www.ncb.org.uk
page 28
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
5.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Lessons for Northern Ireland
The UK Government’s recent child poverty reports (Department for Work and Pensions &
Department for Education, 2011, 2012) have specifically articulated the view that while family
income is a crucial factor in children’s lives, so too are what the Government views as poverty’s
‘root causes’ including worklessness, low educational attainment, poor health and high levels of
debt.
Although Northern Ireland (NI) may frame these factors different than ‘root causes’, they are
important factors underlying child poverty. Indeed, raising employment rates and wages, including
raising female employment rates in particular, are the keys to alleviating child poverty in the longterm (OECD, 2012). Generous maternity benefits, universal child benefits, and accessible and
affordable childcare do much to encourage maternal employment.
Based on information from the case studies, some of the key learning points for NI going forward
include:
 NI needs to demonstrate an understanding of the various economic, social and
demographic factors that underlie child poverty – in NI overall and in particular regions –
and think about what policies and programmes can influence these factors.
 NI needs a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities held by both the UK and NI
administrations.
 The child poverty strategy should encourage work across government departments and
agencies when it makes sense, but also ensure that responsibility is not diluted. NI may
want to think about setting up a group, agency or council responsible for organising the
child poverty strategy, setting targets and holding agencies responsible for delivering their
targets.
 When developing policies, programmes and initiatives, NI should maintain an appropriate
balance between (and consider the cost effectiveness of) universal policies aimed at
preventing poverty and promoting the well-being of all children, on the one hand, and
targeted approaches aimed at combating poverty among vulnerable children, on the other
hand.
 NI needs to think about their criteria for targeting: should targeted approaches be aimed at
the most vulnerable children, or should they also include slightly less vulnerable children to
prevent further slide into poverty?
 NI needs to ensure that its strategies, policies and programmes are responsive and up-todate.
 NI needs to think of strategies to increase access to ‘good’ jobs for parents furthest from
the labour market, put policies and practices in place that enable women to work, and
identify and tackle the disincentives parents (mothers) face entering the labour market
including part-time jobs. They need to acknowledge the tension between balancing
requirements to provide a ‘safety net’ for non-working families, while also incentivising and
rewarding work.
 As a matter of urgency, NI needs to increase the provision of accessible, affordable
childcare.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 29
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
 Tackling child poverty is not just about money and material goods, it is also about children’s
well-being via access to high-quality services for themselves and their families. NI needs to
support and develop preventions and interventions that promote positive development
across outcomes throughout childhood.
 NI needs to set targets, measure outcomes and use data to inform decisions – especially
about what is and is not working.
 Key steps for NI include: define the problemidentify key agencies and
responsibilitiesoutline key initiatives to tackle the problemset targetsput a
monitoring and evaluation system in placereport on progress regularly refine and
update the strategy.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 30
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
6.
Fauth, Blades and Gill
References
Barnes, M., Chanfreau, J., & Tomaszewski, W. (2010). Growing up in Scotland: The circumstances of
persistently poor children. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
Bee, A. (2012). Household income inequality within US counties: 2006-2010 American Community
Survey Briefs. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Bradshaw, P., Martin, C., & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2008). Growing up in Scotland study: Exploring
the experiences and outcomes of advantaged and disadvantaged families. Edinburgh:
Scottish Government Social Research.
Christiansen, R. H., & Nielsen, H. O. (2010). Working poor in Europe - Denmark. Retrieved from
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/studies/tn0910026s/dk0910029q.htm
Cribb, J., Joyce, R., & Phillips, D. (2012). Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2012.
London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Davis, A., Hirsch, D., Smith, N., Beckhelling, J., & Padley, M. (2012). A minimum income standard for
the UK in 2012: Keeping up in hard times. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & Smith, J. C. (2011). Income, poverty, and health insurance
coverage in the United States: 2010 Current population reports. Washington, DC: U.S.
Census Bureau.
Department for Work and Pensions, & Department for Education. (2011). A new approach to child
poverty: Tackling the causes of disadvantage and transforming families' lives. London: The
Stationery Office.
Department for Work and Pensions, & Department for Education. (2012). Child poverty in the UK:
The report on the 2010 target. London: The Stationery Office.
European Commission Employment Social Affairs and Inclusion DG. (2010). The measurement of
extreme poverty in the European Union. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=751&langId=en
Foley, A. (2012). State of Connecticut Child Poverty and Prevention Council January 2012 progress
report
Hoelscher, P. (2004). A thematic study using transnational comparisons to analyse and identify
what combination of policy responses are most successful in preventing and reducing high
levels of child poverty. Final report.: European Commission, DG Employment and Social
Affairs.
Horgan, G., & Monteith, M. (2009). What can we do to tackle child poverty in Northern Ireland?
Viewpoint. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
MacInnes, T., Aldridge, H., Parekh, A., & Kenway, P. (2012). Monitoring poverty and social exclusion
in Northern Ireland 2012. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
McLaughlin, E., & Monteith, M. (2006). Child and family poverty in Northern Ireland. Belfast:
OFMDFM.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 31
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention. (2008). National report on strategies
for social protection and social inclusion 2008-2010.
National Statistics. (2012). Poverty and income inequality in Scotland: 2010-11. Retrieved from
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/06/7976
New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. (2009). $aveNYC account: Innovation in asset
building. Research brief. New York: Department of Consumer Affairs.
Northern Ireland Executive. (2011). Improving children's life chances: The child poverty strategy.
Belfast: OFMDFM.
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. (2012). Poverty in Northern Ireland: 2010/11.
Retrieved from http://www.dsdni.gov.uk/ni_poverty_bulletin_201011__release_document_.pdf
NYC Center for Economic Opportunity. (2012). The CEO poverty measure, 2005-2010. A working
paper by the NYC Center for Economic Opportunity. New York: CEO.
OECD. (2012). The future of families to 2030 doi:10.1787/9789264168367-en
Olesen, M. (2011). Building a coordinated strategy to help parents: The general framework of social
policy and parenting support in Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.peer-review-socialinclusion.eu/peer-reviews
Oxford Economics. (in press). Northern Ireland economy in transition: Impacts on vulnerable groups
and policy responses.
Regeringen. (2011). Et Danmark, der star samman regeringsgrundlag.
Ryan, R. M., Fauth, R. C., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2012). Childhood poverty: Implications for school
readiness and early childhood education. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Handbook of
research on the education of young children (3rd ed., pp. 301-321). New York: Routledge.
Short, K. (2011). The Research Supplemental Poverty Measure 2010. Washington, DC: US Census
Bureau.
Social Protection Committee. (2012). SPC advisory report to the European Commission on tackling
and preventing child poverty, promoting well-being. Brussels: European Commission.
State of Connecticut. (2011). State of Connecticut agency prevention report. A report to the Child
Poverty and Prevention Council.
Sullivan, A., Cara, O., Joshi, H., Ketende, S., & Obolenskaya, P. (2010). The consequences of
childhood disadvantage in Northern Ireland at age 5. Belfast: OFMDFM.
TARKI. (2010). Child poverty and child well-being in the European Union. Report prepared for the
DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (Unit E.2) of the European
Commission. Budapest: Tarki Social Research Institute.
The Danish Government. (2009). Denmark's National Reform Programme, first progress report:
Contribution to the EU's growth and employment strategy (The Lisbon Strategy). Retrieved
from
www.ncb.org.uk
page 32
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
http://uk.bm.dk/Themes/~/media/BEM/Files/English/Acts/Denmarks%20National%20Refo
rm%20Programme%20oct%2009.ashx.
The Danish Government. (2010). Denmark 2020, knowledge, growth, prosperity, welfare. Retrieved
from
http://www.stm.dk/publikationer/arbprog_10_uk/Denmark_2020_knowledge_growth_pro
sperity_welfare.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2012a). The National Reform Programme, Denmark 2012. Retrieved
from http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/nd/nrp2012_denmark_en.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2012b). Reference for the Committee of Experts to illustrate the methods
to calculate poverty and the proposal for a Danish poverty line.
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration. (2011). Social policy in Denmark. Retrieved from
http://english.sm.dk/international/eu-presidency2012/Documents/Social_Policy_Folder_dec2011.pdf.
The Scottish Government. (2011). Child Poverty Strategy for Scotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (2012). Measuring child poverty: New league tables of child
poverty in the world's rich countries. Innocenti Report Card 10. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti
Research Centre.
Williams Shanks, T. R., & Danziger, S. K. (2011). Anti-poverty policies and programs for children and
families. In J. M. Jenson & M. W. Fraser (Eds.), Social policy for children and families: A risk
and resilience perspective (2nd ed., pp. 25-56). London: Sage Publications.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 33
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Child poverty outcomes models
Fauth, Blades and Gill
Appendix A. Brief methodology
This rapid review was commissioned by NCBNI and carried out by the NCB Research Centre.
To select the countries considered for the case studies, we reviewed the OECD and European
Commission websites, documents and datasets.
We created a long list of countries based on commonalties and differences in historic child
poverty rates and approaches to social policy and child poverty (if applicable).
We discussed this list with NCBNI and agreed our short list of countries.
One staff member was assigned a particular country and carried out searching and
summarising using OECD and European Commission documents as a starting point. For each
country, relevant organisations, experts and websites were identified to target the searching.
For Denmark, we contacted local experts to ensure full coverage given language barrier. We
received feedback from the Danish Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration and the
Economic Council of the Labour Movement.
This review took place within a two month period, thus the case studies are meant to be a
good overview of policy and programmes related to child poverty, but certainly will not be
exhaustive.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 34
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Appendix B.
Denmark case study
Rachel Blades
National Children’s Bureau: working with children, for children
Registered Charity Number 258825.
8 Wakley Street, London EC1V 7QE. Tel: 020 7843 6000
Connect with us:
© NCB, October 2012
Facebook: www.facebook.com/ncbfb
Twitter: @ncbtweets
Denmark case study
Blades
Contents
1. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 37
2. Country overview ............................................................................................................................ 37
3. Demographics.................................................................................................................................. 38
4. Child poverty in Denmark ................................................................................................................ 38
5. Child poverty strategy ..................................................................................................................... 39
5.1 Summary of related strategies ........................................................................................................ 40
5.2 Government departments, roles and responsibilities ..................................................................... 42
5.3 Policies, programmes and initiatives ............................................................................................... 43
5.4 Measurement .................................................................................................................................. 56
6. Overall lessons for Northern Ireland ............................................................................................... 56
References ............................................................................................................................................ 57
www.ncb.org.uk
page 36
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
1.
Blades
Summary
Lowest income inequality in the world
Universal access to social assistance
One of the lowest child poverty rates among OECD countries
No current child poverty reduction strategy or measures
New social policy objective to reduce poverty and ensure equal opportunities for all,
with special emphasis on children and those in long term poverty
High labour market participation, low in-work poverty and effective income support
Three-sided mix of active employment policy, flexible labour market, and social
security (Flexicurity)
Wide availability of free and low cost childcare enables work and family life to be
complementary
2.
Country overview
Denmark is a social democracy with a mixed market economy and a large welfare state. Ranking
number one in the world for income equality it has the world’s seventh highest per capita income.17
Danish society encourages individual and collective responsibility, high expectations and standards,
and the Government aims to deliver social assistance to everyone who needs it.
Social policies are designed to maintain and extend Denmark’s position in the global economy,
particularly in the context of the global financial crisis, which, in recent years, has led to an increase
in unemployment and a growing deficit in public finances. The Government is emphasising the
importance of education and high standards to stimulate growth and tackle rising inequalities.
Denmark has one of the lowest growth forecasts among OECD countries (The Danish Government,
2011).
The sovereign state’s present Government is a parliamentary democracy consisting of the Social
Democrats, Social Liberals and Socialist People’s Parties. Characterising the social system are the
following principles (The Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration, 2011):
universal social security benefits and social services
tax financing mainly from general taxation
public responsibility for the provision of benefits and services
services for children, dependent elderly people and people with disabilities to support
labour market affiliation
active social measures
decentralisation of social responsibilities to local government and local communities
local scope of action and autonomy when implementing social protection schemes
user influence on social protection programmes
individual and collective responsibility for social problems
cooperation among public sector, private companies and voluntary social organisations
to promote social welfare
17
http://denmark.dk/en/society/government-and-politics/?sc_lang=en
www.ncb.org.uk
page 37
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
3.
Blades
Demographics
Demark has a population of 5.5 million, only 10 per cent of which is foreign born. The Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) per capita is DKK 300,24118 (2011).19 In 2011 the unemployment rate was
7.7 per cent20 (OECD average 8.2%), up from 4.2 per cent in 2001. Long term unemployment (as a
percentage of total unemployment) has however remained fairly static: 24.4 per cent in 2011
compared to 22.2 per cent a decade earlier.
4.
Child poverty in Denmark
In Denmark, the child poverty rate is frequently cited as one of the lowest among OECD countries,
although the rate has begun to rise. The most recent UNICEF report, using the percentage of
children living in households with equivalent income lower than 50 per cent of the national median
to assess poverty, puts the child poverty rate at 6.5 per cent (UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre,
2012).
The at-risk-of-poverty rates are highest among children living with single parents (17 per cent) and
in large families (15 per cent), but the figures are still well below the EU averages (TARKI, 2010). As
elsewhere in the EU, the risk of poverty is high among children living in jobless households, and
these make up just over a third of all children at risk.
The relatively favourable overall picture of child poverty outcomes is considered to be a result of a
combination of three main factors: high labour-market participation of parents; low in-work
poverty; and effective income support, underpinned by the highest tax rate among OECD
countries.21 Denmark’s public expenditure on labour market policies is high: 1.9 per cent of GDP on
active measures (e.g. training, job creation) in 2011 (0.7 per cent OECD average), and 1.6 per cent
of GDP on passive measures (e.g. income support, early retirement (1 per cent OECD average).22
High labour market participation: Seventy-three per cent of the population (age 15-64) is in work
compared with an OECD average of 64 per cent (2011).23 Most children live in households where
both parents are in full-time employment. Over half of children live in a household where everyone
is in paid work, which is twice the EU average and one of the highest figures in the EU. High labour
market participation is facilitated by the wide availability of free or low cost childcare, high child
and family benefits and comparatively generous maternity benefits and parental leave. Together
these policies help to enable three-quarters of mothers to return to work, the majority full-time. A
survey undertaken in 2006 found that 79 per cent of Danish mothers who took parental leave
returned to work on the same basis as before (Eurochild, 2011). The risk of poverty among children
with a working mother is very low (only 3 per cent). At the same time, the at-risk-of-poverty rate
for children whose mothers are not in work (27 per cent) is also well below the EU average (35 per
cent) (TARKI, 2010).
Low in-work poverty: In-work poverty is minimal and is generally not perceived to be a problem in
Denmark (Christiansen & Nielsen, 2010). Rates are, however, rising. Since the mid 1990s, the share
18
http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert/?Amount=1&From=DKK&To=GBP. One Danish Krone (DKK) is
approximately .10 GBP.
19
http://denmark.dk/en/quick-facts/facts/
20
http://www.oecd.org/els/employmentpoliciesanddata/howdoesyourcountrycompare-denmark.htm
21
http://www.oecd.org/general/denmarkswedenstillthehighest-taxoecdcountries.htm
22
http://www.oecd.org/els/employmentpoliciesanddata/howdoesyourcountrycompare-denmark.htm
23
OECD Employment Outlook 2011 http://www.oecd.org/els/oecdemploymentoutlook2011.htm
www.ncb.org.uk
page 38
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
of the population belonging to the low-income group (e.g. students, immigrants, self-employed and
fully unemployed) has increased from 3.6 per cent in 1994 to 5 per cent in 2005 (Ministry of Social
Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention, 2008b). The share of workers earning less than twothirds of median earnings has also increased from 8.8 per cent in 2000 to 13.4 per cent in 2010.
Earnings dispersion has also increased. Even in light of these changes, the incidence of low pay still
compares favourably with the OECD average of 16.3 per cent.
Effective income support: Over the last decade unemployment rates have been consistently low:
less than six per cent until 2009, at which point rates began to rise, reaching 7.7 per cent in 2011.24
In jobless households, the at-risk-of-poverty rate is relatively high (49 per cent) but a
disproportionate share of social transfers go to children in these households (almost four times
their share of all children). These transfers serve to reduce the relative number at risk of poverty by
46 percentage points, which is twice the EU average for children in such households (TARKI, 2010).
Interestingly, the depth of poverty into which poor children are allowed to fall into (i.e. the relative
‘poverty gap’) is greater in Denmark (32.8 per cent) than in the United Kingdom (18.8 per cent)
(UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2012).
5.
Child poverty strategy
Given its somewhat favourable and stable socio-economic conditions, Denmark does not have a
child poverty reduction strategy per se. Nor does the Government currently have an official
definition of poverty or a poverty line; both 50 and 60 per cent of the median are used with register
data (European Commission Employment Social Affairs and Inclusion DG, 2010).
But in light of growing economic pressures, the Government has newly introduced a social policy
objective to reduce poverty and ensure equal opportunities for all (The Danish Government,
2012b). An expert committee has been set up to analyse various methods to calculate poverty and
prepare suggestions for an official poverty line. The committee is tasked with (The Danish
Government, 2012c):
identifying other countries' use of poverty lines and their experiences
analysing and evaluating the criteria that are relevant to calculate poverty in Denmark
developing proposals for the methods and data that can form the basis of a Danish
poverty line
identifying and highlighting poverty traps and the factors which can bring people out
of poverty
clarifying the evolution of poverty given the committee's recommendations on how
poverty thresholds should be defined.
Now in development, operational poverty indicators will aim to make it possible to identify poor
families and individuals, with particular focus on children living in poverty and people who live in
long-term poverty (The Danish Government, 2011). Probable indicators to assess families’ overall
social circumstances include low income, housing situation, education level, employment
opportunities and health situation (The Danish Government, 2010). The indicators are the subject
of a forthcoming conference and are expected to be published in 2013.
It is worth noting that Copenhagen and Odense, in line with the high degree of localism in
Denmark, have developed independent poverty thresholds. Copenhagen, in particular, experiences
24
http://www.oecd.org/els/employmentpoliciesanddata/howdoesyourcountrycompare-denmark.htm
www.ncb.org.uk
page 39
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
a relatively high level of child poverty compared to other Danish cities, explained in part by the high
number of residents who are in receipt of cash benefits.25 Examples of targeted support
programmes from Copenhagen are provided below.
5.1 Summary of related strategies
In the absence of a child poverty reduction strategy, we briefly outline key overarching government
strategies in order of relevance below. We then go on to introduce government departments’ roles
and responsibilities and summarise policies and programmes of importance.
This year in response to the global economic crisis, rising poverty and social inequalities, a national
prevention strategy will be implemented using DKK 100 million social funds over four years (The
Danish Government, 2012a). It will focus on two initiatives to help children and young people at risk
of deprivation:
strengthening provision for, and the inclusion of, children with welfare and learning
difficulties in daycare, schools and leisure activities by sharing best practice, improving
guidance for local authorities on key transitions (e.g. between school stages) and
developing better links with local health services
strengthening targeted support for families, particularly those with school age
children, children who have been in contact with the youth justice system and children
with behavioural difficulties (e.g. Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder - ADHD)
through the establishment of local action teams, more support and better education.
The prevention strategy is in development, and no further information is currently available in
English.
The National Reform Programme Denmark 2012
Documenting Denmark’s national implementation of the EU’s growth strategy (Europe 2020) and
the competitiveness pact, this strategy includes the overall economic framework for Denmark. On
the national level, the Danish Government has an objective to re-establish the progress in the
Danish economy and to ensure balance between public revenue and expenditure. Initiatives passed
to promote employment and labour supply focus on retirement reform, the young unemployed and
older unemployed. There is also great emphasis on education and social inclusion. Figure 5.1 below
shows the EU headline targets most relevant to reducing child poverty that the Danish Government
has signed up to.
25
http://www.againstchildpoverty.com/downloads/ECACP-policy%20bulletin-April2008.pdf
www.ncb.org.uk
page 40
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Figure 5.1 Targets for 2020
Target for 2020
26
The national target for employment
80 per cent structural employment rate
The national target for education
Less than 10 per cent school dropout rates for the
population aged 18-24 and at least 40 per cent of
the population aged 30-34 having completed
27
tertiary or equivalent education
The national target for social inclusion
Reduce the number of people in households with
low work
intensity by 22,000
National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2008-2010
Also significant is the National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion, which
details actions in support of disadvantaged children and young people. The purpose of the report is
to share the strategies and initiatives Denmark applies to achieve the common objectives for social
protection and social inclusion in the EU (within the EU’s framework of the open method of
communication). This report outlines the programme Equal opportunities – strengthened personal
resources and social cohesion which has an allocation of DKK 600 million from the Rate Adjustment
Pool Scheme (see below) over four years (Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and
Prevention, 2008b).
The programme covers three main action areas (i.e. children, young people, parents) and seven
programme areas:
early and cohesive intervention
academic proficiency and early learning
youth education
special social problems
networks
parental responsibility
documentation and effect.
Rate Adjustment Pool Scheme28
The Rate Adjustment Pool Scheme is allocated money from transfer payments. The money is
used to fund social, health and labour market policies to help benefit claimants and
vulnerable groups. The size of the rate adjustment percentage is determined annually by the
Ministry of Finance on the basis of salary trends in the labour market (the rate is currently 0.3
per cent). Parties in Government that signed the rate adjustment pool settlement (in 2003)
negotiate and agree how best to spend the funds each year.
26
The aim of this target is for 80 per cent of the population aged 20-64 to work in jobs requiring their skills in
2020. Normally discussed in terms of structural unemployment, which is the mismatch between the skills
required for available jobs and those held by the labour supply due to changes, for example, in technology or
taste.
27
Equivalent to higher education in the UK
28
http://www.sm.dk/Puljer/satspulje/Sider/Start.aspx
www.ncb.org.uk
page 41
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Denmark 2020, Knowledge, Growth, Prosperity, Welfare
Risks and actions relating to child poverty are addressed in the Government’s national strategy for
2020 (The Danish Government, 2010), although there are very few specific targets. The most
pertinent of 10 broad goals for the future are:
Denmark is to be among the world’s wealthiest countries
the Danish supply of labour is to be among the 10 highest in the world
Danish schoolchildren are to be among the cleverest in the world
Denmark is to be among the best at creating equal opportunities.
Progress, Innovation and Cohesion – Strategy for Denmark in the Global Economy
In Denmark’s globalisation strategy (The Danish Government, 2006) 8 of 14 priorities focus on
education. The Government aims to create a world class education system, increase participation
and completion rates, and raise standards across the board, illustrating the importance placed
upon education to improve Denmark’s competitiveness in the global economy. Two of the main
objectives within education are (The Danish Government, 2009a):
Denmark’s primary and lower secondary school is to be the best in the world, where
the brightest pupils match the level of the best in other countries and where the level
of the weakest pupils is to be raised.29
At least 95 per cent of the youth cohort is to complete a youth education programme30
in 2015. It is an intermediate aim that a minimum of 85 per cent of all young people
are to complete an upper secondary education in 2010.
While there is no specific youth policy, strategy or system (Haarder, Undated), youth policy is
integrated into the general policies that support the Danish democratic welfare society. Each sector
(i.e. national government department, regional or local authority that receive substantial funding
from the Government) has its own field of responsibility that covers policy and measures designed
to continue the Danish method of raising children to be safe and have ample opportunities for
development (e.g. through education and active citizenship).
5.2 Government departments, roles and responsibilities
Responsibility for welfare tasks is divided between the various ministries:
Ministry for Social Affairs and Integration31 is responsible for the central administration
of the Danish social security and benefits system. The main responsibilities are policy
on children at risk; the elderly; people with disabilities; and marginalised groups
including homeless people, people with mental health issues and people who misuse
substances, among others.
29
Primary school is the first stage of primary education for children, targeting those aged 7-13 years. Lower
secondary school is the second stage of primary education for children, targeting those aged 13-17 years.
Upper secondary education normally caters to 16-19-year-olds and includes general education to qualify for
access to higher education and vocational or technical education to qualify for access to the labour market.
30
Akin to upper secondary or 16-19 education.
31
http://english.sm.dk/MinistryOfSocialWelfare/Sider/Start.aspx
www.ncb.org.uk
page 42
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Ministry of Health32 is in charge of the administrative functions in relation to the
organisation and financing of the health care system, psychiatry and health insurance,
as well as the approval of pharmaceuticals and the pharmacy sector.
Ministry of Employment33 is responsible for employment and working; work
environment and occupation health; maternity leave; active employment measures;
keeping people in work; work-based training; housing benefits; housing services for
those no longer in active labour; and supervising local authorities and unemployment
funds. The Ministry’s remit covers unemployment, cash, sick pay, maternity and
holiday benefits.
Ministry of Children and Education34 carries out the Government’s education policy. Its
mission is to create world class education programmes that offer high quality
education for all, regardless of background.
There is a strong devolution to the regions, and in particular municipalities. Denmark is divided into
five regions and 98 local authority areas. Regions and local authorities are independent, politically
controlled organisational units. The five regions, each with popularly elected members, are tasked
with ensuring the quality of the Danish Healthcare System and specialised social services, and the
regional development of education, employment and culture, among other areas35.
Local authorities carry out a considerable amount of welfare tasks. Governed through legislation,
they assess the need for social services. They also ensure that public welfare services respond to
individual circumstances and needs and are in the interests of local conditions. Responsible for
fixing and levying taxes, planning and providing a broad spectrum of social services (including
daycare facilities and support for unemployed people), municipalities also implement social security
schemes, such as child allowance. This explains differences in the service level from one local
authority to the other and varying tax rates: the highest local tax rate being about 28 per cent and
the lowest about 23 per cent in 2011(The Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration, 2011).
The majority of welfare tasks are performed by public employees but local authorities have
contracted out certain social services to private enterprises, businesses and voluntary
organisations. Greater involvement of voluntary organisations to enhance social welfare efforts is
an existing Government aspiration: DKK 100 million was set aside in 2011 in support from the Rate
Adjustment Pool (The Danish Government, 2010). The public also has opportunities to influence
how their life and situation is defined by the authorities through, for example, advisory user
councils.
5.3 Policies, programmes and initiatives
When compared with other OECD countries with high child poverty rates (e.g. US, UK), Danish
programmes, for the most part, are not specifically designed to tackle child poverty. Historically,
Denmark has low child poverty rates in the context of successful active employment policies and
universal family support, and it is these policies that are the primary focus in this section.
32
http://www.sum.dk/English/The%20Ministry.aspx
http://uk.bm.dk/TheMinistry/The%20Ministry.aspx
34
http://www.eng.uvm.dk/The-Ministry/The-Ministry
33
35
http://www.regioner.dk/In+English/Publications+and+Policy+Papers/~/media/Filer/Om%20regionerne/Regio
nerne%20-%20kort%20fortalt%202011%20-%20engelsk.ashx
www.ncb.org.uk
page 43
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
5.3.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
Active labour market policy (ALMP)
ALMP aims to help unemployed and employed people who are looking for a job or wishing to
undergo training or education in private and public enterprises. All unemployed people have access
to employment measures irrespective of whether they are receiving unemployment benefits, social
assistance, start-help or sickness benefits. They are expected to look actively for work or participate
in a programme to promote their job prospects – the so-called ‘mutual obligations’ approach.
ALMP has four overall objectives:
to assist jobseekers in finding a job
to offer services to private and public employers who are looking for labour or wish to
retain their workforce
to help people who are receiving social assistance or start-help to find a job quickly so
that they will be able to support themselves and their families
to help people who due to reduced working capacity have a special need for assistance
in finding a job.
ALMP - Employment activation programmes
Activation programmes can include general and vocational guidance, job search assistance,
individual job-oriented action plans, private and public job training, education, leave schemes, job
rotation and the sharing of full-time jobs (Hendeliowitz, 2008).
Examples of recent initiatives include:
more traineeships (5,000 in 2011) within the Employers’ Trainee Reimbursement (AER)
Scheme
a bigger range of training programmes for unemployed workers, both skilled and unskilled,
including an option of six weeks of training of their own choice
one year extension of a pilot scheme to help unemployed workers re-qualify for new jobs.
In Copenhagen the ‘House of Development’ (also known as the Centre for Progress and Job
training) was set up by local government as part of the Municipal Job Centre to help people who
are dependent on benefits and need special employment access support, many of whom have an
immigrant background (Eurochild, 2011). It is a highly structured employment activation
programme designed to get people back into work and into the social insurance system and
incorporates:
tailored job plans for a period of 3-6 months
training
work experience placements
internships
psychological and counselling support for those who need it to become work ready
(approximately half of attendees)
childcare
discrete youth programme for 18-25-year-olds
longer-term integration programmes for immigrant attendees.
Financial incentives are provided to employers who hire people from the Centre. The Centre tries
to match aptitudes and interests to available jobs but ultimately, people are trained to meet
labour market demand, and non-cooperation results in loss of benefits. Moving into employment
typically moves employees out of poverty as the minimum wage is relatively high.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 44
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Young people have been a particular target group for employment initiatives in recent years based
upon the ‘right and duty’36 principal when it comes to training and work. Initiatives include (The
Danish Government, 2012b):
more unemployed young people will be trained through the adult apprenticeship
scheme
job rotation for unemployed young people with higher education
job and skill development package for ‘academically weak’ young people
targeted training (including separate active measures within the construction sector)
basic skills courses for more young people
trainee programmes to give unemployed graduates to the labour market.
Social security
A wide range of social security measures are in place, some of which are available to all and other
benefits are targeted at particular groups.
Social assistance and starting allowance (activation measures and benefits) are offered when an
adult person is temporarily without sufficient means to meet their needs due to particular
circumstances (e.g. sickness, unemployment). The benefit is family-based and depends on age,
dependent children and period of residence. The calculation basis of social assistance is 80 per cent
of the maximum unemployment benefit for parents with children living in Denmark and 60 per cent
of this maximum for people without children. There is a special rate for young people under 25
years of age and for the starting allowance (European Commission, 2011). Recipients must accept
appropriate offers to participate in activation measures or in any measure aimed at improving the
possibilities of labour market integration (e.g. job seeking courses, work experience).
Unemployment insurance is voluntary and distributed according to the various (sector-based)
branches; two insurances are reserved for the self-employed. The insured pay contributions. These
contributions and those that employees and the self-employed pay into the Labour Market Fund
cover part of the State share for the expenses related to the unemployment insurance. To qualify
for unemployment benefit, individuals must be out of work, have registered with a public
employment service (Jobcenter), be actively looking for work and be available for the labour
market (European Commission, 2011).
Family allowance is given to all families with children under the age of 18. On 1 January 2011 this
amounted to €2,28137 (0-2 years), €1,806 (3-6 years) and €1,421 (7-17 years) annually per child
(Olesen, 2011). Family allowances were increased significantly in 2008 (especially for children under
3 years). The tax authorities administer the family allowance, and both family allowance and child
allowance (below) are tax-free amounts, paid quarterly independent of the income. Central
government pays the expenditure.
Child allowance is payable to certain groups of children under 18 (Olesen, 2011):
Ordinary child allowance is payable to lone parents and to parents who both receive a
pension under the Social Pensions Act. The allowance is €666 annually (January 2011).
36
Unemployed people are entitled to receive compensation for lost income but must seek jobs and attempt
to up skill in return.
37
One Euro (€) is approximately .80 GBP (£).
www.ncb.org.uk
page 45
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Extra child allowance is payable as a supplement to the ordinary child allowance to
lone parents who have the child living with them. The allowance is €678 annually
irrespective of the number of children.
Special child allowance is payable to children who have lost one or both parents, or
when paternity has not been determined. Furthermore, a child may qualify for the
special allowance if one or both parents receive a pension under the Social Pensions
Act and in some other cases. The special child allowance is €1,701 annually per child.
An orphan receives twice this amount.
Multiple birth allowance is granted in the event of multiple births and until the
children reach the age of seven. The multiple birth allowance is €1,098 annually for
each child.
Adoption allowance is granted to adopters of a foreign child through one of the
recognised adoption organisations. The allowance is €6,323 and is payable as a lump
sum to cover some of the expenses incurred in connection with the adoption.
General family benefits and the various other family allowances are administered by local
authorities.
Cash benefits are for employed and self-employed people and assisting spouses in connection with
pregnancy, maternity or adoption. The daily cash benefits are paid by the local authority. If an
employer pays wages or salary in connection with absence due to maternity, the employer is
entitled to reimbursement from the local authority.
The Danish parental leave system is amongst the most generous and most flexible in
the EU. A total of 52 weeks (one year) of leave (maternity, paternity and parental) is
available to parents (Eurochild, 2011).
A pregnant woman is entitled to daily cash benefits starting from four weeks before
the due date set by her doctor. In case of sickness she is entitled to maternity benefits
before the four-week period.
Parents are entitled to maternity benefits for a total of 52 weeks. During the first 14
weeks, normally only the mother may receive the benefits. During this period, the
father is entitled to paternity leave with daily cash benefits for two weeks. The father
may also be granted benefits if the mother is unable to care for the child due to
serious illness or death. The parents may decide for themselves how they will
distribute the last 32 weeks of the time they receive maternity benefits. During
parental leave, an amount equivalent to 60 per cent of the unemployment benefit is
payable.
Adopters are entitled to daily cash benefits for 46 weeks after they have received the
child.
Flexible labour market
The flexible labour market aims to make work a financially attractive option for the nearly one-fifth
of the work force struck by unemployment each year to qualify and motivate them to find work. In
2012, the Government introduced initiatives to: a) promote employment and labour supply (by
5,000 people 2020) and b) help ensure that the vast majority of people who become unemployed
quickly find a new job (The Danish Government, 2012b). These initiatives are:
Disability pension reform: vulnerable and exposed persons under 40 years of age will
not, initially, have access to disability pension. Instead rehabilitation teams will be
established in local authority areas to deliver holistic and individualised support to help
them stay in work for longer.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 46
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Changes to the flex-job scheme for those with permanently reduced working ability
were created as an alternative to disability pension. The largest subsidies are now paid
to unemployed people on the lowest wages and with the least working capacity. Flexjobs will be made temporary for young people. Unemployed people who have been
referred to a flex-job will have the same active employment options as other
unemployed.
In supporting people to return to work in recent years the Government has also (The Danish
Government, 2010):
put a ceiling on some of the lowest benefits such as social assistance and introductory
benefit
tightened availability rules and rules for supplementary unemployment benefits
made it easier for unemployed people to find work by increasing the amount of
contact they have with support services and the range of options available to them
made it easier for people given notice of dismissal to receive education and training
extended the work-sharing scheme designed to help mitigate the effects of the global
financial crisis by providing companies and employees with an alternative to
redundancy
placed special emphasis on immigrants and on avoiding long-term unemployment
among young people.
However, in response to growing concerns about rising poverty and numbers of disadvantaged
children, the Government abolished the lowest social assistance benefits from January 2012 (starthelp, introductory benefit, the ceiling on social assistance benefits, and the ‘hour rule’38 restricting
people to qualify for social assistance). The change is estimated to involve an increase in benefits
for about 16,000 whole-year benefit recipients. The ceiling on assistance to children and young
people has also been abolished, which means that families are entitled to full allowance for all
children regardless of how many children they have. Financially, the improvements involve DKK 350
million additional public expenditure in 2012, increasing to DKK 412 million in 2015 (The Danish
Government, 2012b).
For those in work, the Government has introduced more flexible working policies. Family policy in
Denmark aims to support families to improve work-life balance and outcomes through the range of
benefits described above plus extensive leave rights, universal childcare and flexible working hours
(Eurochild, 2011). Since 2008, parents working in the public sector have been entitled to paid leave
on the second day of a child’s illness. The period of paid parental leave was also increased from 12
to 18 weeks (Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention, 2008b). In much of the
public sector parents can record ‘plus hours’ to enable them to save funds for a limited period to
help finance a later period with part-time employment and a lower salary. Denmark also has one of
the shortest working weeks in the EU (average 35 hours) and parents are able to choose part-time
or flexible working hours.
Flexicurity
The ALMP and flexible labour market are two sides of the Danish three-sided mix of active
employment policy, a flexible labour market and social security. This concept termed ‘flexicurity’ (a
contraction of flexibility and security), underlies these policies and programmes based on the
38
When a couple has received social assistance benefits for two years it is a condition of continued help that
they can both prove they have had regular work in at least 450 hours. If not, the person most marginal to the
labour market loses social assistance benefit.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 47
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
assumption that public interventions are necessary to ensure adaptability among both employers
and employees, which is crucial for the labour market to function well. Together they offer
guidance, a job or education to all unemployed. The policies consist of flexible rules for hiring and
dismissing during periods of recession and a high level of security for wage earners who become
unemployed, regardless of their spouses’ incomes. Elements of the model (active employment
policy, a flexible labour market and social security) have consistently been adjusted to help
maintain relatively high employment rates.
Tax reductions
Tax on income has been reduced in recent years to make work pay more. A tax freeze saw tax on
earned income reduced three times (in 2004, 2007 and 2010). The comprehensive reform of direct
and indirect taxes abolished the middle-bracket tax for all tax payers, reduced the number of
people paying top-bracket tax and introduced a special earned-income tax credit for those in
employment (The Danish Government, 2010).
Monitoring Danish policies to increase families’ financial resources
The first five experiments of a study testing the effectiveness of ALMPs from 2005-2008
showed (Rosholm, 2011):
The duration of unemployment amongst the newly unemployed reduced by three weeks
when they received early and intensive support (job search assistance and frequent
meetings with case workers) and were in the programme full-time for at least 13 weeks.
Men, in particular, were positively affected by the threat of early activation, i.e. having to
accept the first available opportunities for work or training.
All were positively affected by a greater frequency of case worker meetings (every one or
two weeks compared with a minimum of every 13 weeks in the control groups).
A cost-benefit analysis by The Danish Economic Council (2007) found net benefits of ALMPs
of €2,000 per unemployment spell.
As a result of the perceived success of ALMPs, current policy dictates that unemployed
people are invited to interview every month after the first welfare-to-work offer and receive
improved guidance and support with literacy and numeracy (The Danish Government, 2010).
5.3.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Childcare
All children older than 26 weeks can take up a place at a daycare facility until they reach school age
(The Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration, 2011). Seventy per cent of Danish children between
0-2 years (91 per cent of children between 1-2 years) and 97 per cent of all children between 3-5
years attend publicly supported daycare facilities. Parents pay a maximum of 25 per cent of the
budgeted gross operating expenditure for daycare services. Fees are relative to income so lower
income families pay at a reduced rate or receive services free of charge. In addition, parents receive
a sibling discount.
Recent legislation has shifted the focus of childcare to promote child development within an agreed
curriculum. The curriculum supports children’s language development and socialisation. The aim is
to create greater coherence between daycare facilities, schools and after-school provision, as well
as having a regulatory effect on quality control. Practically all daycare facilities have managed to
implement the curricula, with largely positive results (Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health
www.ncb.org.uk
page 48
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
and Prevention, 2008b). Approximately 70 per cent of day care staff are pedagogues39, though not
all are qualified.
VIDA Project - Knowledge-based efforts for socially disadvantaged children in day-care:40 a
research project hosted by the Danish School of Education, Aarhus University, commissioned
and financed by the Ministry of Social Affairs from 2010 to 2013
Aim: test and document which types of pedagogical daycare efforts are most successful in
providing better opportunities in life for socially disadvantaged children.41
VIDA will: update materials for working with socially disadvantaged children, introduce a new
IT-based tool to help daycare centres reflect on their own practice, and employ the IT tool to
help train daycare staff to identify socially disadvantaged children early. The overall approach
encourages preschool teachers to be reflective, to share best practice and to develop new
practices at a local level, based on analyses and reflection on everyday practice and the
children.
Methodology: 6,000 children in 120 daycare centres in four municipalities, divided into three
groups:
Group 1 focuses on the children’s well-being and learning (i.e. the VIDA model
programme)
Group 2 also focuses on the children’s well-being and learning (as in Group 1), as well as
parental involvement (i.e. the VIDA + parents model programme)
Group 3 (the control group) is left to continue with their ordinary practice.
Expected outcomes: The VIDA intervention is expected to have a greater effect on children
who are disadvantaged and excluded, but should benefit all children. It is expected that the
intervention is especially beneficial in daycare centres where there are many disadvantaged
children and in centres where staff education and training leads to implementation.42
Housing
Social housing is provided for a disproportionately high share of very young and old households, the
unemployed and single parent families. Housing benefit is normally granted as rent allowance to
pensioner households or as rent subsidies to people in active employment. The Danish state has
made a major commitment to housing policy expenditure, often spending 2 per cent of GDP per
annum on policies since the mid-1950s.43 Danes have also been prepared to pay, on average, high
proportions of their incomes (typically 30 per cent) on housing. As a consequence, housing policies
are long standing and the housing stock is largely of high quality resulting in less acute housing
problems relative to poorer EU countries.
There are, however, specific problems regarding neighbourhood quality (i.e. in areas with older
private rental housing or older multi-storey estates), access and affordability. Coupled with an
ageing population, family breakdown and rising unemployment (near the EU average rate), there
39
The concept ‘pedagogue’ is specific to Denmark. Pedagogues have a very broad qualification and are
employed both in child care services, in centres for people with physical disabilities and services for older
people, although most work in early childhood education and care.
40
http://www.dpu.dk/en/research/researchprogrammes/organisationandlearning/vida/
41
http://ec.europa.eu/social/families/userfiles/file/EAF_Childcare_report_FINAL.pdf
42
http://ec.europa.eu/social/families/userfiles/file/EAF_Childcare_report_FINAL.pdf
43
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/workingpapers/soci/w14/text2_en.htm
www.ncb.org.uk
page 49
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
are new housing-related problems that the Government has set out to address in its national
strategy for 2020. New initiatives include (The Danish Government, 2010):
formulation of a comprehensive ‘ghetto strategy’ to address the physical structures
and resident composition in areas of concentrated poverty with the aim of achieving
greater balance in these housing estates
increased efforts to reduce the number of homeless people (approximately 5,000 in
2011) who do not have any form of accommodation, by improving targeted sociopedagogic support
counselling support for tenants who have not paid their rent to try and prevent
eviction.
These efforts follow a pilot scheme to provide financial support and lasting housing for people with
social problems, which was made permanent in January 2009 (TARKI, 2010).
Housing First Europe,44 funded by the European Commission, started on 1st August 2011 and
is planned to last for 24 months. The ‘Housing First’ approach aims to increase access to
permanent housing on the basis that housing needs to be secured before people can be
expected to make progress in other areas, such as substance misuse. As detailed in the
Government’s homelessness strategy (Ministry of the Interior and Social Affairs, 2009), the
approach aims to prevent problems (e.g. drug dependency) from developing by providing a
secure and stable home. It also aims to help people with existing problems via home visits
from social workers who provide support and monitor progress. Housing First projects in
Denmark and four other European cities will be evaluated from a European perspective to
give greater clarity on the potentials and the limits of the approach already tried and tested
in the US, as well as the essential elements of Housing First projects.
5.3.3 Policies that promote child well-being and early intervention and
prevention
Until recently child poverty has not been perceived to be a problem in Denmark, hence the lack of
programmes designed specifically to tackle child poverty. Traditionally, policies have been designed
to prevent child poverty in the first place and have largely been successful.
While efforts to support children’s well-being are often integral to everyday practice, some
targeted initiatives do exist and more are planned (i.e. there are currently 90 initiatives to improve
the conditions of vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups from 2012-2015). Greater focus is
now being given to children’s rights and the most disadvantaged children (The Danish Government,
2011). Specific examples are given where available in English.
The National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2008-2010 (Ministry of
Social Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention, 2008a) sets out a broad and comprehensive
range of social service offers. These are considered to be essential to the Danish welfare model,
which helps families choose to work by helping them meet their dependents’ needs. Below is a
brief summary of universal early intervention policies and targeted initiatives.
44
http://www.housingfirst.fi/en/housing_first/housing_first_in_finland/international_cooperation/housing_fi
rst_europe
www.ncb.org.uk
page 50
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Generic early intervention policies
These policies do not appear to have associated programmes as such, and are instead integral to
everyday practice:
statutory requirement by local authorities to formulate child policies linking general
and preventative work with targeted initiatives
improved support for expectant families vis-à-vis healthcare and social networks
efforts to enhance tools to help identify socially disadvantaged children and reduce the
age at which they start to receive support for health visitors, childminders, early
childhood educators, teachers and other professionals
contact with a health visitor immediately after birth, coupled with later enrolment in
daycare facilities to detect problems early, act quickly and react responsibly
transition interviews from health visitor to crèche, crèche to daycare centre and
daycare to school.
Targeted initiatives
While target groups are specified, there is little available detail (in English) on these initiatives
because of the devolved nature of many policies. We present some basic information below:
Each year (via the Rate Adjustment Pool) considerable funds are earmarked for the
most vulnerable groups in society. A total of DKK 5.3 billion for 2009 and 2010, for
example, has been set aside in the period 2009-2013 for initiatives targeted at people
with substance misuse problems, sex workers, homeless people and people with
mental health needs, as well as vulnerable children and young people. Services
include, for example, a treatment guarantee for young people with severe substance
misuse problems, psychological assistance for young people with mental health
problems and improved crime prevention activities.
special focus on the most socially disadvantaged identified as ‘especially
disadvantaged pregnant women’, ‘marginalised mothers of infants’, ‘socially
disadvantaged fathers’ and ‘infants from immigrant backgrounds’
special support for children identified as at risk of a significantly lower learning
outcome
targeted initiatives to improve educational standards and achieve greater openmindedness in schools for children with academic problems (e.g. with learning
difficulties), pupils with social problems (e.g. loneliness, bullying, behavioural
difficulties), absent pupils (illegal and for an extended period of time) and children in
care including peer-to-peer counseling and adult friends for children
foster care reform to enhance the quality of casework and tighten the requirements
for investigation of cases involving children (launched in 2006)
local examples of improved cooperation between schools and local authorities on
tuition of children in care.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 51
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Targeted support for young lone mothers in Copenhagen. Only around one in five (22 per
cent) young lone mothers in Denmark are able to access training or get into the higher
education system, and approximately 1,000 babies are born to young mothers in Denmark
annually. Alexandra College in Copenhagen is a specialist resource that aims to help young
lone mothers or expectant mothers from disadvantaged backgrounds to get good
educational qualifications, employment and an independent life. The college is a small, selfgoverning residential establishment with capacity to accommodate 11 young mothers and
their children for 2-3 years. The young mothers receive counselling, social guidance and care.
Places are funded by the municipality and the admission criteria are selective. The college is
costly, but has an almost 100 per cent ‘success’ rate.
Education as the foundation for child and family well-being
The Government places great emphasis on improving children’s experiences of education and
enhancing educational outcomes to help achieve its goals for 2020 including having:
some of the cleverest children
one of the more equal societies
a better supply of labour when compared with other countries.
All young people are expected to have a qualifying education. According to rules introduced in
2009, education is the first priority for the young unemployed without a proper qualifying
education (The Danish Government, 2009a):
Young people under 25 years without dependants and without education will be
obliged to follow an education on standard conditions.
Young people of 18-19 years who leave school without starting an upper-secondary
education will be immediately offered work on referral to a jobcentre.
Young people under 30 years without training or a job who are stuck in unemployment
will get a new chance.
In addition to the Government’s main education policy objectives45 (introduced in section 5.1), the
following broad objectives within the field of education are: 46
Education programmes are to be attractive and of the highest quality.
The general upper secondary education programmes are to provide pupils with good
academic and general competences enabling more to complete higher education.
The vocational education and training programmes are to challenge the most talented
pupils and provide them with increased possibilities for higher education. At the same
time, the programmes are to provide realistic educational and training possibilities for
academically weaker pupils.
45
Denmark’s primary and lower secondary school is to be the best in the world, where the brightest pupils
match the level of the best in other countries and where the level of the weakest pupils is to be raised. At
least 95 per cent of the youth cohort is to complete a youth education programme in 2015 (The Danish
Government, 2009b).
46
http://www.eng.uvm.dk/Fact-Sheets/General/Lifelong-learning. The report is available at: www.uvm.dk.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 52
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Education programmes and activities: The most relevant education programmes and activities from
early years up to lower secondary education are summarised here. Drawing on a progress report
from the Government,47 monitoring data and evaluation findings are presented in boxes where
applicable:
a ‘reading pledge’ to ensure that all children are able to read well before they leave
second form funded by a targeted reading fund
language assessment of all three-year-olds
compulsory language stimulation for bilingual children
supplementary training courses for early childhood educators on socially
disadvantaged children in daycare facilities
Book Start programme (as in Great Britain)
action plan for reading
a 360 degree examination of primary and lower secondary school to raise standards
across the board
initiatives to strengthen the transition from primary and lower secondary schools to
upper secondary schools (cf. Denmark’s NRP 2008).
In 2012, planned measures to promote education are (The Danish Government, 2012b):
a bill to strengthen the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in primary
and lower secondary school, combined with greater freedom and responsibility to
municipalities to offer a better primary and lower education and targeted support for
those most in need
reform of primary and lower secondary school to provide equal opportunities for all,
including initiatives to ensure all pupils attain a professional standard in Danish and
mathematics, the continued development of an evaluation culture and an increase in
teaching hours.
Youth education: An inter-ministerial committee is being established to identify coherent,
evidenced-based and cost effective measures increasing the number of young people completing
an upper secondary education.48 There are three core themes: vocational upper secondary
education and training; the challenge of ensuring everyone completes an upper secondary
education; and general upper secondary education. The committee’s work will involve drawing up
reforms to the tax system to try and establish a fairer distribution of resources. The work of the
committee builds on the Government’s efforts in recent years to:
strengthen vocationally-orientated youth education programmes
increase the intake (including young people with special needs), choice and
opportunities for work-based training opportunities
provide more practical training placements
47
Annex 2. Initiatives in the field of education Denmark’s National Reform Programme – First Progress
Report. October 2009
48
Akin to further education for 16-19 year olds in the UK.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 53
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Drawing on a progress report from the Government, the number of local authorities that
implemented basic vocational education and training increased by approximately 23 per cent
between 2006 and 2008. Intake to the basic vocational education and training programme
rose between 2006 and 2008, an increase of about 24 per cent.
Three out of four colleges believed they can already observe or expect less absence and
drop-out as a result of short internships. In addition, an evaluation of increased training
places reach-out efforts and guidance revealed that the colleges’ efforts to support weak
pupils in finding in-service training places significantly improved.
‘ladderise’49 and differentiate by ability
Thirty per cent of colleges estimated that ‘ladderisation’ and differentiation by ability have a
positive influence on programme retention for pupils with limited learning prerequisites, and
19 per cent of the colleges believed that the possibility of stepped education and
differentiation by ability will lead to more pupils starting higher education in the longer term.
introduce individualised action plans and mentor schemes (particularly to support
transition), and improve early information, advice and guidance to help better meet
learners’ needs and ambitions and to improve retention and completion rates
Action plans gave colleges better insight into problems and solutions for drop-out and, thus,
a better starting point for working with young people who learn at a slower pace and/or have
additional learning needs.
offer enhanced social and psychological support services
Forty per cent of the colleges perceived that enhanced social and psychological services had
a positive influence on the pupils’ well-being, which can contribute to reducing drop-out. The
majority of the remaining colleges anticipated favourable influences in the long-term.
offer in-service training for teachers
Two-thirds of vocational college teachers perceived that their participation in in-service
training had an impact on their teaching practice, and 70 per cent responded that observers
can watch in-service training in their practice.
systematically collect data to inform efforts to enhance course completion
establish a national task force with expertise in young people to provide advice to job
centres
establish a flexible class size limit of 28 students in general upper secondary education.
49
Ladderisation provides access ramps for easier transition and progression between vocational and higher
education.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 54
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
Evaluation findings indicated that there are some positive trends towards the fulfillment of
the 95 per cent objective that all young people should complete an upper secondary
education in 2015.50 For example, the share of a youth cohort obtaining an upper-secondary
education five years after ninth grade rose between 2006 and 2007. Only 17 per cent of the
pupils who commenced a basic course in the second half of 2008 dropped out without
choosing another basic course, compared with 22 per cent the previous year.
Youth guidance: Forty-five municipal youth guidance centres provide guidance services for young
people up to the age of 25 years, each with an overall framework defined by the local authority. In
line with the high importance placed upon education both as a foundation for individual well-being
and labour market affiliation – and as a means to extend Denmark’s position in the global economy
– the centres focus on guidance related to transition (e.g. from compulsory school to youth
education or, alternatively, to the labour market). Activities include individual and group guidance
sessions, as well as introductory courses and bridge building schemes to give pupils in forms eight
to ten (age 14-16) a ’taste’ of conditions, levels and requirements at different youth education
institutions.51 The main target groups are:
pupils in primary and lower secondary school: forms 6-9
young people under the age of 25 years who are not involved in education, training or
employment who receive outreach services from the centres (who are obliged to
establish contact with these young people and help them get back into education and
training or employment)
other young people under the age of 25 who contact the centres themselves for
guidance
young people who need extra help and guidance to continue or complete education
programmes.
Cross-sectoral cooperation (between primary schools, lower secondary schools, youth education
institutions, businesses and job centres) is emphasised in the Danish legislation on guidance to
ensure a coherent guidance system and a regular exchange of experiences, knowledge and best
practice. The youth guidance centres may be considered the first step in a lifelong guidance
process.
Parental responsibility and support
The Danish Parental Responsibility Act of March 2006 was introduced to improve parents’
responsibility for their children. It typically instructs parents to take action in circumstances where
it has not previously been possible to establish well-functioning cooperation between parents and
authorities on the welfare of a child. A wide range of initiatives have been introduced to tackle
parent’s ability to support children’s school attendance, for example, including family treatment
units for parents with drug and alcohol misuse problems and homework cafes.52
Supporting parents is one of the Government’s key actions in the national strategy for 2020. Below
are listed the most recent parenting programmes, which began with support from the national level
50
Annex 2. Initiatives in the field of education Denmark’s National Reform Programme – First Progress
Report. October 2009
51
Youth Guidance Centres http://www.eng.uvm.dk/Education/Educational-and-vocational-guidance/YouthGuidance-Centres
52
Attempts have been made to evaluate models contracts (Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and
Prevention, 2008b), but these could not be sourced.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 55
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
and are funded on solid evidence of success, based on experiences from the US and Australia
(Olesen, 2011).
Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY, HIPP HOPP in Denmark):
a parenting programme aiming at improving school readiness for children between the
age of 3-6 years using both one-to-one meetings with parents and groups sessions
Ready for Children: a programme delivered in group settings for parents expecting or
with newborns who are at risk of harming their child or displaying harsh parenting
Parent Management Training the Oregon model (PMTO): a parenting programme that
offers one-to-one counselling to parents of children from 4-12 years with severe
behaviour difficulties (e.g. ADHD)
The Incredible Years (IY): a series of programmes designed to help children with severe
behaviour difficulties (e.g. ADHD), which includes a group-based parenting programme
for parents of children from 2-4 years
Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST): a parenting programme for parents of adolescents
between the age of 12-17 displaying severe behaviour difficulties and criminal
behavior using one-to-one counselling
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC): a treatment programme for
adolescents between the age of 12-17 displaying severe behaviour difficulties and
criminal behavior who need a temporary out of home placement, which includes
thorough parenting support to the biological family via one-to-one sessions.
5.4 Measurement
As previously highlighted, the Government has recently introduced a social policy objective to
reduce poverty and ensure equal opportunities for all, and to aid efforts to tackle poverty is also
developing indicators to measure child poverty. The lack of monitoring and measurement to date is
likely due to historically low child poverty rates. Monitoring and evaluation data has been included
in this case study where applicable and available in English.
6.
Overall lessons for Northern Ireland
give greater flexibility to local authorities to respond to local needs and help mobilise
and involve everyone in society
work together
combine universal provision (make it the norm not the exception) with targeted efforts
for specific vulnerable groups - old adage that prevention is better than cure
integrate information, advice and guidance to support individual choices and
transitions between education, employment and unemployment
adapt and respond to socio-economic changes at national, regional and local levels.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 56
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
References
Christiansen, R. H., & Nielsen, H. O. (2010). Working poor in Europe - Denmark. Retrieved from
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/ewco/studies/tn0910026s/dk0910029q.htm
Eurochild. (2011). Family policies that work best for children, fighting child poverty and promoting
child well-being.
European Commission. (2011). Your Social Security Rights in Denmark.
European Commission Employment Social Affairs and Inclusion DG. (2010). The Measurement of
Extreme Poverty in the European Union. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=751&langId=en
Haarder, B. (Undated). Danish youth policy. Retrieved from http://youth-partnershipeu.coe.int/youth-partnership/ekcyp/By_country/Denmark.html
Hendeliowitz, J. (2008). Danish Employment Policy National Target Setting, Regional Performance
Management and Local Delivery.
Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention. (2008a). National report on strategies
for social protection and social inclusion 2008-2010.
Ministry of Social Welfare Ministry of Health and Prevention. (2008b). National Report on Strategies
for Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2008 - 2010.
Ministry of the Interior and Social Affairs. (2009). The Government's Homelessness Strategy - A
Strategy to Reduce Homelessness in Denmark 2009-2012. Retrieved from
http://www.feantsa.org/files/freshstart/National_Strategies/Danish_strategy_Pjece%20om
%20hjeml%C3%B8sestrategien_EN.pdf.
Olesen, M. (2011). Building a coordinated strategy to help parents; The general framework of social
policy and parenting support in Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.peer-review-socialinclusion.eu/peer-reviews
Rosholm, M. (2011). The Effectiveness of Danish Labour Market Policy - Evidence from Social
Experiements. Paper presented at the Social Experimentation in Action, Brussels, belgium.
http://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/documents/9%20Presentation%20Mic
hael%20Rosholm.pdf
TARKI. (2010). Child poverty and child well-being in the European Union. Report prepared for the
DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (Unit E.2) of the European
Commission. Budapest: Tarki Social Research Institute.
The Danish Government. (2006). Progress, innovation and cohesion: A strategy for Denmark in the
global economy - summary. Retrieved from
http://www.globalisering.dk/multimedia/Pixi_UK_web_endelig1.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2009a). Denmark's National Reform Programme, First Progress Report,
Contribution to the EU's Growth and Employment Strategy (The Lisbon Strategy). Retrieved
from
http://uk.bm.dk/Themes/~/media/BEM/Files/English/Acts/Denmarks%20National%20Refo
rm%20Programme%20oct%2009.ashx.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 57
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Denmark case study
Blades
The Danish Government. (2009b). Denmark's National Reform Programme, first progress report:
Contribution to the EU's growth and employment strategy (The Lisbon Strategy). Retrieved
from
http://uk.bm.dk/Themes/~/media/BEM/Files/English/Acts/Denmarks%20National%20Refo
rm%20Programme%20oct%2009.ashx.
The Danish Government. (2010). Denmark 2020, Knowledge, Growth,Prosperity, Welfare.
Retrieved from
http://www.stm.dk/publikationer/arbprog_10_uk/Denmark_2020_knowledge_growth_pro
sperity_welfare.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2011). A Denmark That Stands Together. Retrieved from
http://www.stm.dk/publikationer/Et_Danmark_der_staar_sammen_11/Regeringsgrundlag
_okt_2011.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2012a). Implementation of the Social Funds for 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.sm.dk/Puljer/satspulje/Documents/2012%20Udmoentning%20af%20satsregul
eringspuljen.pdf
The Danish Government. (2012b). The National Reform Programme, Denmark 2012. Retrieved
from http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/nd/nrp2012_denmark_en.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2012c). Reference for the Committee of Experts to illustrate the methods
to calculate poverty and the proposal for a Danish poverty line.
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration. (2011). Social policy in Denmark. Retrieved from
http://english.sm.dk/international/eu-presidency2012/Documents/Social_Policy_Folder_dec2011.pdf.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (2012). Measuring child poverty: New league tables of child
poverty in the world's rich countries. Innocenti Report Card 10. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti
Research Centre.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 58
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Appendix C.
United States case study –
Focus on State of Connecticut and New York City
Becky Fauth
National Children’s Bureau: working with children, for children
Registered Charity Number 258825.
8 Wakley Street, London EC1V 7QE. Tel: 020 7843 6000
Connect with us:
© NCB, October 2012
Facebook: www.facebook.com/ncbfb
Twitter: @ncbtweets
United States case study
Fauth
Contents
Summary61
1.
United States .......................................................................................................................... 62
1.1 US overview .................................................................................................................................... 62
1.2 Child poverty in the US.................................................................................................................... 62
1.3 Child poverty strategy ..................................................................................................................... 63
2.
State of Connecticut ............................................................................................................... 66
2.1 State overview ................................................................................................................................ 66
2.2 Demographics ................................................................................................................................. 66
2.3 Child poverty in Connecticut ........................................................................................................... 67
2.4 Child poverty strategy ..................................................................................................................... 67
2.5 Overall lessons for NI ...................................................................................................................... 77
3.
New York City ......................................................................................................................... 78
3.1 City overview ................................................................................................................................... 78
3.2 Demographics ................................................................................................................................. 78
3.3 Child poverty in New York City ........................................................................................................ 78
3.4 Child poverty strategy ..................................................................................................................... 79
3.5 Overall lessons for NI ...................................................................................................................... 89
References...................................................................................................................................... 90
www.ncb.org.uk
page 60
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Summary
The child poverty rate in the US is highest among OECD countries.
There is no overall US child poverty strategy.
In 2004, Connecticut became the first state in the US to enact a law setting a poverty
target. The Child Poverty and Prevention Council was established in 2006 to manage
the child poverty strategy in Connecticut.
Since 2008, the Council’s efforts have focused on the income safety net, family
income and education. Based on bespoke research, Connecticut has more recently
begun to focus on increasing enrolment in subsidised housing, energy assistance and
nutrition assistance; increasing attainment of Associates Degrees;53 and guaranteeing
child care subsidies as the key strategies to reduce poverty.
In 2006, the New York City Mayor’s office established the Center for Economic
Opportunity (CEO), which designs and tests new anti-poverty initiatives in
collaboration with city agencies.
To date, CEO has funded and tested over 50 programmes. CEO includes a rigourous
monitoring and evaluation agenda to enable replication (and expansion) of
programmes that demonstrate impact and elimination of programmes that do not.
When initiatives show positive results, they move from pilot status to permanent
programmes, the latter of which are housed at city agencies, who subsequently hold
funding and decision-making authority.
53
In the US, an associate degree is equivalent to the first two years of a four-year college or university degree.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 61
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
1.
Fauth
United States
1.1 US overview
Social policy in the US is exemplified by its focus on individual responsibility and employment-based
policies. Shying away from universal benefits, most benefits are stringently means-tested (i.e. have
very strict eligibility criteria), targeting poor families.
Given strong devolution to individual states, the US does not have a federal child poverty strategy
as such. Rather, states – and, in some cases, cities – typically set their own social policy agendas
using federal funds where possible, and supplementing them with state funding, to tackle child
poverty.
1.2 Child poverty in the US
According to many estimates (Hoelscher, 2004; OECD, 2012; UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre,
2012), the child poverty rate in the US is highest among OECD countries, which many see as a
reflection of lack of comprehensive federal social and family policy. The most recent UNICEF report,
using the percentage of children living in households with equivalent income lower than 50 per
cent of the national median to assess poverty, puts the US child poverty rate as 23.1 per cent
(UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2012).
While the reports cited above use a relative measure (i.e. determining poverty status based on the
income of the ‘average’ family), the official poverty measure in the US is an absolute threshold (i.e.
based on a set level of income or resources). This threshold, which was originally developed in
1959, is based on expected food expenditures for families of varying sizes and adjusted annually for
the Consumer Price Index cost of living. A family’s pre-tax cash income is compared against the
threshold to determine whether its members are living in poverty. In 2011, the poverty threshold
for a single mother raising two children was $18,123 per annum.54 The poverty guidelines (often
referred to as the federal poverty level, or FPL) are a simplified version of the threshold primarily
used to determine financial eligibility for social programmes. The poverty guidelines figure for a
family of three in 2011 was $18,530.55
According to the official Census Bureau estimates, 22 per cent of children under 18 years were in
poverty in 2010 (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2011). The percentage of children in poverty has
been on the rise since 2008, and when looking at the percentage living at or below 200 per cent of
the FPL, 44 per cent of American children are poor (Addy & Wight, 2012). Black and Hispanic
children are considerably more likely than White families to live in poverty, as are children living in
single parent families, children whose parents have less than a high school degree and children who
reside with parents who do not work. Child poverty rates are lowest in the Northeast region of the
US, the location of our two US case studies.
Many experts have criticised the poverty threshold for: (1) underestimating the type and degree of
expenditures families must outlay from month-to-month, (2) ignoring regional differences in living
costs and (3) excluding alternative sources of income that were specifically designed for lowincome families, such as food stamps and housing subsidies (Citro & Michael, 1995). From 2011, a
54
55
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/index.html - 1 USD ($) is approximately .63 GBP (£).
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/figures-fed-reg.shtml
www.ncb.org.uk
page 62
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
supplemental poverty measure (SPM) aimed at redressing many of these criticisms complements
the existing threshold (Short, 2011). Specifically, the SPM calibrates the threshold (to be adjusted
geographically) based on the average expenditures of families living below the median income (but
who are not poor), including food costs, housing, clothing and utilities ‘plus a little more’ in its
calculations. Federal in-kind benefits (e.g. food stamps, housing subsidies, etc.) are included in
families’ incomes, with taxes, childcare and out-of-pocket medical expenses deducted from income
calculations. In 2010, the child poverty rate using the SPM was 18.2 per cent (Short, 2011). This
difference between the poverty threshold percentage and the SPM percentage is likely due to the
important influence of tax credits and in-kind benefits aimed at families with children (i.e. for other
age groups, the SPM estimate is higher than the poverty threshold estimate).
Prior to the national implementation of the SPM in 2011, both Connecticut and New York City
created poverty measures based on a set of 1995 recommendations from the National Academy
(Citro & Michael, 1995), which informed the current SPM.
1.3 Child poverty strategy
From the beginning of his administration in 2009, President Obama intended to fund only social
programmess that had solid evidence of success (Haskins & Baron, 2011). Broadly, the
adminstration selects important social problems, identifies model programmes that have been
shown – using randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or other rigorous research – to significantly
reduce the problem, and then obtains funds from Congress to scale-up these evidence-based
programmess. New projects are evaluated to ensure they are faithfully implemented and produce
good results.
The administration is implementing this evidence-based strategy in six areas:
Evidence-Based Home Visitation Program for at-risk families with young children
(Department of Health and Human Services – HHS). Key outcomes focus on maternal and
child health, early childhood development, and family functioning.
Evidence-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention program (HHS). Key outcome is reduction in teen
pregnancy.
Investing in Innovation Fund to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based
educational strategies (Department of Education – DOE). Initiatives must focus on at least
one of the following: improve outcomes for pre-school children, help students qualify for or
succeed in college, help students with disabilities or with limited-English proficiency or serve
schools in rural areas.
Social Innovation Fund to support public/private investment in evidence-based programmes
in low-income communities (Corporation for National and Community Service). The money is
to be used to fund evidence-based programmes addressed to at least one of three broad
areas of social policy: economic opportunity, youth development and school support, and
promoting healthy lifestyles and avoiding risky behaviour.
Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Program to fund
development and scale-up of evidence-based education and career training programmes for
dislocated workers (Department of Labor – DOL). Education and employment are key
outcomes.
Workforce Innovation Fund to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based strategies
to improve education and employment outcomes for US workers (DOL). Programmes must
impact student learning, employment, and earnings.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 63
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
The Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy56 is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organisation whose mission is
to increase government effectiveness through the use of rigorous evidence about ‘what works’ for
social policy. The Coalition’s work with the government has helped inform and shape the policy
initiatives summarised above.
1.3.1 Policies, programmes and initiatives
Before describing in detail the child poverty strategies of the State of Connecticut and New York
City, it is useful, by way of context, to briefly summarise the key federal anti-poverty strategies in
the US. It should be noted that while the programmes summarised are federal in scope, they are
often at least partially funded by individual states, and for some, states set the eligibility criteria
and benefit levels.
Key policies include are summarised below (for summaries see Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, & Scholz,
2011; Cancian, Meyer, & Reed, 2010; Hoelscher, 2004; Smeeding & Waldfogel, 2010; Williams
Shanks & Danziger, 2011).
1.3.1.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
Temporary Assistance to Needy Familes (TANF) provides funding to states through a federal block
grant for provision of financial support to poor families and initiatives that decrease non-marital
births and promote work. The flexibility of funding enables states to match their use of money with
local needs. The federal funds cannot be used to pay for more than five years of (lifetime) cash
assistance, but states are allowed to shorten or extend the timelimits out of their own revenues.
Recipients must work as soon as they are job ready, and a set proportion of each state’s recipients
must work at least 30 hours per week (more hours for two-parent families) or engage in workrelated activities.
Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) are income supplements aimed at lowincome families. EITC is refundable so that even workers who don’t earn enough to pay income tax
or whose entitlement is higher than their tax liability are paid a rebate. Eligibility and benefit levels
depend on: (1) whether the taxpayer has children (and how many), (2) the taxpayer’s marital status
and (3) earnings relative to family size and marital status. State EITC is is granted on top of federal
tax credits in some states. Alongside SNAP (see below), EITC is the most effective US anti-poverty
programme. CTC reduces tax liability for families making less than $130,000 per year. The per-child
amount is currently capped at $1,000, but will return to $500 per child in 2013 if the law is not
changed.
Unemployment Insurance (UI) provides cash payments to the unemployed who have been made
involuntarily redundant. UI is a state-level programme, whereby states set eligibility and benefit
levels. Benefits are paid for only a fixed amount of time (usually six months), but the federal
government subsidises extensions during economic downturns (see ARRA).
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 (ARRA) was created to bolster the safety net for
poor families. Its provisions include increasing the federal EITC, the refundable CTC and SNAP (see
below), and extending UI and related benefits.
56
www.coalition4evidence.org
www.ncb.org.uk
page 64
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
1.3.1.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) provides funding for states to provide child care
vouchers, or contracts with providers, to low-income families. States can transfer a portion of TANF
funds to CCDF or spend TANF directly for child care. Many states (39 in 2011) provide state-funded
pre-K to 4-year-olds (and some 3-year-olds), which may be offered in public schools, as well as
community-based settings. In 2011, 32 per cent of 4-year-olds and 8 per cent of 3-year-olds
attended state-funded pre-K (National Institute for Early Education Research, 2011). States
determine income and work status eligibility for child care funding.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, aka ‘food stamps’) and the Women, Infants,
and Children (WIC) programme provide food assistance to poor families. SNAP is a federal
programme for families at (or slightly above) the federal poverty level. Alongside EITC, SNAP is the
most effective US anti-poverty programme. WIC provides food, health care and nutrition
information for low-income pregnant and post-natal women and children under 5 years. WIC
eligibility is set by states based on income and nutrition risk.
Housing benefits in the US include vouchers for housing in the private market (Section 8) and
provision of subsidised housing in publicly managed buildings (or privately owned but managed
under government contract). Eligibility is determined in local areas (i.e. housing authorities).
Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) provide health care to lowincome families and children. Medicaid is jointly run by the federal and state governments,
whereas under SCHIP, the federal government pays a share of state costs for medical care to lowincome children who are not eligible for Medicaid. States set eligibility and service requirements for
SCHIP.
1.3.1.3 Policies that promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
Head Start (HS) and Early Head Start (EHS) are federally funded community-based programmes that
provide comprehensive child development services to low-income children and their families.
Comprising individualised education, health and nutrition service, the objective of HS is to prepare
children aged 3 to 5 years for success in school. Support and training of parents to enable them to
foster the development of their children and to move towards self-sufficiency is also integral to HS.
EHS was introduced in 1994 as a complementary programme to HS offering services for pregnant
women, infants and toddlers. The main objectives are the promotion of healthy prenatal outcomes
for pregnant women, the improvement of early child development and the enhancement of the
quality of parent-child relationships. Services take place in home and/or centre-based settings.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 65
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
2.
Fauth
State of Connecticut
2.1 State overview
Connecticut was the first state in the US to enact a law setting a poverty target. With relatively low
child poverty levels (by US standards), it makes for a useful case study to inform NI.
Connecticut is a state in the New England region of the Northeastern US. Much of southern and
western Connecticut (along with the majority of the state's population) is part of the New York
metropolitan area, widely referred to as the ‘Tri-State’ area.
The Connecticut state government has three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The head
of the executive branch is the governor, who is elected to a four-year term. There executive
departments include: Administrative Services, Agriculture, Banking, Children and Families,
Consumer Protection, Correction, Economic and Community Development, Developmental
Services, Construction Services, Education, Energy and Environmental Protection, Information
Technology, Insurance, Labor, Mental Health and Addiction Services, Military, Motor Vehicles,
Public Health, Public Safety, Public Utility Regulatory Authority, Public Works, Revenue Services,
Social Services, Transportation and Veterans Affairs.
The legislature in Connecticut is called the General Assembly, which has an upper body, the State
Senate (36 senators), and a lower body, the House of Representatives (151 representatives). Bills
must pass each house in order to become law. The governor can veto the bill, but this veto can be
overridden by a two-thirds majority in each house. The Lieutenant Governor presides over the
Senate (the President Pro Tempore in his/her absence), and the Speaker of the House presides over
the House.
The highest court of Connecticut's judicial branch is the Connecticut Supreme Court, headed by the
Chief Justice of Connecticut. The Supreme Court is responsible for deciding on the constitutionality
of the law or cases as they relate to the law.
There is also local government.
2.2 Demographics
More than three-quarters of the state’s residents are White (77.6 per cent), with 10.1 per cent
Black or African American and 13.4 per cent Hispanic.
Connecticut ranks first in the US for per capita income.57 There is, however, a great disparity in
incomes throughout the state. In particular, Connecticut’s larger cities including Hartford,
Bridgeport and New Haven have relatively low per capita incomes, but are surrounded by wealthy
suburbs. The state's unemployment rate in June 2012 was 8.1 per cent.58 Connecticut ranks second
among states in income inequality (Bee, 2012).
57
58
http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-pci.htm
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm/
www.ncb.org.uk
page 66
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
2.3 Child poverty in Connecticut
Using the official FPL, the child poverty rate in CT in 2010 was 12.8 per cent (relative to 22 per cent
across the US). The child poverty rates since 2003 are presented in Figure 1 below. Connecticut has
the second lowest child poverty rate in the nation. In 2010, 26.8 per cent of children were living at
or below 200 per cent of the FPL; this alternate measure roughly corresponds to Connecticut’s SelfSufficiency Standard, which assesses the income necessary for a family to meet basic needs.
Figure 1. Child poverty rates in CT 2003-2010
30%
Percent children
25%
20%
Percent of children under
18 in households with
income <100% fpl
15%
Percent of children under
18 in households with
income <200% fpl
10%
5%
0%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: (Foley, 2012)
Similar to the US, child poverty rates in Connecticut vary substantially based on location, and Black
and Hispanic children and children living in single parent families are significantly more likely to live
in poverty in Connecticut than their counterparts.
2.4 Child poverty strategy
In 2004, Connecticut became the first state in the US to enact a law setting a poverty target,
bringing together disparate state agencies together to work toward a common goal. The measure
was signed into law in 2004, and in 2006, the Child Poverty Council and the state’s Prevention
Council merged into the
Child Poverty and Prevention Council.59 The purpose of the Child Poverty and Prevention Council is
to:
develop and promote the implementation of a 10-year plan to reduce the number of children
living in poverty in Connecticut by 50 per cent (by 2014)
establish prevention goals and recommendations and measure prevention service outcomes
to promote the health and well-being of children and families.
59
http://www.ct.gov/opm/cwp/view.asp?a=2997&q=383356
www.ncb.org.uk
page 67
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
The council reports annually on progress toward the goal of cutting child poverty in half, focusing
on the governor’s budget, as well as on poverty and prevention reports from state agencies with
membership on the Council. Each agency’s report must include information on:
long-term agency goals
strategies
performance-based standards
outcomes and performance-based accountability
a statement on the overall effectiveness of prevention within the agency
methods used to reduce disparities in child performance and outcomes by race, income level
and gender
a brief description of the purpose of the prevention program
the number of children and families served
state and federal funding for the fiscal year.
The council also advises the governor and legislature on ways to realign the state’s budget to
ensure that it is compatible with reducing child poverty.
2.4.1 Government departments
The following government departments and people are involved in Connecticut’s child poverty
strategy. Many of the keys policies, programmes and initiatives are run by the following
departments.
Office of Policy and Management
the President Pro Tempore of the Senate
the Speaker of the House of Representatives
Department of Children and Families (DCF)
Department of Education (DOE)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS)
Department of Developmental Services (DDS)
Department of Public Health (DPH)
Department of Social Services (DSS)
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD)
Judicial Branch, Support Court Service Division
Board of Regents for Higher Education
Health Care Access
the Child Advocate
the chair of the State Prevention Council
the Executive Director of the Children’s Trust Fund
the Executive Director of the Commission on Children
the Executive Director of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities
2.4.2 Policies, programmes and initiatives
Since 2008, the Council’s efforts have focused on the income safety net, family income and
education. Below is a brief summary of some of the state’s actions in 2011 to address child poverty
and promote children’s well-being.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 68
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
2.4.2.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
State EITC: In 2011, Connecticut began offering a state earned income tax credit. This fully
refundable credit provides a benefit of up to approximately $1,700 to approximately 190,000 lowincome families.
Job Creation: A recent public act promoting economic growth and job creation in the state
established new and existing business assistance, economic and workforce development, and job
training programs, and another created the Connecticut Bioscience Collaboration programme to
support establishment of a bioscience cluster, which will enable nearly 7,000 permanent jobs.
2.4.2.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
TANF Contingency Funding: Connecticut received $32.4 million in new federal funds to provide
short-term emergency room services to families, subsidised employment opportunities to
individuals, baby supplies, school supplies, support services to assist families to remain in their
homes and summer camp opportunities for children.
Supportive Housing: Across the state, 150 new units of supportive housing were developed,
providing permanent, affordable housing matched with support services for families and individuals
at risk of homelessness.
Affordable Housing: The state budget included $100 million for housing development and
rehabilitation projects to increase the availability of affordable housing options for low-income
families.
Federal Emergency Homeowners Loan Program (FEHLP) and Emergency Mortgage Assistance
Program (EMAP): The Connecticut Housing Finance Authority (CHFA) approved a total of 1,070
assistance loans to homeowners and 280 loans to homeowners facing foreclosure.
2.4.2.3 Policies that promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
Early Childhood System: A coordinated early childhood system in Connecticut was created in 2011.
Academic Achievement Gap: The Achievement Gap Task Force was created to consider effective
approaches to closing the achievement gaps in elementary, middle and high schools and develop a
master plan to eliminate gaps.
Board of Regents for Higher Education: This Board was created to improve coordination, expand
transparency and streamline administrative structures across the state’s HE system.
2.4.2.4 Key prevention programmes and services by department
Below we summarise some relevant findings from the 2011 agencies report (State of Connecticut,
2011). Prevention programmes and services highlighted in this report serve children from birth to
age 18 and their families. Programmes included were designed to prevent or eliminate at-risk
behaviour before problems occur and promote the health and well-being of children. Further
details of specific programmes and funding can be found in the full report. Most of these policies
and programmes are aimed at promoting child well-being and early intervention and prevention.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 69
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Department of Labor
Aim: enable all families who receive time-limited state cash assistance to become and remain
independent of welfare through employment by the end of the 21-month time limit on cash
assistance; provide low-income youth aged 14-24 years with meaningful paid work experiences
Key programmes: Jobs First Employment Services (JFES), CT Youth Employment Program (CYEP)
Key outcomes: employment status, earned wages above TANF or FPL
Data collected: JFES issues monthly figures on the number of JFES participants who are employed
by vendor and statewide; and the number of participants with earnings higher than the Temporary
Family Assistance (TFA) payment standard and the FPL. CYEP collects data on the number of youth
to participate in a paid work experience. DOL also collects data on the number of youth to
participate in job-readiness training and to receive support services. In 2011, 1,853 young people
enrolled in CYEP with 1,661 completing the programme.
Department for Children and Families
Aim: prevent maltreatment by promoting nurturing and attachment between family members;
knowledge of parenting and child development; parental emotional resilience; social connections
for parents; and concrete supports, such as food, clothing, housing, transportation, and services.
Key programmes: DCF/Head Start Partnership, Early Childhood Consultation Partnership (ECCP),
Early Childhood Services, Positive Youth and Family Strengthening Development Initiative, Youth
Suicide Prevention
Key outcomes: less need for DCF services; children to remain safely at home; more timely
permanency; improved child well-being; better preparation for youth in transition
Data collected: enrolment and monitoring information; performance-based outcomes; several
programmes have existing or planned evaluations
Researchers at the Yale Child Study Center conducted a RCT of ECCP from 2007 (Gilliam,
2007). ECCP provides consultation and training to staff in early childhood settings to promote
children’s socio-emotional well-being to prevent problem behaviours. The study compared
outcomes for children who were enrolled in classrooms that received ECCP services those
that did not. Children in ECCP classrooms demonstrated significantly fewer behaviour
problems including hyperactivity and oppositional behaviours, but no significant programme
effects were found for observable classroom quality or teacher-child interactions. ECCP is a
manualised programme with a detailed implementation strategy. Since 2002, ECCP has
operated within 67 per cent of Connecticut’s licenced early childhood settings. In 2011, it
served 3,035 children and 1,192 teachers.
Department of Developmental Services
Aim: provide early intervention to families of very young children with disabilities or delays to
ameliorate the delay or to at least prevent secondary disabilities; support families to care for their
children in the family home; and prevent out-of-home placement
www.ncb.org.uk
page 70
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Key programmes: Birth to Three, Family Support Services
Key outcomes: early identification of disability; improvement in children’s developmental
trajectories; parental confidence and competence; decrease in need for special education services;
children able to live at home longer with their families; children and families receive appropriate
supports
Data collected: All Birth to Three contractors are part of a real-time data system that enables the
state to view their performance on a daily basis
Department of Education
Aim: ensure high-quality preschool education for all; high academic achievement of all students in
reading, writing, mathematics and science; all students graduate high school prepared for lifelong
learning and careers
Key programmes: Even Start Family Literacy Program, Early Childhood Program (school readiness)
Key outcomes: high-quality preschool education for all young children; children enter kindergarten
fully prepared for further learning in literacy and numeracy; increase in teachers with specific early
childhood education qualifications; progress towards quality standards in Early Childhood
Education; increased achievement of all students; closing achievement gaps; increased teacher
retention rates and ethnic minority teachers in high-need districts; fewer districts and schools
identified as needing improvement or corrective action; increased family participation in planning
and improvement of school programmes; increased support to families for supporting children’s
learning at home; increased high school graduation requirements; access to meaningful out-ofschool learning experiences for students; reduce the number of students who are suspended or
drop out of high school
Data collected: enrolment and monitoring information (including graduation rates); young
children’s school readiness skills; adult education and parenting skills (for parents participating in
Even Start); achievement test scores (by receipt of free/reduced meals)
Even Start is required to contract for local programme evaluations, which require 3-5 visits to
individual programmes annually to review early childhood records and lesson plans, observe
instruction and conduct focus groups with staff and adults. All programmes must report on
quality, attendance and outcomes, as well as meet state standards or performance indicators
of success in early childhood, adult education and parenting education. Outcomes,
attendance and quality assurance standards are reviewed on a monthly and an annual basis
at the local and state level. Programmes must also develop local objectives that are
measurable and demonstrate the quality of their programme and outcomes.
Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services
Aim: reduce the incidence of problem behaviour, improve health and well-being, and achieve
quantifiable decreases in substance abuse rates
Key programmes: Partnership for Success, Tobacco Prevention and Enforcement
Key outcomes: decrease substance abuse rates, including tobacco use among 12-17 year olds and
alcohol use; reduce suicidal behaviour; decrease criminal justice involvement; reduce retailer
violations for tobacco sales to minors
www.ncb.org.uk
page 71
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Data collected: DMHAS assesses its performance against the federal health outcome measures, as
assessed in the annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which provides state reports
(NSDUH60). Recent outcomes include: a reduction in cigarette and other tobacco use rates among
12-17 year-olds, as well as recent use of illicit drugs across all ages; a reduction in alcohol use rates
over the past year among young people ages 12-20; decreases in the number of tobacco merchants
selling tobacco products to minors (to 11 per cent in 2011 from a high of 70 per cent in 1996).
Department of Public Health
Aim: protect and improve health and safety by assuring the conditions in which people can be
healthy; promoting physical and mental health; and preventing disease, injury and disability
Key programmes: Asthma Program: Easy Breathing; Child Day Care Licensing; Community Health
Centers (CHC); Emergency Medical Services for Children; Family Planning; Immunization Program;
Injury Prevention; Lead Poisoning Prevention and Control; Newborn Laboratory Screening and
Tracking; Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity (NPAO); Oral Health-Home by One; Rape Crisis and
Prevention Services; Tobacco Use Prevention and Control; Special Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infant and Children
Key outcomes: number of pregnant women receiving prenatal care in first trimester; number of
children with appropriate immunisations; number low birthweight; increase in lead screening rates;
decrease in prevalence of children with elevated blood lead levels; increase in fruit and vegetable
intake and physical activity among preschoolers; appropriate weight gain during pregnancy; low
birthweight; breastfeeding initiation and duration; childhood anemia
Data collected: enrolment and monitoring information; reviews of medical records and treatment
plans; some individual programmes use surveys (e.g. NPAO carries out evaluation including preand post-tests)
The Connecticut School Health Survey (CSHS61) is a series of school-based biennial surveys
comprised of the Youth Tobacco Component (YTC) for students in grades 6-12 and the Youth
Behavior Component (YBC) for students in grades 9-12. The surveys provide data on health
risk behaviours and links between these behaviours and students’ academic achievement.
Department of Social Services
Aims: provide programmes and services that address the root causes of and the concomitants of
poverty including increased access to affordable housing; increased awareness and availability and
access to food and good nutrition; increased awareness of and access to preventive and curative
health; and increasing the number of children who are ‘ready to learn’ by providing childcare and
parenting education focusing on helping infants and toddlers develop appropriate socio-emotional
skills.
Key programmes: Children’s Trust Fund, which includes Healthy Start and Nurturing Families
Network (NFN); Fatherhood Initiative; Teenage Pregnancy Prevention
Key outcomes: reduced rate and severity of child abuse and neglect; improved parent-child
interaction and parenting skills; gains in household stability, education and employment; enhanced
60
61
https://nsduhweb.rti.org/
http://www.ct.gov/dph/cwp/view.asp?a=3132&q=388104&dphNav_GID=1832
www.ncb.org.uk
page 72
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
family relationships and parent well-being; increased developmental monitoring and access to
services; maternal health; infant and child health; child development
Data collected: DSS is currently in the process of formalising a longitudinal data collection and
analysis strategy to go beyond the process measures they currently collect
Several studies conducted by the University of Hartford Center for Social Research (CSR62)
show that programmes supported by the Children’s Trust Fund reduce the incidence and
severity of child abuse and neglect and help parents to take hold of their responsibilities and
become better caregivers. For example, highlights of the 2010 report on the NFN, which is
intensive home visiting for new parents who are at high risk for child abuse and neglect
include:
Mothers who received 1-2 years of NFN services made significant gains in education,
employment and independent living, but they still struggled financially.
NFN mothers reduced their risk of maltreating their children.
NFN mothers were better able to access available resources in their communities
(Damboise & Hughes, 2010).
In 2011, 1,950 families received intensive home visiting services from NFN.
Judicial Branch, Support Court Service Division
Aim: divert children from juvenile court involvement and penetration into criminal justice system
Key programmes: Education Support Services; Family Support Centers
Key outcomes: reduction in juvenile court intake; increases in juveniles engaged in criminogenic
need-based treatment; reduction in 24-month re-arrest rates for juveniles on probation or
supervision; fewer delinquency commitments
Data collected: intake; treatment enrolment and completion; recidivism rates; commitments to
long-term residential placements or for incarceration. Recent data indicates decreases in intakes,
increases in treatment and decreases in commitments.
A model intervention that holds great promise in diverting school-based arrests is the SchoolBased Diversion Initiative (SBDI), which aims to bridge existing behavioural health services
and supports to children and youth with mental health needs to prevent juvenile justice
involvement. Results of a 2011 evaluation comparing Emergency Mobile Psychiatric Services
(EMPS) utilisation rates and arrest data within two communities with SBDI compared to
matched communities without SBDI reported:
Among youth with previous juvenile justice involvement, rates of subsequent referrals were
significantly lower in SBDI communities (31 per cent) than non-SBDI communities (43 per
cent), even after controlling for race, age, gender and previous delinquency.
Youth with previous juvenile justice involvement in SBDI communities experienced lower
risk and delayed onset of recidivism (398 days to re-arrest) compared to non-SBDI
communities (258 days) (O'Connell, 2011).
62
http://www.centerforsocialresearch.org/?page_id=102
www.ncb.org.uk
page 73
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
2.4.2.5 New programmes and initiatives
In 2009, the Office of Policy and Management contracted the Urban Institute to provide an
economic analysis of which recommended strategies would reduce child poverty in Connecticut
most significantly using various measures of poverty (i.e. FPL, 200 per cent of FPL and an alternate
measure similar to the SPM) (Giannarelli & Zedlewski, 2009). The analysis used the TRIM3 model,63
a micro-simulation model of the key tax and benefit programmes affecting low-income families.
TRIM3 simulates the effects of different programme rules on families’ incomes and poverty by first
calculating the direct effect of the alternatives on families’ programme benefits and taxes, and
second estimating any potential labour supply response to the alternative policies. The analysis
identified three recommendations:
increase enrolment in subsidised housing, energy assistance and nutrition assistance
increase attainment of Associates Degrees64
guarantee child care subsidies
The analysis estimated that if these recommendations were instated, reductions in poverty would
range from 10 per cent to 29 per cent using the various poverty measures. Based on this
quantitative analysis and further discussion, the Council’s recommendations for action in 2012 are:
1. Reduce homelessness:
increase Rental Assistance Program certificates (RAPs) available to families with children,
prioritising services to populations, such as families involved in the child welfare system who
are separated or at risk of permanent separation, young adults ages 18-24 who have aged
out of the child welfare system and are homeless or at risk of being homeless, and families
with children with physical and mental health needs
re-open the Security Deposit Guarantee Program
continue to implement supportive housing for families with children
align investments of state agencies in family housing
2. Enhance Early Childhood Education
allow low-income parents up to 75 per cent of the state median income (instead of the
current 50 per cent) to enroll in Care4Kids, the programme that provides child care
assistance to low- to moderate-income families
create a ‘bridge’ programme to cover Care4Kids costs for providers between the time an
application is submitted and approved (usually 60 days), to ensure that parents do not lose a
job during the wait period
3. Post-secondary education
expand Western Connecticut State University’s Bridges programme to all community
colleges, in which professors work with middle- and high-school students, administrators and
teachers in priority school districts to reduce the need for remedial education
collect and distribute data to inform all public school districts of remedial education needs
and six-year college graduation rates on a biennial basis65
63
http://trim.urban.org
In the US, an associate degree is equivalent to the first two years of a four-year college or university degree.
65
For more details, see
http://www.ctregents.org/files/pdfs/p20/Supplemental%20Data%20Review%20for%20Superintendents%20%20web.pdf
64
www.ncb.org.uk
page 74
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
expand financial aid strategies to cover cost of living expenses
4. Enhance access to supplemental nutrition program
increase enrolment for federal energy and nutrition assistance programmes including
streamlining applications, improving access to offices, increasing efficiency of application
processing, enhancing outreach and creating ‘one-stop shopping’
Other key recommendations include:
continue to promote use of federal and state EITC
enforce existing truancy laws and support efforts to address truancy to help lessen youth
dropout rates
enhance General Educational Development (GED)66 and literacy programmes for TANF
participants including piloting ways of expediting attainment of high school diplomas or GEDs
or supplementing income for parents who move from welfare to work
provide support for young mothers on TANF including developing programmes of support for
pregnant and parenting teens
The Council also wishes to promote collaboration across agencies including publicising to enrollees
of one programme their eligibility for another, integrating existing screening tools and creating a
coordinated leadership team across agencies. The following are examples of successful interagency
collaborations:
DCF Head Start Partnership: The focus of this partnership is to develop strategies to promote
young children's healthy development and the stability of the child within the family. All 14
DCF Area Offices have formed partnerships with the Head Start programmes in their area,
providing more young children with DCF involvement or in DCF placements high-quality
preschool placements, as well as support and resources for their parents.
State Healthy Start Program: DPH provides funding to DSS to administer the State Healthy
Start Program, an insurance programme for low-income pregnant women. The agencies
collaborated on the drafting of the new contract language to implement changes to Healthy
Start that promote screening of women for risk of abuse and neglect, and a system to refer
women for services and enrollment into a comprehensive home visiting programme.
66
GED tests are a group of tests assessing high school-level academic skills. They are often taken by people
who no longer attend high school, but wish to receive a high school equivalency diploma.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 75
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
2.4.3 Measurement
As summarised above, each state agency included in the prevention strategy also measures
outcomes related to their service.
Table 1 below summarises some of the key outcomes for Connecticut.
Table 1. Key outcomes aligned with child poverty strategy
FPL
Poverty
200 per cent FPL
Alternative poverty measure (similar to SPM)
Reduction in welfare dependence and increase in employment
Welfare and employment status
Reduction in in-work poverty
Increased take-up of state and federal EITC
Increased job-readiness
Increased enrolment in subsidised and supportive housing
In-kind benefits
Increased enrolment in nutrition assistance
Increased eligibility for child care subsidies
Reduction in child abuse and neglect
Family relationships
Reduction in placements away from home
Improved parent-child interactions and parenting skills
Improved developmental trajectories and achievement for all
children
Increased enrolment in preschool education
Child development and
achievement
Improved home learning environment
Increased achievement test scores
Increased high school graduation rates
Increased attainment of Associate’s Degrees
Substance use
Reduction in substance abuse rates
Reduction in retailer violations for underage sales
Increased pre-natal care
Reduction in low birthweight
Reduction in lead poisoning
Health
Increased breastfeeding initiation
Reduction in suicides
Increased immunisation
Increased healthy eating
Reduction teen pregnancy
Criminal justice
www.ncb.org.uk
Reduction in recidivism
Increased engagement in needs-based treatment
page 76
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
2.5 Overall lessons for NI
focus on prevention
set targets and outcomes
regularly measure performance against targets and outcomes
set up a group, agency or council responsible for organising child poverty strategy, setting
targets and holding agencies responsible for delivering their targets
encourage multi-agency working
understand the drivers and correlates of poverty – overall, in your country and in particular
regions.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 77
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
3.
Fauth
New York City
3.1 City overview
New York City is a good example of use of rigourous evidence to trial new and innovative poverty
solutions – in one of the world’s largest and most diverse cities.
New York City is located in the Northeastern US, in southeastern New York State, approximately
halfway between Washington, DC and Boston. New York City consists of five boroughs - The Bronx,
Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island, each of which comprises a state county. It is the
most populous city in the US, with an estimated 2011 population of 8,244,910 distributed over a
land area of 305 square miles.67
The New York City government is responsible for public education, correctional institutions,
libraries, public safety, recreational facilities, sanitation, water supply and welfare services.
The executive branch of the New York City government consists of the Mayor, the Public Advocate,
the Comptroller the and five Borough Presidents. The heads of about 50 city departments are
appointed by the mayor. The mayor also appoints several Deputy Mayors to head major offices
within the executive branch of the city government. The mayor is responsible for all city services,
police and fire protection, enforcement of all city and state laws within the city, and administration
of public property and most public agencies.
The New York City Council, which consists of 51 members, each elected from a geographic district,
comprises the legislature.
New York City is divided into 59 administrative districts, each served by a Community Board, which
are local representative bodies that serve as advocates for New York City residents and
communities.
3.2 Demographics
In 2010, New York City’s population was 33 per cent White, 26 per cent Black, 26 per cent Hispanic
and 13 per cent Asian.68 Approximately 36 per cent of the city's population is foreign-born.
Income inequality is greater in New York City than any other metropolitan area in the US (New York
State ranks highest among states) (Bee, 2012).
3.3 Child poverty in New York City
Using the official FPL, the child poverty rate in NYC in 2010 was 29.5 per cent (relative to 22 per
cent across the US) (NYC Center for Economic Opportunity, 2012). The poverty rates are highest in
The Bronx and Brooklyn and lowest in Staten Island. Children in one-parent families are nearly
twice as likely to be in poverty as children in two-parent families, and non-Hispanic White children
67
68
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/census/popcur.shtml
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36/3651000.html
www.ncb.org.uk
page 78
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
are about 1.5 times less likely to live in poverty than their Black, Hispanic and Asian counterparts.
Not surprisingly, poverty rates are highest among adults with less than a high school education and
those who do not work.
Although poverty rates increased between 2008 and 2010, assessment of the poverty rate using a
measure comparable to the SPM indicated that it increased far less than it would have had the noncash social safety net programmes been in place (see Figure below).
Source: (NYC Center for Economic Opportunity, 2012)
3.4 Child poverty strategy
Not a target per se, but the establishment of the New York City Center for Economic Opportunity
(CEO)69 by the Mayor’s office enabled implementation and trialling of new, innovative and
promising anti-poverty programmes and initiatives in New York City. CEO designs and tests new
anti-poverty initiatives in collaboration with city agencies and manages an Innovation Fund that
provides city agencies funding to implement such initiatives.
In 2006, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City established the Commission for Economic Opportunity
to analyse the causes, scope and consequences of poverty and to devise a strategy to reduce
poverty and increase access to opportunity. The Commission, which included 32 civic leaders,
recommended the city focus on three populations: working poor, young adults age 16-24 and
families with children. As a result of the Commission, the Mayor established CEO in 2006.
69
http://www.nyc.gov/html/ceo/html/home/home.shtml
www.ncb.org.uk
page 79
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
CEO includes a rigourous monitoring and evaluation agenda to enable replication (and expansion)
of programmes that demonstrate impact and elimination of programmes that do not. When
initiatives show positive results, they move from pilot status to permanent programmes, the latter
of which are housed at city agencies. This designation transfers ongoing funding and decisionmaking authority to the managing agency, although they continue to be evaluated.
In 2008, CEO selected Westat and Metis Associates as their independent evaluators. An evaluation
strategy is developed for each initiative, taking into account the availability of extant data,
implementation status, timing of expected outcomes and existing knowledge of a particular
programme. Early implementation and outcome evaluations (called ‘programme reviews’) are
carried out for most initiatives, documenting:
implementation and fidelity to established models
sponsoring and providing agencies
budget
target population
statement of need, goals and services
eligibility criteria
targets and outcomes
selected key findings
conclusions and recommendations
CEO shares their evaluation findings locally and nationwide to enable replication (and further
evaluation) of promising programmes. CEO programmes that did not receive a programme review
are monitored and evaluated using other mechanisms, such as analysis of existing administrative
data. Several CEO programmes are being evaluated using RCTs including Opportunity NYC (J. Riccio,
et al., 2010), NYC Justice Corps (Tapper, Zacharia, Bergman, Fields, & Clarke, 2009) and the CUNY
Performance Based Scholarship programme.
3.4.1 Government departments
The following government departments and organisations are involved with CEO. Many of which
work with CEO to implement and manage individual programmes, as described below.
City University of New York (CUNY)
Department of Finance (DOF)
Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA)
Office of Financial Empowerment (OFE)
Department of Parks and Recreation (Parks)
Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC)
Department of Education (DOE)
MDRC
Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD)
New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA)
Administration for Children’s Services (ACS)
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH)
Office of the Mayor
Department of Youth and Community Development (DYCD)
Human Resources Administration (HRA)
Department of Small Business Services (SBS)
Public Libraries
Department of Probation (DOP)
www.ncb.org.uk
page 80
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)
Department of Correction (DOC)
Westat
Metis Associates
3.4.2 Policies, programmes and initiatives
To date, CEO has funded and tested over 50 programmes. Some successful and promising CEO
programmes relevant to children or families with children are summarised below.
3.4.2.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (CUNY ASAP) (City University of New York)
Operating at all six of CUNY’s community colleges, CUNY ASAP is designed to increase community
college graduation rates by removing barriers to graduation by offering participating students a
prescribed course to degree completion and a variety of academic and financial supports. The
programme aims to increase the three-year community college graduation rate to 50 percent.
Programme features include advisement and tutoring, tuition waivers, free textbooks and public
transport cards. The programme also offers consolidated course schedules to accommodate
students’ work schedules and career and employment specialists to help students with job
placement and career development. The programme supports students who wish to transfer to
four-year colleges.
CUNY released a preliminary outcome report in November 2009 with a follow-up report in early
2012 (Linderman & Kolenovic, 2012). ASAP is now involved in a random assignment study led by
MDRC, with the first impact report expected in 2012.
According to early evidence, CUNY ASAP exceeded its goal: the Autumn 2007 cohort of 1,132
students achieved a 55 per cent three-year graduation rate, higher than the 24.7 per cent
graduation rate for the comparison group and three times the national urban community
college graduation rate of 16 pe rcent (Linderman & Kolenovic, 2012). Longer-term data
revealed that 63 per cent of ASAP students (vs. 44 per cent of comparison group students)
earned a degree or transferred to a four-year college within the first three years. These
promising results have persisted, even for the higher-need cohorts that began in 2009.
Comprised primarily of low-income students with some developmental education needs, an
analysis of the Autumn 2009 cohort (N=429) demonstrated that ASAP students were
graduating at significantly higher rates than a comparison group of similar students: the twoyear graduation rate for the fall 2009 ASAP cohort was 28 per cent vs. 7 per cent for the
comparison group.
CUNY Preparatory (CUNY Prep) (CUNY)
CUNY Prep offers out-of-school youth ages 16-18 years the opportunity for full-time study to obtain
a GED and enrol in college.
EITC Mailing (DOF)
To ensure that all eligible New Yorkers receive the EITC, DOF mails pre-populated amended tax
returns to potentially-qualified households who did not claim the EITC on their submitted tax
return. Recipients are asked only to verify their income and dependent child information, and sign
and mail the amended form to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
www.ncb.org.uk
page 81
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Office of Financial Empowerment (DCA)
The Office of Financial Empowerment (OFE) is the nation’s first municipal office with the mission to
enable residents with low- to moderate-incomes to build assets and make the most of their
financial resources including increasing access to high-quality financial education and tax credits,
connecting low-income households to safe and affordable banking and asset building products and
services, and enforcing and improving protections in financial services. OFE leads Cities for Financial
Empowerment, a coalition of cities dedicated to financial empowerment for residents. OFE
manages multiple programmes including:
Financial Empowerment Centers (DCA/OFE), which offer free one-to-one professional
financial counselling at community-based organisations and mobile sites. Financial
Empowerment Centers served more 13,500 clients during the first three years and helped
residents to pay off more than $4.2 million in debt.
$aveNYC (DCA/OFE) enables eligible low-income tax filers to use a portion of their EITC to
build savings by earning a 50 per cent matched contribution for maintaining the account
balance for one year. At the end of the first year pilot, 76 per cent of participants earned
their matched funds, saving an average of $624 (New York City Department of Consumer
Affairs, 2009). The programme has been expanded to three additional cities, Newark, NJ, San
Antonio, TX and Tulsa, OK.
MillionTreesNYC Training Program (Parks)
This seven month paid training programme prepares unemployed, out-of-school youth for green
jobs. Trainees choose one of three tracks: arboriculture, ecological restoration or landscape design
and gardening to develop marketable skills. A 2009 grant from the US Department of Agriculture
enabled graduates to be placed in subsidised green jobs.
Nursing Career Ladder: Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Program (HHC and DOE)
This initiative prepares low-income individuals who are currently living at or below 130 per cent of
the FPL for careers in nursing, offering programme enrolees full tuition and support services. Once
they complete the programme and obtain their professional licence, participants are placed in LPN
positions at HHC hospitals or other health care facilities, earning approximately $40,000 annually.
Nursing Career Ladder: Registered Nurse/Bachelor of Science in Nursing (RN/BSN) Program (HHC)
This programme is similar to the LPN programme, but supports participants to earn a Bachelor of
Science (BS) degree in Nursing. Graduates commit to working as a Registered Nurse (RN) at HHC
hospitals for four years.
Opportunity NYC-Family Rewards (CEO, in partnership with MDRC)
This family-focused programme offered rewards for activities related to educational effort and
achievement, preventive health care, and employment and training. Preliminary results from the
evaluation showed that the programme reduced poverty and improved a number of child
outcomes, including rates of school attendance and grade advancement, standardised test results,
and preventive dental and health care. The initial programme was trialled as a three-year
demonstration, which ended in 2010 (with the evaluation continuing for an additional two years).
The Social Innovation Fund (SIF – see below) Family Rewards is a second-generation conditional
cash transfer programme that builds on the preliminary results of Opportunity NYC, focusing on the
www.ncb.org.uk
page 82
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
most promising health, education and employment incentives, offered in New York City and
Memphis, TN.
Findings from the Opportunity NYC evaluation revealed that 98 per cent of participating
families earned rewards – more than $6,000, on average – over the first two years of the
programme (J. Riccio, et al., 2010). About two-thirds (65 per cent) earned rewards in every
period they were available. Family Rewards had effects on a range of outcomes including:
reduction in poverty and perceptions of financial hardship
increased savings and the likelihood that parents had bank accounts, and reductions in the
use of cheque cashers
increased school attendance, course credits, grade advancement and standardised test
results among high school students with high standardised maths scores, but no effects on
younger pupils or older pupils with lower maths scores
increased families’ use of health insurance coverage and receipt of medical care, and
reductions in use of hospital emergency rooms for routine medical care
substantially increased families’ receipt of preventive dental care
increased employment in jobs not covered by the UI system, but reduced employment in
UI-covered jobs.
Opportunity NYC-Work Rewards (CEO, in partnership with HPD, NYCHA and MDRC)
This programme provided work and job training incentives to adults living in subsidised housing
from 2007-2010. This three-year initiative tested different combinations of employment assistance
and financial incentives. Some participants were enrolled in the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS)
Program, a federal programme that encourages work and savings. Works Rewards is undergoing a
random assignment evaluation concluding in 2014. This programme helped to inform the
development of the Social Innovation Fund (SIF) Family Rewards programme being implemented in
New York and one other city.
Youth Financial Empowerment (ACS)
This programme teaches financial literacy skills to young people aging out of the foster care system,
and provides matching funds to contributions made by youth into Individual Development Accounts
(IDAs) (up to $2,000 by saving $1,000 in the IDA). These savings can be applied to obtain and
maintain stable housing, pursue educational and vocational opportunities and establish small
enterprises.
3.4.2.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Child Care Tax Credit (DOF, in collaboration with New York State)
The New York City Child Care Tax Credit provides eligible low-income families with a refundable tax
credit to help pay for child care expenses. When combined with the federal and state child care tax
credits, eligible families can receive over $6,100 annually to help offset the cost of childcare.
3.4.2.3 Policies that promote child well-being and early intervention and prevention
School-Based Health Centers (DOHMH)
New School-Based Health Centers (SBHCs) were established at six high-need high school campuses,
providing a comprehensive range of services including primary care, acute care, health education,
vaccinations and chronic disease management, and offer a non-stigmatised environment for
www.ncb.org.uk
page 83
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
obtaining reproductive and mental health services. SBHCs provide free care to students regardless
of their insurance status.
Healthy Bodegas Initiative (DOHMH)
This programme aims to promote healthy eating by increasing the availability, quality and variety of
healthy foods at food retailer located in targeted low-income neighbourhoods. It works with food
retail owners to improve the provision and promotion of many healthy items including low-fat milk,
fresh fruits and vegetables, and also works with community groups to increase consumer demand
for these products.
Teen ACTION (DYCD)
Teen ACTION (Achieving Change Together In Our Neighborhood) is an after-school programme
designed to help young people cultivate an ethic of service; develop life skills and critical thinking
skills; reduce risky behaviours that may result in teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases;
encourage use of health and mental health services; and promote commitment to academic
achievement. Teen ACTION participants work with staff, community advocates and experts to
research social, emotional and environmental issues affecting their schools or communities.
3.4.2.4 Other programmes covering all policy areas
Jobs-Plus (HRA)
Jobs-Plus is a place-based comprehensive employment services programme for residents of
targeted New York City Housing Authority developments. The programme serves all working age
residents of a targeted housing development or cluster of developments using a three-part
strategy: (1) on-site access to employment-related services, (2) rent-based and other work
incentives that allow residents to keep more of their earnings, and (3) activities that promote
community support for work through neighbour-to-neighbour outreach. The Jobs-Plus programme
is being expanded through the Young Men’s Initiative (YMI – see below) and the Social Innovation
Fund (SIF – see below) in New York and San Antonio, TX. The programme is based on a national
demonstration that resulted in increased earnings for residents at least seven years after the
programme’s implementation, relative to a control group (J. A. Riccio, 2010).
Young Men’s Initiative (YMI)
YMI is a multi-agency initiative comprised of over 30 programme and policy initiatives in four key
areas: education, employment, health and justice. This $43 million annual public-private
partnership, supported by City funds, Bloomberg Philanthropies and Open Society Foundations
funds the expansion of CEO programmes and a number of new initiatives designed to improve
outcomes for young men of colour. CEO is overseeing the implementation and evaluation of the
majority of YMI programmes. Tables 2 and 3 provide brief summaries of existing and new
programmes funded under YMI.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 84
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Table 2. CEO programmes expanded under YMI
Programme
Agency
Description
Expanded Training and
Employment
Business Solutions Training Funds
Employment Works
Sector-Focused Career Centers
SBS
Increased training slots
Jobs-Plus
HRA &
NYCHA
Employment services programme for residents of
public housing
NYC Justice Corps
CUNY
Community service and work readiness programme
for youth involved with the criminal justice system
Young Adult Internship Program
DYCD
Internship programme for unemployed, out-of-school
youth
Young Adult Literacy Program
DYCD &
Libraries
Literacy programme that combines educational
instruction with internships and support for pre-GED
young adults
Community Education Pathways to
Success (CEPS) at Neighborhood
Opportunity Network (NeON)
DOP
Pre-GED programmes to include young adults on
probation
www.ncb.org.uk
page 85
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
NYC Justice Corps helps young adults involved with the criminal justice system to reintegrate
into their communities through community benefit projects, paid internships, educational
opportunities and support. NYC Justice Corps is expanded by YMI to serve additional highneed neighbourhoods, and is currently undergoing a random assignment evaluation. The CEO
programme influenced the development of a model operating in several states across the
country funded by the US Department of Labor.
Young Adult Internship Program provides short-term paid internships, placement into jobs,
education or advanced training and follow-up services to disconnected young people ages
16-24 years. Evaluation data suggest that the programme is effective in re-engaging
disconnected young people: approximately 50 per cent of the young people who entered the
programme remained were in verified employment, education or trainng nine months after
completing the internship (Westat & Metis Associates, 2009). Through YMI, the programme
is adding four new sites and expanding capacity at five existing sites to serve an additional
501 youth per year. The programme will undergo a random assignment evaluation.
Young Adult Literacy Program (YAL) offers literacy and math instruction, work readiness,
support services and paid internships at libraries and community-based organisations for 1724-year-olds who read at a 4th-6th grade level. Sites serve cohorts of approximately 20
participants and are expected to engage them for six months or longer, to ensure
participants make the necessary advancements to enter GED programmes or the job market.
The programme was supplemented with a paid summer work experience programme aimed
at promoting class attendance, and providing job skills and income. The effectiveness of
adding a paid summer internship to the standard YAL model was assessed with an
experimental evaluation using a randomised design: 9 of the 12 YAL sites participated in the
evaluation of the summer internship component, with five sites randomly assigned to the
treatment group (including an internship component) and four sites the control group (no
internship).
The evaluation showed that adding paid internships dependent on attendance at the
education services led to increased attendance and programme retention, as well as an
increase in participants’ math gains. Surprisingly, the evaluation did not reveal significant
differences in literacy skills between treatment and control young people (Westat & Metis
Associates, 2011).
The programme is adding five new sites, and DOP is launching five sites tailored to
probationers, both as part of YMI.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 86
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
Table 3. New CEO programmes under YMI
Programme
Agency
Description
AIM (Advocate,
Intervene, Mentor)
DOP
Intensive mentoring programs for youth on juvenile probation
Arches
DOP
Intensive mentoring and group cognitive behaviour therapy
programme for young adults on probation
Cornerstone Mentoring
DYCD &
Service
Group-based mentoring programme for middle school students
Every Child Has an
Opportunity to Excel and
Succeed (ECHOES)
DOP
After-school employability development services through an
alternative-to-placement programme serving young people on
Family Court probation
Teen and Young Adult
Health Program
HHC
Train staff and establish peer counselling to provide adolescentfriendly health services and social support within HHC hospitals
and clinics
IMPACT: Peer Mentoring
in Young Adult Literacy
CUNY
Add peer mentoring and an alumni network to existing GED
programme
Justice Community
DOP
NeON-based programme that includes community service,
subsidised employment and career development for courtinvolved youth
Justice Scholars
DOP
New education and career exploration programmes serving
court-involved youth
Project CeaseFire
DOHMH &
HHC
Evidence-based anti-violence programmes in three
neighbourhoods with high rates of gun violence in collaboration
with nearby public hospitals
Social Innovation Fund (SIF)
The national SIF effort is funded by an annual grant of $5.7 million and other matching funds that
support the replication and rigorous evaluation of five programmes across eight cities. The five
programme models being replicated are:
Family Rewards targets families with high school aged children in Memphis, TN and New York
City.
Jobs-Plus provides job and career support, community building and rent incentives to public
housing residents. Jobs-Plus is being offered in New York City and San Antonio, TX.
Project Rise offers education and paid internships to young adults who are out of school, out
of work and who lack a high school diploma or GED in Kansas City, MO, New York City and
Newark, NJ.
SaveUSA offers a matched savings account to low-income tax filers in New York City, Newark,
NJ, San Antonio, TX and Tulsa, OK.
WorkAdvance connects adults to career ladders in Cleveland, OH, New York City, Tulsa, OK
and Youngstown, OH.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 87
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
In addition to expanding successful anti-poverty programmes, a major goal of SIF is to scale-up and
expand the capacity of provider organisations. CEO and partners provide technical assistance to
improve the implementation of programme models and building staff and organisational capacity.
Five comprehensive evaluation plans have been developed as part of SIF:
Family Rewards study enrollees: 1,668 (programme: 833; control: 835)
SaveUSA study enrollees: 2,482 (opened SaveUSA account: 1,662; control: 820)
WorkAdvance study enrollees: 352 (programme: 183; control: 169)
Random assignment has been completed for SaveUSA in New York and Tulsa, and Family
Rewards in New York.
3.4.3 Measurement
CEO created its own fit for purpose New York City poverty measure (comparable to the SPM) to
better reflect the cost of living and of work supports, and assist agency efforts to target
programmes to individuals in need. CEO issues annual reports updating the poverty measure and
poverty rate for New York City. A 2012 working paper (NYC Center for Economic Opportunity, 2012)
showed how the increased generosity of food stamps and the expansion of tax credits due to the
ARRA offset what would have otherwise been a sharp rise in New York City’s poverty rate from
2008 to 2010. No direct measurement of the impact of CEO’s programmes on poverty.
As summarised above, each initiative is extensively monitored and evaluated, and programmes that
do not demonstrate successful outcomes are discontinued.
Table 4 below summarises some of the key outcomes for New York City CEO.
Table 4. Key outcomes aligned with CEO’s programmes
Poverty
FPL
CEO poverty measure (similar to SPM)
Increased employment
Employment and savings
Increased job training and job readiness
Increased take-up of EITC
Increased savings and asset building and decreased debt
In-kind benefits
Increased take-up of childcare tax credits
Increased educational outcomes and achievement
Education and attainment
Increased high school graduation rates
Increased community college graduation rates
Increased preventive health care
Increased healthy eating
Health
Reduction in young people’s risky behaviours
Reduction in teen pregnancy
Increased engagement in needs-based treatment
www.ncb.org.uk
page 88
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
3.5 Overall lessons for NI
high-quality monitoring and evaluation should be at the heart of anti-poverty strategies
don’t be afraid to innovate
continue successful programmes with demonstrable results and discontinue unsuccessful
ones
create targeted programmes for specific vulnerable groups
work across agencies and departments.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 89
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
References
Addy, S., & Wight, V. R. (2012). Basic facts about low-income children, 2010. New York: National
Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University.
Bee, A. (2012). Household income inequality within US counties: 2006-2010 American Community
Survey Briefs. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Ben-Shalom, Y., Moffitt, R., & Scholz, J. K. (2011). An assessment of the effectiveness of antipoverty programs in the United States National Poverty Center Working Paper Series. Ann
Arbor, MI: National Poverty Center, University of Michigan, Gerald R. Ford School of Public
Policy.
Cancian, M., Meyer, D. R., & Reed, D. (2010). Promising antipoverty strategies for families. Fast
Focus, (No. 6-2010). Retrieved from
http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/fastfocus/pdfs/FF6-2010.pdf
Citro, C. F., & Michael, R. T. (Eds.). (1995). Measuring poverty: A new approach. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Damboise, M. C., & Hughes, M. (2010). Nurturing Families Network: 2010 annual evaluation report.
Hartford, CT: Center for Social Research, University of Hartford.
DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & Smith, J. C. (2011). Income, poverty, and health insurance
coverage in the United States: 2010 Current population reports. Washington, DC: U.S.
Census Bureau.
Foley, A. (2012). State of Connecticut Child Poverty and Prevention Council January 2012 progress
report
Giannarelli, L., & Zedlewski, S. (2009). Economic modeling of child poverty and prevention council
initiatives. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Gilliam, W. S. (2007). Early Childhood Consultation Partnership: Results of a random-controlled
evaluation. New Haven, CT: Child Study Center, Yale School of Medicine.
Haskins, R., & Baron, J. (2011). Building the connection between policy and evidence: The Obama
evidence-based initiatives. London: Nesta.
Hoelscher, P. (2004). A thematic study using transnational comparisons to analyse and identify
what combination of policy responses are most successful in preventing and reducing high
levels of child poverty. Final report.: European Commission, DG Employment and Social
Affairs.
Linderman, D., & Kolenovic, Z. (2012). Results thus far and the road ahead: A follow-up report on
CUNY Accelerate Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). New York: ASAP.
National Institute for Early Education Research. (2011). The state of preschool 2011. New
Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, Rutgers Graduate School of
Education.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 90
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
United States case study
Fauth
New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. (2009). $aveNYC account: Innovation in asset
building. Research brief. New York: Department of Consumer Affairs.
NYC Center for Economic Opportunity. (2012). The CEO poverty measure, 2005-2010. A working
paper by the NYC Center for Economic Opportunity. New York: CEO.
O'Connell, M. (2011). Connecticut's School Based Diversion Initiative. New Haven, CT: Yale Program
for Recovery and Community Health.
OECD. (2012). The future of families to 2030 doi:10.1787/9789264168367-en
Riccio, J., Dechausay, N., Greenberg, D., Miller, C., Rucks, Z., & Verma, N. (2010). Toward reduced
poverty across generations: Early findings from New York City's Conditional Cash Transfer
Program. New York: MDRC.
Riccio, J. A. (2010). Sustained earnings gains for residents in a public housing jobs program: Sevenyear findings from the Job-Plus demonstration MDRC Policy Brief. New York: MDRC.
Short, K. (2011). The Research Supplemental Poverty Measure 2010. Washington, DC: US Census
Bureau.
Smeeding, T. M., & Waldfogel, J. (2010). Fighting child poverty in the United States and United
Kingdom: An update. Fast Focus, (No. 8-2010). Retrieved from
http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/fastfocus/pdfs/FF8-2010.pdf
State of Connecticut. (2011). State of Connecticut agency prevention report. A report to the Child
Poverty and Prevention Council.
Tapper, D., Zacharia, J., Bergman, A., Fields, A., & Clarke, R. (2009). Evaluation of the NYC Justice
Corps: Final report of year one of the NYC Justice Corps program implementation. New
York: Metis Associates.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (2012). Measuring child poverty: New league tables of child
poverty in the world's rich countries. Innocenti Report Card 10. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti
Research Centre.
Westat, & Metis Associates. (2009). Evaluation of the Young Adult Intership Program (YAIP): Anaysis
of existing participant data. Rockville, MD: Westat.
Westat, & Metis Associates. (2011). CEO Young Adult Literacy Program and the impact of adding
paid internships. Rockville, MD: Westat.
Williams Shanks, T. R., & Danziger, S. K. (2011). Anti-poverty policies and programs for children and
families. In J. M. Jenson & M. W. Fraser (Eds.), Social policy for children and families: A risk
and resilience perspective (2nd ed., pp. 25-56). London: Sage Publications.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 91
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Appendix D.
Scotland case study
Chloe Gill
National Children’s Bureau: working with children, for children
Registered Charity Number 258825.
8 Wakley Street, London EC1V 7QE. Tel: 020 7843 6000
Connect with us:
© NCB, October 2012
Facebook: www.facebook.com/ncbfb
Twitter: @ncbtweets
Scotland case study
Gill
Contents
1. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 94
2. Country overview ............................................................................................................................ 94
3. Demographics.................................................................................................................................. 95
4. Child poverty in Scotland................................................................................................................. 95
5. Child poverty strategy ..................................................................................................................... 98
5.1 Summary of related strategies ........................................................................................................ 99
5.2 Relevant government departments and roles .............................................................................. 103
5.3 Policies, programmes and initiatives ............................................................................................. 103
5.4 Measurement ................................................................................................................................ 110
6. Overall lessons for Northern Ireland ............................................................................................. 110
References .......................................................................................................................................... 112
www.ncb.org.uk
page 93
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
1.
Gill
Summary
Child poverty in Scotland has been in decline since 1998, though progress has slowed
since 2005.
Responsibility for interventions to address child poverty sits with both the UK and
devolved Scottish Governments.
The Scottish child poverty strategy links with other Scottish strategies to reduce
income and health inequalities.
Key policies relate to the provision of in-work benefits, job creation and work
readiness, provision of childcare, parenting support and reducing household
expenditure.
Policies have some focus on rights and addressing inequalities.
2.
Country overview
The Scottish parliament was established in 1999 following devolution through the Scotland Act
(1998). Scotland currently remains part of the UK, although a referendum on full independence is
due in autumn 2014. Scotland is governed by the First Minister.
The Scotland Act (1998) sets out policy responsibilities ‘reserved’ by the UK government, including
trade and industry, social security and UK foreign policy and defence. Anything not explicitly laid
out in the Act became, by default, a ‘devolved’ responsibility. These include health, education,
home affairs, rural affairs, economic development and some aspects of transport. The Scottish
Parliament holds ‘full legislative competence’ in that it can pass legislation within the devolved
areas.
The overall ‘Purpose’ of the Scottish Government is to “focus government and public services on
creating a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through
increasing sustainable economic growth.” 70 This purpose is underpinned by a 10-year (2007-2017)
outcomes-focussed framework that incorporates five key strategic objectives for Scotland to be: (1)
wealthier and fairer; (2) healthier; (3) safer and stronger; (4) smarter; and (5) greener. Eight highlevel ‘targets’ sit beneath these objectives to:
improve Scotland’s economic growth
improve productivity
improve economic participation
increase population growth
increase healthy life expectancy
reduce income inequality
reduce inequalities in economic participation
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
A further set of 16 national outcomes and 50 national indicators sit under these objectives. The
four indicators identified as specifically linking to child poverty are:
reduce the proportion of individuals living in poverty
reduce children’s deprivation
increase the proportion of babies with a healthy birth weight
70
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00387872.pdf
www.ncb.org.uk
page 94
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
increase the proportion of young people in learning, training or work.
Progress towards each of the 50 outcomes (and, thus, ultimately the overall purpose) is measured
independently and communicated publicly through the ‘Scotland Performs’ website.71 The website
is a continually updated and accessible resource that illustrates ‘at a glance’ key indicator data and
direction of travel year on year. The website also outlines in more detail sources of data used to
measure progress and baseline measures.
At a local level, Scotland consists of 32 unitary authorities represented by the Convention of
Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA). From 2009, each local authority Community Planning
Partnership (CPP) was required to draw up, in partnership with the Scottish Government and
supported by the Improvement Service,72 a three-year ‘Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) outlining
key strategic priorities for the area, the outcomes these should achieve, and how these local
outcomes would contribute to achieving the overall purpose for Scotland.
3.
Demographics
Scotland’s population was recently estimated at 5.2 million (National Statistics, 2011) with the four
largest cities being Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee. In terms of ethnic diversity, the
population is largely White (98 per cent); South Asian (1.1 per cent), Black (0.2 per cent), Mixed (0.3
per cent), Chinese (0.3 per cent) and Other (0.2) ethnic groups make up the remainder of the
population.
Scotland, along with the rest of the UK, is in the midst of a recession. Though recent data has
indicated a precarious return to growth since 2009, it also shows a gap between economic
development in Scotland and the UK as a whole. For example, GDP in Scotland in the second
quarter of 2011 grew by 1.1 per cent, whereas for the UK as a whole it grew by 1.5 per cent.73
In 2011, unemployment in Scotland stood at 7.7 per cent (slightly lower than the UK rate of 7.9 per
cent). Overall, the rate of unemployment was lower amongst women than men but there was some
evidence that this was shifting. However, women in Scotland still have the highest employment
rate amongst all the UK nations.
4.
Child poverty in Scotland
The UK Child Poverty Act 2010 (HM Government, 2010) includes four key targets that span the
different ways in which child poverty is defined and measured in the UK and Scotland:
reduce relative low income (less than 10 per cent of children live in a household where
income is less than 60 per cent of the median before housing costs (BHC))
reduce combined low income and material deprivation (less than five per cent of children live
in households where income is less than 70 per cent of the median and experience material
deprivation)
71
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About/Performance/scotPerforms/glanceperformance
http://www.improvementservice.org.uk/single-outcome-agreements/
73
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About/Performance/scotPerforms/purposes/economicgrowth, accessed
21/09/12
72
www.ncb.org.uk
page 95
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
reduce absolute low income (fewer than five per cent of children live in households where
income is 60 per cent less than the adjusted base amount)
reduce persistent poverty (fewer children – the exact percentage yet to be confirmed – live in
households where income is less than 60 per cent of the median for a period of three years).
Data for these income and poverty measures come from the Household Below Average Income
(HBAI) measure, which is obtained via the Family Resources Survey (TARKI, 2010). The material
deprivation measure (which captures the number of families unable to afford ‘usual’ items such as
a family holiday and so on) also comes from the Family Resources Survey.
A comprehensive analysis of child poverty in the European Union in 2010 described how poverty
more than doubled in the UK between 1979-1997(TARKI, 2010). This growth was attributed to a
steep rise in unemployment in the early 1980s, changing demographics (including an increase in the
number of lone-parent families) and welfare policy that reduced the real value of state benefits. By
1997, the UK had the highest rate of child poverty in the EU.
A more recent report by the Institute of Financial Studies (Brewer, Browne, & Joyce, 2011) outlined
that relative child poverty (BHC) fell in 2010-2011 to its lowest point since the 1980’s: down by
300,000 (2.1 per cent). However, linked to the prevailing economic climate, this measure was
influenced by the downward move in median household income and a fall in the real value of
earnings. Overall, between 1998-1999 and 2010-2011 child poverty reduced by 1.1 million, largely
attributed to the implementation of financial redistribution to families with low income.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 96
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
The Scottish Government (National Statistics, 2012) outlined the most recent data on child poverty
available from 2010-2011, as well as trends over the last 14 years (see Figure 1):
Relative low income stood at 17 per cent, a three per cent decrease on 2009-2010 figures.
Low income and material deprivation stood at 13 per cent, a two per cent decrease on 20092010 levels.
Absolute low income stood at 10 per cent, a one per cent decrease since 2008-2009.
Figure 1 Child poverty in Scotland 1998- 2011
Source: HBAI dataset, DWP.
The Growing Up in Scotland (GUS) longitudinal survey series explores experiences of a cohort of
Scottish children and their families.74 A research summary highlighted how children of single,
younger mothers were more likely than single, older mothers to be living in poverty (Bradshaw,
Martin, & Cunningham-Burley, 2008). In addition, those mothers were more likely to smoke and
were less likely to participate in healthy activities or services associated with positive child health
outcomes, such as breastfeeding and antenatal classes.
Another briefing from the study explored the nature of persistent child poverty (i.e. poverty
experienced in at least three years between 2005-2009) (Barnes, Chanfreau, & Tomaszewski, 2010).
The children most likely to experience persistent poverty tended to live in lone parent households,
households with three or more children, households where parents(s) were not consistently
employed, social housing and/or deprived areas. The briefing also suggested that children living in
persistent poverty were more likely than children who experienced temporary poverty to
experience problems with language development and emotional and behavioural difficulties.
74
http://www.growingupinscotland.org.uk/
www.ncb.org.uk
page 97
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
5.
Gill
Child poverty strategy
The UK Child Poverty Act stipulates that the UK parliament publish an overarching child poverty
strategy every three years, and that devolved nations each produce a separate strategy taking in to
account devolved powers held. It also established a UK-wide Child Poverty Commission to advise
the UK and devolved governments.
UK strategy
The Labour government produced a UK child poverty strategy in 1997, which set ambitious targets
to halve child poverty by 2010 and eradicate it by 2020. In 2010- 2011 child poverty fell by 300,000
to its lowest point since the 1980’s (Cribb, Joyce, & Phillips, 2012). Yet, the target of halving child
poverty by 2010 was missed by 600,000 children.
In 2011, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) outlined the coalition government’s first
child poverty strategy (HM Government, 2011). This builds on the four key targets outlined in the
UK Child Poverty Act (summarised at the start of Section 1.3), but emphasises the desire to tackle
(what they consider to be) the ‘causes’ of child poverty, namely: worklessness, education failure
and family breakdown. The new strategy also amends the previous Commission to create a Social
Mobility and Child Poverty Commission that reports to Parliament and is responsible for measuring
progress towards eradicating child poverty.
The new UK strategy outlines a clear set of goals and indicators, most of which relate to the UK as
whole. The strategy focuses on:
supporting families to achieve financial independence: removing financial disincentives to
work, improving financial management and supporting people in to work
supporting family life and children’s life chances: providing support and removing barriers in
relation to attainment, health, housing, early years and environment, among other factors to
enable children achieve their potential
the role of place and transforming lives: supporting and encouraging local communities and
local partners to identify and support families in a long-lasting way.
Indicative measures are linked to family resources (income and poverty), family circumstances
(working status and transition from childhood to labour market) and health and well-being (UK
indicators to be confirmed). Further details of the strategy, indicators and steps taken or planned
can be found here: https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/CM-8061.pdf
Scottish Child Poverty Strategy
A distinct Scottish Child Poverty Strategy was produced in 2011 (The Scottish Government, 2011a)
in line with the stipulations of the UK Child Poverty Act. The strategy incorporates two key aims: to
increase household income and increase the well-being and opportunities for children. It links
directly to the overall national performance framework75 and the ‘purpose’ for Scotland.
75
The overall strategy for Scotland outlined in Section 1.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 98
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Three principles underpin the Scottish strategy:
the prevention of poor outcomes and early years intervention; breaking inter-generational
causes and effects of poverty
positive asset-development, individual and community development; focusing on what is
working and co-production and positive transitions out of the welfare system
developing services that reflect children’s’ needs; adopting a rights-based approach.
Progress is measured at a high level through the Purpose for Scotland targets and national
indicators outlined in Section 1 (related to poverty, child deprivation, birth weight and young
people’s training and employment). Progress on these is available through the Scotland Performs
website. In addition, an annual report on progress will be produced, the first of which was
published in March 2012. The strategy itself will be refreshed every three years.
The strategy is clear in recognising that drivers exist at both UK and Scotland levels, but is explicit in
the view that Scotland would be better placed to tackle poverty if powers for tax and credits were
more or fully devolved. The recent recession is recognised as creating additional challenges for
reducing child poverty (though it should be noted that reductions in the child poverty rate in
Scotland had stalled around 2005 before the UK entered the recession).
5.1 Summary of related strategies
As mentioned, the child poverty strategy Scotland feeds in to the overall Purpose for Scotland
outlined in the first section of this summary. However, it is also linked to, and builds upon, a
number of policies that have been developed since devolution. Three public policy frameworks
underpin all of Scotland’s policies and outline an explicit approach to tackle opportunity, health and
economic inequalities in Scottish society. In this section we outline these three frameworks,
followed by a range of other strategies.
Early Years Framework: The Early Years Framework for Scotland (The Scottish Government, 2008b)
highlighted the importance of the early years in influencing later outcomes for children. Overall, the
framework states the desire for equality of opportunity and outcomes for all children and effective
intervention to prevent or address inequity as it arises. The framework incorporates 10 steps to
achieving the ‘transformational change’ necessary to realise these ambitions:
a coherent approach
support for families and communities to achieve outcomes independently
prevent the cyclical nature of poverty and other poor outcomes
empower families and communities
prevent and intervene with strong universal services
services of high quality
services that address the needs of families and children
use of play to improve children’s outcomes and quality of life
straightforward and efficient service delivery
collaboration that works.
The framework puts the emphasis on outcomes and the SOA and CPP mechanisms to achieving
positive outcomes for children, and specific actions relate to children’s well-being broadly rather
than solely focusing on poverty per se. The framework defines the early years as pre-birth to 8
years but puts particular emphasis on birth-3 as a critical time in determining children’s’ outcomes.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 99
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Equally Well Framework: The ‘Equally Well Implementation Plan’ (The Scottish Government, 2008c)
was launched in Scotland following the report of the Ministerial Task Force on Health Inequalities.
Its overall aim is to improve health outcomes and reduce health inequalities through four key areas
for action and reform: (1) early years; (2) mental well-being; (3) alcohol, drugs and violence; and (4)
‘big killer diseases’ (i.e. heart disease and cancer).76 The framework highlights the role of local CPP
in planning, implementation and monitoring progress. It also describes the need to support
individuals in adopting healthy lifestyles and remove barriers preventing them from doing so, such
as supporting people to maintain a healthy weight or develop skills to increase employability.
As part of the implementation plan a number of ‘test sites’ were approved (local authorities
submitted applications based on identified local targets and implementation plans). These test sites
were akin to pathfinder sites to test change and provide learning. The framework (and test sites)
covered specific topics including:
early years
education and information for young people
mental health and well-being
poverty and fuel poverty
employment and business
physical environment
alcohol, drugs and violence-prevention and treatment
primary care and dental health
smoking.
The implementation plan was reviewed in 2010 with the purpose of making further
recommendations to support the implementation of the framework and facilitate local change,
rather than explore the impact of the new approach on health outcomes. A detailed summary of
progress on the Equally Well recommendations is available through the Scottish government
website.77
Achieving our Potential Framework78: In 2008, the Scottish Government outlined a specific
framework to reduce poverty and income inequality (The Scottish Government, 2008a). This linked
with the overall purpose target of creating a wealthier and fairer Scotland. The framework targets
not only people living in poverty currently, but also those living on the edges of poverty. Therefore,
it aims to increase incomes for the poorest 30 per cent of people in Scotland. The framework
outlines five key areas of action:
tackling income inequality (i.e. making working pay and maximising the potential for people
to work)
introducing long-term measures to tackle poverty (focusing on children and young people,
health inequalities, discrimination and disadvantage)
supporting those in poverty (local taxation, fuel hardship and financial inclusion)
making benefits work better for Scotland
partnership working
76
A full outline of outcomes incorporated in the framework can be found on pp. 15-16 of the implementation
plan, many of which specifically relate to child poverty.
77
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/924/0100345.pdf
78
This pre-dates the child poverty strategy and covers the Scottish population as a whole, focusing largely on
economic participation rather than well-being factors associated with economic inequality.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 100
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Scottish Government Economic Strategy: The 2007 Government Economic Strategy (The Scottish
Government, 2007) highlighted that growth in Scotland’s GDP has lagged behind that of the UK as a
whole and the other small European countries.79 It sets out several targets in relation to economic
growth, but also outlines how, with greater devolution or independence, Scotland would be able to
take more substantial actions to improve growth, such as through the ability to adapt the tax
system and employment policy, and increase the representation of Scotland within Europe.
The Economic Strategy was updated in 2011 (The Scottish Government, 2011b), acknowledging the
turbulent financial environment sparked by the financial crisis in 2008, but reaffirming commitment
to the existing six key strategic priorities, which include: (1) a supportive business environment; (2)
a low carbon economy; (3) learning, skills and well-being; (4) infrastructure development and place;
(5) effective government; and (6) equality.
Scottish youth unemployment strategy: A draft youth unemployment strategy was published by the
Scottish Government in January 2012 (copy unavailable80). An accompanying briefing by the
Scottish Parliament outlined a youth unemployment rate in 2011 of 24.3 per cent (compared with
the overall unemployment rate of 8.6 per cent) and that the number of young people not in
education, employment or training (NEET) in 2010 stood at 36,000 (Scottish Parliament Information
Centre, 2012). Further details of interventions to support young people are outlined below.
Scottish drug and alcohol strategies: The Scottish Government launched a specific ‘framework for
action’ in 2009 to tackle alcohol misuse in Scotland. This recognised the costs to individuals,
families and communities from alcohol misuse (e.g. ill health and unemployment) (The Scottish
Government, 2009). The framework aims to reduce consumption, support families and
communities, change attitudes and behaviour, and improve treatment. In relation to child poverty,
this strategy aims to improve parenting and parents’ work readiness, as well as prevent children
and young people misusing alcohol.
Similarly, the 2009 drugs strategy The Road to recovery: A new approach to tackling Scotland’s drug
problem also highlights steps to prevent and treat drug use (The Scottish Government, 2008d). The
strategy includes a specific chapter around children in substance misusing families, highlighting
their vulnerability and the need for early intervention and support.
79
80
That is, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Sweden.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2012/01/Employment
www.ncb.org.uk
page 101
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC): The GIRFEC guidance (first published in 2008 and updated
in 2012) outlined a new way of working for the children and young people’s workforce in Scotland
(The Scottish Government, 2012b). It recognised that a child-centred approach was key to achieving
positive outcomes for children and young people and described itself as the “bedrock” for
children’s services. The guidance incorporated 10 ‘core principles’ focusing on developing high
quality, co-ordinated and streamlined services that were developed in a participative way and that
allowed children and families choice. Overall, the guidance outlined a set of integrated outcomes
for children:
Figure 2 GIRFEC outcomes for children and young people
Safe…
protected from abuse, neglect or harm
Healthy…
experiencing the highest standards of physical and mental health, and supported to
make healthy, safe choices
Achieving…
receiving support and guidance in their learning – boosting their skills, confidence and
self-esteem
Nurtured…
having a nurturing and stimulating place to live and grow
Active…
having opportunities to take part in a wide range of activities – helping them to build
a fulfilling and happy future
Respected…
to be given a voice and involved in the decisions that affect their wellbeing
Responsible…
taking an active role within their schools and communities
Included…
getting help and guidance to overcome social, educational, physical and economic
inequalities; accepted as full members of the communities in which they live and
learn
The guidance explicitly links to a range of other policies for children, including the Early Years
Framework mentioned earlier and United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).
UK Welfare Reform Act 2012: This UK-wide act was given royal assent in March 2012 (HM
Government, 2012). It sets out some fundamental changes to the organisation and delivery of
social welfare that will impact on provision to prevent and ameliorate child poverty, including
streamlining a broad range of benefits into one ‘universal’ benefit and limitations on the level of
housing benefit payable.
Finally, though not yet implemented, Scotland’s proposed Children and Young People’s Bill is in its
consultation phase at the time this research is being conducted (The Scottish Government, 2012c).
Planted firmly at its centre is a commitment to ensuring children’s rights are upheld in line with the
UNCRC, and a focus on well-being. The Bill also seeks to improve childcare, make service delivery
more child-centred and improve the care system.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 102
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
5.2 Relevant government departments and roles
At UK level, the child poverty strategy is presented by both DWP and the Department for Education
(DfE).
Within the Scottish Cabinet (which consists of eight Cabinet Secretaries and 11 Ministers), the most
relevant departments are:
Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth (encompassing Energy, Enterprise and
Tourism and Local Government and Planning)
Education and Lifelong Learning (encompassing Children and Young People, Youth
Employment, and Learning, Science and Scotland’s Languages).
5.3 Policies, programmes and initiatives
This section outlines a number of policies, programmes and initiatives implemented by both the UK
and Scottish governments aimed at reducing child poverty directly or indirectly, bearing in mind the
reserved and devolved responsibilities of each administration. For clarity, (UK) or (S) is included in
each subheading to indicate where each item originates.
5.3.1 Policies to increase families’ financial resources
A combination of UK and Scottish policies and programmes focus on increasing families’ financial
resources, reflecting the reserved responsibility for taxation and social security and devolved
responsibilities for trade and economic development.
Social security (UK)
The UK operates a comprehensive system of social security, administered through DWP to provide
income for those who are disabled, have been made redundant, suffer ill health, are retired or are
unemployed for other reasons. A key function of DWP is also to provide practical support to help
people transfer from unemployment in to the labour market. The Welfare Reform Act (2012) saw
the introduction of two new key packages of financial assistance.
First, a new Universal credit is a means-tested benefit that provides financial support for those both
in and out of work. It will replace (by April 2013) a complex range of currently existing benefits,
including Job Seekers Allowance, Income Support, Working Tax Credits, Child Tax Credits and
Housing Benefit. Instead of families receiving multiple payments for different elements of
entitlement on a weekly or bi-weekly basis, one monthly payment will be made. Financial
assistance is also available for those who enter work in order to assist with the transition from
benefits and to assist those on low incomes.
The UK has operated a system of ‘in work’ benefits to supplement low incomes for nearly 30 years.
Family Credit (FC; 1986-1999) was replaced by Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC; 1999-2003),
which was in turn replaced by the current Working Tax Credit (WTC).
www.ncb.org.uk
page 103
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
An evaluation of WFTC carried out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFD) estimated that it
had increased the number of lone mothers in employment by 5.1 per cent but had reduced
the number of women in couples in the labour market by 0.6 per cent (Brewer, Duncan,
Shephard, & Suarez, 2005). Further, the number of fathers in couples in the labour market
had increased by 0.8 percent. Overall, this equated to a reduction in the number of workless
households by 99,000 and an increase of 81,000 individuals participating in the labour
market. The level of take up of WTC has been queried over time. One study reported that
only 58 per cent of eligible families were claiming WTC. The research found that the main
reason was a perception amongst families that they were not eligible for support (Breese,
Maplethorpe, & Toomse, 2011).
A Personal Independence Payment will also be introduced from April 2013. This will replace the
current non-means-tested Disability Living Allowance that facilitates independent living (e.g. costs
associated with accessible transport) for disabled people between 16-64 years.
Overall, the Scottish Parliament supports the simplification of the current benefits system, but is
explicit in its desire to have greater devolved powers in setting and organising the tax and benefits
system so that it is better suited to Scotland and better linked to other devolved policies and
programmes, including reducing child poverty.
Child Benefit (UK) has been a universal UK non-means-tested benefit since the 1940’s (formerly
Family Allowance). The current rate provides a family with £20.30 per week for the first child and
further £13.40 for each subsequent child. From 2013, however, higher-rate tax payers will not be
eligible for the benefit.
Job creation and a living wage
A number of policies and programmes have been introduced by the Scottish Government aimed at
generating employment and ensuring that employment pays a wage comparable with living costs in
Scotland.
Community Jobs Scotland (S) is a job creation programme, whereby the Government provides up to
£6,175 to third sector organisations to employ young people in roles paying minimum wage for at
least 25 hours per week for a minimum of six months. Training and support for young people is
provided.
An evaluation of the programme found it provided 1,861 jobs with 448 employers (McTier,
Clelland, & McGregor, 2012). Of the young people who participated in the programme, 40
per cent entered employment, 4 per cent moved in to education or training and 7 per cent
took up a voluntary position; 43 per cent returned to unemployment after the programme
ended, however. For the third sector organisations involved, it enabled them to enhance
their services through increased capacity and raised awareness amongst young people of the
third sector as a viable employment option. However, the employment opportunity was
time-limited and it was not clear who was responsible for transition in to further education,
employment or training following the placement.
Going forward the programme will focus on supporting 16-19-year-olds in 2012-2013.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 104
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Scottish Living Wage (S): The Scottish Living Wage Campaign 81 was established in 2007, aimed at
increasing the income of low paid workers and making ‘work pay’. It is a multi-agency campaign led
by a steering group comprising of key trade union and anti-poverty membership organisations
(including, for example, Unison and the Child Poverty Action Group). The campaign has had some
impact, as a ‘living wage’ rather than a ‘minimum wage’ was adopted by the public sector in 2011.
The minimum wage is currently defined as £7.20 per hour (compared to the current UK minimum
wage of £6.08 for those over 21, £4.98 for those aged 18-20 years and £3.68 for those aged 16-17).
Information about the campaign can be found here http://www.povertyalliance.org.uk/slwhome.asp.
Analysis predicting the outcome of implementing the living wage across the public sector was
carried out by the Scottish Government. They reported that increases in income would be felt in
households across the income distribution, not just within the lowest 30 per cent targeted by the
Scottish anti-poverty policies (The Scottish Government, 2010b). It was also suggested that any
increases in income for the lowest paid would be offset by reduced entitlement to in-work tax
credits.
Regeneration (S): The Scottish regeneration strategy Achieving a Sustainable Future sets out a
range of regeneration initiatives to boost economic growth. For example, Urban Regeneration
Companies (private and public partnerships) have undertaken area specific regeneration projects
leading to housing and leisure developments, job creation and civic spaces. Case studies can be
found here: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/regeneration/17735
Employability and transition to labour market
Increasing the ‘employability’ of the population and removing barriers that prevent the transition
from education, unemployment or parenthood to the labour market have also been addressed by
both the UK and Scottish administrations:
Job Centre Plus (UK): Delivered by DWP, the remit of Job Centre Plus is to directly support job
seekers and increase their flow in to the labour market. Whilst supporting the efficient application
and receipt of benefits amongst its client group, it also provides one-to-one and group support to
help individuals become work-ready, find employment and remain in employment. Its most recent
annual report (Department for Work and Pensions, 2011) outlines progress in meeting specific
targets including supporting lone parents in to work.
81
The minimum wage was introduced for the UK by the Labour government in 1997.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 105
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
New Deal Plus for Lone Parents (UK): The exact nature of this programme has changed overtime as
conditions associated with social security eligibility have evolved and as the programme has passed
through different pilot and extension phases. Overall, it offers a programmes of support for lone
parents, aimed at removing barriers to employment and incentivising work through, for example,
work focussed interviews (one-to-one and group support) and in-work credit (financial support).
A qualitative evaluation from summarised interim findings from the expansion of the New
Deal Plus for Lone Parents programme (2008-2010) across several pilot areas (Griffiths,
2011). The expansion included an increase in the amount of in-work credit payable and
advance payments to support childcare registration costs, as well as the delivery of support
to couple parents. The evaluation found a low level of awareness of the range of incentives
and little evidence that the programme had supported couples into work in the same way as
it had done for lone parents. The programme was found to work best when specialist Lone
Parent Advisors engaged with parents.
The programme was also evaluated in following its initial pilot in 2005-06 (Hosain & Dr Breen,
2007). At this stage, the programme involved a number of pre- and post-employment
support mechanisms including work focussed interviews and support in accessing in-work tax
credits. This evaluation found that the in-work credit was the most effective lever to
engaging parents. However, the training provided often assumed that lone parents were
more ‘job ready’ than they actually were. Effective partnerships between lone parents and
agencies best placed to advise on suitable childcare arrangements was key to removing this
barrier.
Scottish Working for Families Fund (2004-2008) (S): A £50 million government fund in Scotland
supports initiatives in 20 local authorities aimed at supporting disadvantaged families to move in to
work by removing barriers (e.g. employability skills and childcare). An evaluation found the
programme recruited 25,508 voluntary ‘clients’ and supported them before, during and after
securing employment through individually tailored packages of support, including activities such as
establishing goals, personal development, careers advice and so on (McQuaid, Bond, & Fuertes,
2009). Support was also provided in relation to finding and meeting initial costs for childcare.
Young people and education, employment and training
Supporting young people to stay in education post-16 is described as a necessary condition to
ensuring the long-term employment prospect of Scotland’s young people, and links to the overall
purpose target of reducing inequality in economic participation. An overall national indicator for
Scotland is to increase the proportion of young people in learning, training or work. A number of
policies have been developed to specifically target young people, in addition to the employability
strands outlined above.
More Choices More Chances (MCMC) (S): This overall NEET strategy for Scotland was published in
2006 (The Scottish Executive, 2006). It set out plans to develop flexible and varied learning
opportunities, and information and support for young people via Job Centre Plus. Young people in
and leaving care, and young offenders were specifically referenced.
16+ Choices (S): This programme formed part of part of MCMC above and was rolled out across
Scotland in 2010, following an initial implementation phase in 2008 (The Scottish Government,
2010a). The policy indicated that every young person should have a 16+ learning offer made to
them and required local partners to work together to develop appropriate learning provision,
effective advice and guidance, and the financial support in place to remove barriers to continuing
education.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 106
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Activity agreements (S): This targeted programme, specifically set up to engage young people at risk
of becoming NEET, was piloted 2009-2011. It engaged young people in learning or other activities
that would help them get ready for formal learning or employment. As part of the programme,
young people voluntarily entered in to an ‘activity agreement’ where they went through a needs
assessment and package of tailored support, and were able to access Educational Maintenance
Allowance (EMA) payments of £30 per week.
The evaluation found that over the pilot period around 70 per cent of young people offered
an activity agreement took it up (1,450 of 2,035 offered) (Stevenson, Watt, Clark, Simpson, &
Stuart, 2011). Younger school leavers (aged 16-17) were most likely to engage. There were
differences in take-up amongst ‘vulnerable groups’: looked after children and young
offenders were more prominent than young parents and those with BME backgrounds.
Forty-one per cent of young people who took up an activity agreement had a place in
education, employment or training at the end of the programme.
5.3.2 Policies to reduce families’ expenses
Childcare
Funded childcare places (S): Currently, local authorities are required to provide funded childcare
places for three- and four-year-olds of 12 hours per week (2.5 hours per day during school time, a
maximum of 475 hours year). The Children and Young People’s Bill currently in development
proposes that this be extended to disadvantaged two-year-olds.
Childcare Vouchers (UK & S): Some employers provide childcare vouchers (in return for tax and
national insurance exemptions). The Scottish Government had promoted their use across all
employment sectors.
Tax credits [childcare element] (UK): Lone parents and couples with children who are working are
eligible to apply for support with childcare costs. To qualify applicants must be working 16 hours or
more and the child be attending a registered childcare provider. A maximum of 70 per cent of
childcare costs will be awarded, up to a maximum of £122.50 for one child and £210 per week for
two or more children.82
Reducing household expenditure
Free school meals (S): Free school meals are now available to school children in Scotland of any age
whose family meets certain income criteria (i.e. they are in receipt of income support, Job Seekers
Allowance and maximum child and working tax credits). Further, free school meals are now
available to all children aged 5-7 years (P1-P3; Key Stage 1 in England), following a pilot during the
academic year 2007-2008. Though the evaluation of the pilot could not detect any health impact
during the short period of time, uptake of free school meals had increased and children were being
exposed to a greater range of foods, and some parents were reported to be taking more interest in
food or diet (MacLardie, Martin, Murray, & Sewel, 2008).
Free higher education (S): In February 2008, the Graduate Endowment Abolition Bill (Scotland) was
passed in the Scottish Parliament, removing all tuition fees for Scottish students studying in Scottish
universities (prior to this partial payment of fees was deferred until a graduate’s income hit a
82
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/taxcredits/start/who-qualifies/children/childcare-costs.htm
www.ncb.org.uk
page 107
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
certain threshold). Figures published by UCAS (cited by the Scottish National Party83) suggest a
greater drop amongst English students than Scottish students since the introduction of tuition fees.
Free prescriptions (S): In April 2011, Scotland introduced new regulations that removed the £7.40
fee for Scottish prescriptions (Welsh and Northern Irish prescriptions are also exempt under a
reciprocal agreement). The fee is payable in England or for English prescriptions.
Energy assistance package (fuel poverty) (S): Data from the Scottish House Condition survey
indicates that the rate of fuel poverty in Scotland has been growing since 2002.84,85 The Energy
Assistance Package provides graduated support so households can afford to meet fuel bills and
heat their home. The scheme, set up by the Scottish Government and delivered by the Energy
Saving Trust in Scotland, provides a free energy check for anyone who requests it. Further, the
scheme can provide eligible parties (generally those in receipt of particular benefits) with free or
subsided home insulation or heating systems to minimise fuel bills and ensure maximum household
fuel efficiency.
5.3.3 Policies that promote child well-being and early intervention and
prevention
A range of programmes and policies have been implemented by the Scottish Government over a
period of time aimed at supporting families, early intervention, and reducing social exclusion and
inequality of outcomes.
Sure Start (S): Sure Start was introduced in Scotland in 1999 with four key objectives:
improve children’s social and emotional development
improve children’s health
improve children’s ability to learn
strengthen families and communities.
An extensive National Evaluation of Sure Start, conducted at Birkbeck University, explored
implementation and cost effectiveness, as well as impact across families with children of differing
ages. Overall, findings were mixed or showed little or no positive impact. For example, one study
(National Evaluation of Sure Start, 2005) found improved child behaviour and family functioning
amongst some groups, but also poorer verbal development and more negative perceptions of local
services amongst other groups. Overall, the evaluation found that Sure Start was of more benefit to
the less disadvantaged users.
A mapping exercise of Sure Start in Scotland was published in 2005 describing its implementation
here (Cunningham-Burley, Carty, Martin, & Birch, 2005). Findings showed that although uptake of
services was good, and there was a perceived positive impact across a range of child, family and
community measures. However there has been little formal evaluation to capture impact. More
recently, the Scottish Government has stated it will focus more on the Early Years Framework
placing greater emphasis on effective early intervention, strong universal services and parenting (a
strategy for the latter is currently in development).
83
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2012/jul/impact-university-tuition-fees-laid-bare, accessed
21/09/12
84
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Housing-Regeneration/TrendFuelPoverty, accessed
21/09/12
85
Fuel poverty occurs when costs equate to 10 per cent or more of household income.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 108
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Family Nurse Partnership (S): Implementing the Family Nurse Partnership (FNP) parenting
programme was earmarked as an immediate action in the Early Years Framework to target
vulnerable first time mothers and break the cycle of poverty and poor outcomes in the early years.
It is currently being piloted in two Scottish NHS health boroughs. The programme provides
intensive, consistent support via a family nurse to mothers from early in pregnancy until the child
reaches two years. Overall, it aims to develop parental capacity in order to improve the health of
the mother and child, improve child development and encourage self-sufficiency.
FNP has been rigorously tested in the US, demonstrating favourable impacts such as increased
maternal employment, fewer childhood injuries, improved health through pregnancy and improved
child development in preparation for schooling. The results of an England based RCT are due in
2013.
A Scotland- based evaluation is also currently being conducted currently, with the final report
due in 2013. However two interim evaluation reports from the NHS Lothian evaluation are
currently available.
The first report focused on setting up the programme and engaging mothers during the early
pregnancy stage (Martin, Marryat, Miller, Ormston, & Gordon, 2011). Overall, staffing the
programme in the necessary manner was largely achieved. For example, family nurses had
the requisite qualifications, had the necessary case loads and worked exclusively on the FNP.
The target to enrol all identified clients by the 28th week of pregnancy was achieved, though
enrolling 60 per cent or those by week 16 was not.
The second report focused more specifically on the effectiveness of the programme during
the late pregnancy/ post-partum phases (Ormston, Susan., & Gordon, 2012). The level of
take-up and the duration for which mothers remained engaged with the programme were
found to meet the targets set. Less than seven per cent of enrolled families became ‘inactive’
(below the 10 per cent target) and 52 per cent of clients participated in 80 per cent of
programme visits. Success was attributed to family nurses developing strong relationships
with parents during pregnancy, nurses being flexible to fit in with parents’ schedules and
clients’ levels of motivation. There were also some indications of a positive impact on
parenting confidence and healthy behaviours.
Since 2010, NHS Scotland has developed the ‘Psychology of Parenting Project’ (PoPP).86 This project
aims to improve access to evidence-based parenting initiatives for families whose children display
behavioural difficulties. This has primarily involved collecting evidence regarding the effectiveness
of parenting programmes being delivered across Scotland, two of which were considered to be
‘gold standard’. However, this research also found a number of barriers that prevented the
translation of theory in to practice.
There is some other limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of parenting support in Scotland,
but this review cannot clarify the extent to which these programmes have (if at all) been
commissioned at a local level (Moran, Ghate, & Van Der Merwe, 2004). An international review of
parenting conducted by the Policy Research Bureau highlighted an evaluation of HomeStart
Scotland, which reported increased confidence and self-esteem of parents, and a reduction in
familial physical and mental health problems and children’s behavioural problems. This review also
86
http://www.nes.scot.nhs.uk/education-and-training/by-discipline/psychology/multiprofessionalpsychology/psychology-of-parenting-project.aspx
www.ncb.org.uk
page 109
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
highlighted the Parents Altogether Lending Support (PALS) programme and reported that parents
found the intervention useful (though an in depth evaluation of outcomes was not conducted).
5.4 Measurement
At the time this research took place, the higher level ‘purpose’ child poverty indicators (outlined
previously) were rated on the ‘Scotland Performs’ website as summarised (including data sources)
in Table 1 below.
Table 1 Scottish National Indicators incorporated in the Child Poverty Strategy
Distance of travel since
2010- 2011
NI 12: Increase the proportion of young people in learning, training or work
(data from the School Leavers Destination Survey; baseline 2007-2008)
Performance improving
NI 16: Increase the proportion of babies with a healthy birth weight (data from
the Scottish Morbidity Record; baseline not clarified)
Performance maintained
NI 35: Reduce the proportion of individuals living in poverty (data from the
Family Resources Survey; baseline 1999-2010)
Performance improving
NI 36: Reduce children’s deprivation (data from the Family Resources Survey;
baseline 2004-2005)
Performance maintained
The more specific measures and actions included in the Scottish child poverty strategy were:
reduce levels of child poverty and minimise the impact of socio-economic disadvantage on
children
increase the numbers of parents in good quality employment
increase household incomes
reduce pressure on household budgets
ensure more children have positive outcomes in the early years, and that more children grow
up in nurturing, stable households, with good parenting and home learning environments
reduce health inequalities among children and families
ensure children and young people receive the opportunities they need to succeed regardless
of their socio-economic background
ensure that more young people are in positive and sustained destinations
ensure families receive the support they need, when they need it- especially the most
vulnerable
to reduce levels of child poverty and minimise the impact of socio-economic disadvantage on
children through communities and place
drive change through working with local partners.
The Scottish Government reports on the child poverty strategy annually, with the first progress
report being published in March 2012 (The Scottish Government, 2012a). The report describes a
number of initiatives implemented at Scotland and local level in relation to each of the measures
outlined above, and in some cases presents output data (e.g. number of apprenticeships available).
6.
Overall lessons for Northern Ireland
Several aspects of Scottish policy and practice emerged that may be useful for Northern Ireland to
consider in developing their own strategy.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 110
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
Policies relating to child poverty and children’s services appeared to be developing a stronger
‘rights’ and ‘equalities’ based approach over time (e.g. the current Act being consulted upon,
the GIRFEC approach and economic equality strategies).
Strategies and policies acknowledge the interlinked nature of factors that ‘surround’ child
poverty, related both to individual and household income as well as broader well-being and
social indicators.
Linked to this, policies focus on removing barriers to achieving equality and well-being
(through early intervention and breaking the cyclical nature of poverty), rather than on
simply increasing income.
Scotland, since devolution, has developed a large range of policies and strategy documents
that are interlinked, promote joint accountability and that fundamentally focus on equality of
opportunity. However, there is a danger that accountability becomes diluted and policies are
duplicated or become overly complex.
There appears to be systematic mechanisms for measuring progress through the overall
‘Scotland Performs’ website and annual child poverty strategy reports. The Scotland
Performs website provides independent, transparent and up-to-date data regarding the
overall targets for Scotland.
In developing the child poverty strategy (and others) for Scotland, it was necessary to have a
clear understanding of roles and responsibilities held by both the UK and Scottish
administrations. The Scottish strategies identify where:
o
The UK government ultimately has control
o
The Scottish government can supplement or complement UK policy
o
UK-wide policy limits the ability of the Scottish government to implement change
o
The Scottish government will work to secure greater influence in order to develop
more effective and integrated local policies.
A broader tension within the child poverty strategy (and others) relates to how governments
can balance requirements to provide a ‘safety net’ for non-working individuals and families at
the same time as incentivising and rewarding work.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 111
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
References
Barnes, M., Chanfreau, J., & Tomaszewski, W. (2010). Growing up in Scotland: The circumstances of
persistently poor children. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
Bradshaw, P., Martin, C., & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2008). Growing up in Scotland study: Exploring
the experiences and outcomes of advantaged and disadvantaged families. Edinburgh:
Scottish Government Social Research.
Breese, H., Maplethorpe, N., & Toomse, M. (2011). Take-up of tax credits. London: NatCen.
Brewer, M., Browne, J., & Joyce, R. (2011). Child and working-age poverty from 2010-2020. London:
Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Brewer, M., Duncan, A., Shephard, A., & Suarez, M. J. (2005). Did Working Families' Tax Credit
work? The final evaluation of the impact of in-work support on parents' labour supply and
take-up behaviour in the UK. London: HM Revenue Customs.
Cribb, J., Joyce, R., & Phillips, D. (2012). Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2012.
London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Cunningham-Burley, S., Carty, A., Martin, C., & Birch, A. (2005). Sure Start mapping exercise 2004.
Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research.
Department for Work and Pensions. (2011). Jobcentre Plus annual report and accounts 2010-11.
London: The Stationery Office.
Griffiths, R. (2011). Helping more parents into work: an evaluation of the extension of New Deal
Plus for Lone Parents and In Work Credit; phase 1 report. London: Department for Work
and Pensions.
HM Government. (2010). Child Poverty Act 2010. London: The Stationary Office.
HM Government. (2011). A new approach to child poverty: Tackling the causes of disadvantage and
transforming families' lives. London: The Stationery Office.
HM Government. (2012). The Welfare Reform Act 2012. London: The Stationary Office.
Hosain, M., & Dr Breen, E. (2007). New Deal Plus for Lone Parents qualitative evaluation. London:
Department for Work and Pensions.
MacLardie, J., Martin, C., Murray, L., & Sewel, K. (2008). Evaluation of the Free School Meals Trial
for P1 to P3 pupils. Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research.
Martin, C., Marryat, L., Miller, M., Ormston, R., & Gordon, J. (2011). The evaluation of the Family
Nurse Partnership Programme in Scotland: Phase 1 report - intake and early pregnancy.
Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research.
McQuaid, R., Bond, S., & Fuertes, V. (2009). Evaluation of the Working for Families Fund (20042008). Edinburgh: Napier University.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 112
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
McTier, A., Clelland, D., & McGregor, A. (2012). Evaluation of Community Jobs Scotland
Programme. Final report. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
Moran, P., Ghate, D., & Van Der Merwe, A. (2004). What works in parenting support? A review of
the international evidence. London: DfES.
National Evaluation of Sure Start. (2005). Early impacts of Sure Start Local Programmes on children
and families. Nottingham: DfES.
National Statistics. (2011). Scotland's population 2009. The Register General's annual review of
demographic trends (155th ed.). Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
National Statistics. (2012). Poverty and income inequality in Scotland: 2010-11. Retrieved from
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/06/7976
Ormston, R., Susan., M., & Gordon, J. (2012). Evaluation of the Family Nurse Partnership
Programme in NHS Lothian, Scotland: 2nd report - late pregnancy and postpartum.
Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research.
Scottish Parliament Information Centre. (2012). Youth unemployment: Policy. Edinburgh: Scottish
Parliament.
Stevenson, B., Watt, G., Clark, I., Simpson, L., & Stuart, A. (2011). Evaluation of the Activity
Agreement Pilots. Final report. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
TARKI. (2010). Child poverty and child well-being in the European Union. Report prepared for the
DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (Unit E.2) of the European
Commission. Budapest: Tarki Social Research Institute.
The Scottish Executive. (2006). More choices, more chances: A strategy to reduce the proportion of
young people not in education, employment or training in Scotland. Edinburgh: The
Scottish Executive.
The Scottish Government. (2007). The Government Economic Strategy. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2008a). Achieving our potential. A framework to tackle poverty and
income inequality in Scotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government. (2008b). The Early Years Framework. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2008c). Equally Well implementation plan. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2008d). The road to recovery. A new approach to tackling Scotland's
drug problem. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government. (2009). Changing Scotland's relationship with alcohol: A framework for
action. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 113
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
Scotland case study
Gill
The Scottish Government. (2010a). 16+ learning choices. Policy and practice framework. Supporting
all young people into positive and sustained destinations. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2010b). Low pay and income inequality in Scotland. Edinburgh: The
Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government. (2011a). Child Poverty Strategy for Scotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2011b). The Government Economic Strategy. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2012a). Annual report for Child Poverty Strategy for Scotland.
Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government. (2012b). A guide getting it right for every child. Edinburgh: The Scottish
Government.
The Scottish Government. (2012c). A Scotland for Children. A consultation on the Children and
Young People Bill. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
www.ncb.org.uk
page 114
© National Children’s Bureau
October 2012
T: 028 9089 1730
F: 028 9032 8749
www.ncb.org.uk/northernireland
Twitter: @ncb_ni_tweets
cover design: www.conordiverdesign.com
NCB Northern Ireland
Albany House
73-75 Great Victoria Street
Belfast
BT2 7AF