Communities ASD Seminar 2nd June 2009

Sinéad Power - GUS Project Manager

Scottish Government

Aim of the Presentation

1. To provide an overview of the Growing up in Scotland study including:

- Research objectives- Research design- Content

2. Present some key findings from the GUS reports particularly the 2009 Report ‘Parenting and the Neighbourhood Context’

3. Looking to the future – what are the options in GUS for area level analysis?

About GUS: Research Objectives

• Explore the impact of early years experiences on later life outcomes

• How do the experiences and outcomes of Scottish children differ?

• What can we do to improve things?

Study Design (1) – Two cohorts – initially (Sw1)

• Birth cohort: 5217 children aged 10 months • Child cohort: 2859 children aged 34 months

– National sample capable of analysis by urban/rural, deprived/non-deprived and other sub-groups of interest

– Sample drawn from Child Benefit records– Face-to-face (CAPI) survey of parents annually

until child reaches five (almost six) years of age then at selected stages of interest

Study design (2): Ages and StagesAge at interview

SweepLaunch year

0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6

12005

BC1(5217)

CC(2858)

22006

BC1(4512)

CC(2500)

32007

BC1(4191)

CC(2331)

42008

BC1 CC

52009

BC1 = Birth cohort 1CC = Child cohort

BC1

62010

BC1

GUS1 GUS2 GUS3 GUS4 GUS5

(2005/6) (2006/7) (2007/8) (2008/9) (2009/10)

BC only

Main carer Main carer Main carer Main carer Main carer

Partner

Child height & weight

Child height & weight

Cognitive assessments

Cognitive assessments

Health

records

Health records

Health

records

Health records

Health

records

Study Design (3): Sources of information

Study content: Core topics of the main interview Household composition and family demographics

Parental health and well-being

Non-resident parents Early experiences of pre-school

Parental support Early experiences of primary school

Parenting styles Pregnancy and birth

Childcare Involvement of grandparents

Child health and development Material deprivation

Activities with others Food and nutrition

Education and employment Housing and neighbourhood

Income and benefits Social networks and social capital

Accommodation and transport Parental health and well-being

GUS and area level analysis

• SIMD and Rural/Urban - across sweeps

• Sweep 2 (2008) report on Growing up in Rural Scotland

• Sweep 3 (2009) report on Parenting and the Neighbourhood Context

Growing up in Rural Scotland (2008)

• Breastfeeding rates are higher in rural areas and mothers are less likely to smoke.

• Children in rural areas are more likely to have ‘child-rich’ social lives.

• Families with young children make less use of formal childcare in rural areas.

Parenting

and the

neighbourhood

context report (2009)

Background context

• Local area and local services feature prominently in the national performance framework

• Creating communities that provide

a supportive environment for children

and families also a key aim of the

Early Years Framework.

Aim of report

• Report aims to:

– Explore families’ experiences of living in Scotland’s neighbourhoods

– Examine parents’ views on different aspects of their local area

– Identify differences in the views and experiences of parents, in particular relation to area deprivation and urban-rural classification

– Consider the relationship between area characteristics and parenting behaviours

The data• Neighbourhood data:

– Satisfaction with local area– Availability, use and assessment of local

services/facilities– Perceptions of safety– Perceived ‘child-friendliness’ of the local area

• Social network and social support data: – Visits to or visits from family members– Contact with grandparents– Attendance at/ involvement in local parent/child groups– Ease of arranging short-notice childcare– Perceptions of informal social network – closeness to,

and perceived level of support from, family and friends

Parents perceptions of their area

• 81% of parents are very or fairly satisfied with the area where they live

• Satisfaction level varies according to area characteristics

Availability and use of local facilities/ services

• People living in rural areas were less likely to have access to services such as childcare, health and leisure facilities than were those in urban areas

• Areas of higher deprivation also suffered from a lack of childcare, health and leisure facilities

Availability, use and deprivation (%)

None in areaIn area but not

usedIn area used

sometimes/often

Least Most Least Most Least Most

Parent & toddler group 4 16 52 59 44 25

Registered childminder 5 28 81 66 14 6

Playgroup 10 21 73 66 18 12

Nursery 6 6 63 73 31 21

GP 8 13 9 12 83 75

Community health services 9 12 24 22 68 66

Library 10 14 31 37 59 49

Public swimming pool/leisure centre 27 34 17 16 56 50

Playground or park 4 10 5 17 91 73

Credit Union 89 52 10 39 1 9

Advice centre 66 42 32 46 2 12

Parents views of services…

• Local health and education services were rated highest by parents, whereas facilities for children and young people were rated lowest

• Facilities for young children were seen as most in need of improvement – selected by one-fifth of respondents

Percentage rating services as good or very good,

by deprivation - birth cohort

89

82

63

47

15

77

69

39

19

9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

School services

Health services

Childcare

Facilities for under 12s

Facilities for teenagers

%

Least deprived Most deprived

49

45

48

43

59

36

59

23

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Lived in area 10 years or more

Lived in area 1-5 years

Rural

Urban

Social rented housing

Ow ner occupied housing

Most deprived

Least deprived

%

% with low satisfacion score

Percentage with low satisfaction with facilities score - birth cohort

Services and issues most in need of improvement in local area by

area urban rural and deprivation classification

Service or issue

Area Urban Rural Classification (%)

Area Deprivation

Urban Rural

Least deprived

Most deprived

All

Access to GPs and local health services 3 5 3 3 3

Good quality affordable housing 14 15 11 15 14

Good shopping facilities nearby 8 9 9 7 8

Access to good public transport 3 10 6 2 4

Quality of schools 5 3 5 4 4

Level of crime 12 2 4 19 10

Quality of jobs 2 2 1 2 2

Facilities for young children 20 21 16 24 20

Sense of community spirit 2 2 3 1 2

Cleanliness of local environment 5 1 2 6 4

Condition of public spaces 7 5 9 5 6

Family and friends close by 3 3 5 1 3

Facilities for older children 7 9 10 5 8

Access to good quality affordable childcare

2 3 3 1 2

Amount of traffic/dangerous drivers 6 7 10 4 6

Social networks Three-quarters of parents had a satisfactory

friendship network and a similar proportion had a satisfactory family network.

A little over half (57%) had both satisfactory networks and only 10% in the birth cohort and 8% in the child cohort had neither.

Respondents living in areas of low deprivation were slightly more likely to have satisfactory friendship networks than were those living in areas of high deprivation (79% V 70%).

Child-friendliness

Most parents said their local area was moderately or very child-friendly.

Factors independently associated with lower perceived notion of area child-friendliness: Living in an urban or deprived area Lower levels of neighbourhood satisfaction A negative rating of local facilities Having fewer satisfactory social networks Level of education

Variation in perceived child-friendliness by area deprivation

- birth cohort

5 712

24

43

69 67 6964

49

26 25

128

19

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Least deprived 2 3 4 Most deprived

Area deprivation - quintiles

% in

ea

ch

gro

up

Low Medium High

Are area characteristics related to parenting

behaviour?

Relationship between area characteristics and

parenting behaviours

Factors associated with parenting behaviours

Factors not associated with parenting behaviours

• Area deprivation• Urban-rural classification• Existence of social networks• Assessment of local facilities• Household income• Level of education• (Tenure)• (Length of residence)• (Mother’s age at child’s birth)

• Area child-friendliness• Neighbourhood satisfaction

Future developments in GUS and the relationship to area level characteristics

• Re-running the neighbourhood module?

• Data linkage?

• Local Authority level analysis?

LA Level Analysis

• Not currently possible

• Paper on web

• Modelling options being considered??

WANT TO KNOW MORE?

www.growingupinscotland.org.uk

Sinead.Power@scotland.gsi.gov.uk