Disadvantaged children who lived near Sure Start centres got better GCSE results than their peers before the Tories slashed their funding, research shows today. The early years centres, introduced by New
Labour , had a transformational impact on the lives of poorer children before the funding was scaled back, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The think-tank found children eligible for free school meals who lived near a Sure Start centre increased their performance at GCSE by three grades compared to those who didn’t. It is equivalent to the difference between getting two Cs and three Ds, or getting five Cs, researchers said. The scheme also saw more kids receiving special educational needs support at a younger age, with fewer children needing the support at 16 years old. It found the probability of having an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) by the age of 16 decreased by 9%, which the IFS said was equivalent to more than 1,000 children a year. Impacts of Sure Starts were "much larger" for children from the poorest backgrounds and those from non-white backgrounds, the IFS report added. Sure Start centres were introduced by Tony Blair in 1999, offering services including ante and post-natal health services, parenting support, early learning and childcare and parental employment support. But their funding was slashed by the Tories. The IFS said funding for Sure Start fell by more than two thirds and over 1,340 centres closed between 2010 and 2022. The report said it is "critical" the Government’s family hubs and the Start for Life offer "draw on lessons from Sure Start". It said the current family hubs scheme is for a wider range of kids rather than focusing on 0-5 year-olds, has less clearly defined set of services and "much less funding: just over £100 million per year, compared with £300 million per year in the first year of Sure Start". Sarah Cattan, research fellow at the IFS and co-author of this report, added: "It seems unlikely family hubs will be able to go as far in realising the potential that this research shows early years integrated programmes can have for children and their families." Ex-children's commissioner Anne Longfield, who now chairs the Commission on Young Lives, said: "Running down the number of Sure Start centres and cutting early intervention spending after 2010 was a historic mistake. Many children and families have been paying the price for these decisions ever since. The Government's family hubs network does not begin to match the scale or ambition of Sure Start." Margaret Mulholland, SEND and Inclusion Specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, said the IFS report “shows the folly of cutting back the funding for these centres during the 2010s”. She said: “This short-sighted decision has arguably cost more money than it has saved as a result of the significant increase in SEND requirements which might have been offset if support had been in place for children at an earlier age.” Niamh Sweeney, Deputy General Secretary of the National Education Union, said: “Sure Start Centres gave families the services they need and deserve, enabling them to give their children the best start in life… Unfortunately, such valuable support has been decimated, leaving families in desperate need of support.” Neil Leitch, CEO of the Early Years Alliance, said: “While the government’s new programme of family hubs is undoubtedly welcome… it’s very difficult to see how the plans will compensate for the sheer scale of children's centre closures that have taken place over recent years.” Join our FREE Mirror politics
WhatsApp community for all the latest from Westminster