It has been five years since the first edition of Policy Brief was launched (2006) with the strapline translating early childhood research evidence to inform policy and practice.

The goal was to select important issues in child and family health, review and analyse the relevant research, and ‘translate’ this into a series of practical recommendations that could inform policy and practice.

The format of each issue has been consistent, with four main headings – ‘why is this issue important?’; ‘what does the research tell us?’; ‘what are the implications of the research?’; and ‘considerations for policy and programs’. After 21 Policy Briefs, it seems an appropriate time to review what we have achieved to date and how much there is still to do.&nbsp

Centre for Community Child Health

English

Analysis and Policy Observatory (APO)

Policy Brief
An initiative of 
The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne 
Centre for Community Child Health
Translating early childhood research evidence to inform policy and practice
4 Policy Brief 22 > 2011: Policy Brief – Five Years On Policy Brief 22 > 2011: Policy Brief – Five Years On
Looking back
The inaugural Policy Brief – Early childhood and the 
life course – provided the rationale for increased policy 
attention and investment in the early years: 
What happens to children in the early years has 
consequences right through the course of their 
lives. There are many opportunities to intervene and 
make a difference to the lives of children and young 
people. The evidence shows the most effective 
time to intervene is early childhood, including the 
antenatal period. 
Subsequent Policy Briefs have covered a diverse range 
of topics using an ecological model to acknowledge 
the multiple influences on early childhood development 
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). These topics have ranged from 
the broad (the impact of poverty on early childhood; early 
years care and education; parenting young children; 
integrating services for children and their families; 
evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence) 
to the specific (childhood mental health; overweight and 
obesity in childhood; literacy in early childhood; television 
and early childhood development).
Despite the diversity of the topics addressed, six themes 
have recurred: 
1. The importance of strategic communication: 
Communicating the importance of early childhood 
development, and the need to invest in it, needs to 
be incorporated into debate at all levels of society, 
government and workforce. 
2. Integration of policies between government 
departments and levels of government: The 
commonwealth and state governments need to align 
their investment and policies regarding young children 
and their families in order to avoid duplication and 
maximise outcomes.
3. Improved coordination and integration of services: 
To improve outcomes for children and their families, 
universal and primary care services across the health, 
education and community sectors need to be better 
coordinated with one another.  
4. Research and evaluation: To effectively inform early 
childhood policy, we need Australian research to know 
which programs and practices work, and which do not. 
We also need to be able to use practice-based evidence 
to inform our approaches, and apply what we do know.
5. Recognising the important role of early childhood 
education and care: Early childhood cannot be 
categorised into health, education and development, 
as these are one and the same in early childhood. 
Professionals working in preschool settings are not 
simply child minders but providers of rich health, 
education and development programs for children.
6. Parental leave and family-friendly workplaces: 
Despite advances marked by the introduction of paid 
parental leave in 2011, Australia still lacks universal 
family-friendly policies and public acceptance of the 
importance of family-friendly workplaces.
Policy Brief – Five Years On
It has been five years since the first edition of Policy Brief was launched (2006) with the strapline translating 
early childhood research evidence to inform policy and practice. The goal was to select important issues in 
child and family health, review and analyse the relevant research, and ‘translate’ this into a series of practical 
recommendations that could inform policy and practice. The format of each issue has been consistent, 
with four main headings – ‘why is this issue important?’; ‘what does the research tell us?’; ‘what are the 
implications of the research?’; and ‘considerations for policy and programs’. After 21 Policy Briefs, it seems 
an appropriate time to review what we have achieved to date and how much there is still to do. 
Issue 22 > 2011
About the Centre for 
Community Child Health
The Centre for Community Child 
Health (CCCH) has been at the 
forefront of Australian research into 
early childhood development and 
behaviour for over two decades.
The CCCH conducts research into 
the many conditions and common 
problems faced by children that 
are either preventable or can 
be improved if recognised and 
managed early. 
Policy Brief
Policy Brief aims to stimulate 
informed debate about issues 
that affect children’s health and 
wellbeing. Each issue draws on 
current research and international 
best practice. Policy Brief is 
produced by the CCCH, with 
peer review and advice from an 
editorial board of national experts, 
and an advisory group of experts 
in children’s policy and service 
delivery.
References
A full list of references and further 
reading used in the development 
of this Policy Brief is available from: 
www.rch.org.au/ccch/policybriefs.
cfm
Next Policy Brief
Policy Brief 23 will address Child 
Mental Health
Subscribe
To receive Policy Brief e-alerts 
please visit: www.rch.org.au/ccch/
mailinglist.cfm
Centre for Community Child Health
The Royal Children’s Hospital 
Melbourne
50 Flemington Road
Parkville 3052
Victoria, Australia
Telephone: +61 3 9345 7085 
email: enquiries.ccch@rch.org.au 
www.rch.org.au/ccch
Obtaining Australian data regarding the efficacy of existing and any new 
programs should be a priority of this next phase of reform. At times of 
scarce resources, it becomes even more important that we fund only those 
programs that make a demonstrable difference to outcomes.
Recognising the important role of early childhood education and care 
(PB 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13)
The reforms to early childhood education and care have already highlighted 
staff shortages in this sector, as well as disparities in career structure, pay 
and conditions for the different areas of the workforce. Both these issues 
need to be addressed if the potential of the National Quality Framework and 
the Early Years Learning Framework is to be fully realised. 
There needs to be a rapid expansion of tertiary training courses for early 
childhood professionals, with encouragement and incentives for the existing 
workforce to obtain formal higher qualifications. In addition, there is a 
challenging retraining agenda for all professionals who work with young 
children and their families. Professionals have to be able to understand and 
interpret emerging research findings and integrate them into their practice, 
as well as learn to work in a more coordinated way in teams and with 
professionals from other disciplines.
Parental leave and family-friendly workplaces (PB 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16)
The first day of 2011 saw the encouraging introduction of universal paid 
maternity leave, albeit limited – a first for Australia. The considerable and 
often strident opposition from sections of the community that greeted this 
initiative is indicative of a lack of appreciation for the critical role parents have 
in providing the nurturing and responsive environment infants and young 
children need. 
With a few notable exceptions, there has been a disappointing lack of 
leadership and support in this area from business. Business does not yet 
seem to understand that paid parental leave and flexible working conditions 
are ultimately in companies’ best interests. In the long term, family-friendly 
workplaces and the subsequent improvements to social infrastructure, are 
likely to be the most important contributing factors to the future economic 
prosperity of our country.
Australia is increasingly seen internationally as moving to centre stage in 
terms of the implementation of informed, evidence-based policy initiatives 
that reflect government understanding of the importance of early childhood. 
We believe that Policy Brief has contributed to this process through its ability 
to highlight the fact that examining what the science says about particular 
issues will always result in better public policy. As Australia moves into the 
next challenging phases of the policy reform agenda, it will be even more 
important to use the available research in order to build on and continue the 
important reforms.
www.rch.org.au/ccch/policybriefs.cfm
Policy Brief 22 - Five years on_print.indd   4-1 14/07/2011   9:52:52 AM
www.rch.org.au/ccch/policybriefs.cfm www.rch.org.au/ccch/policybriefs.cfm
Policy Brief 22  > 2011: Policy Brief – Five Years On 32 Policy Brief 22 > 2011: Policy Brief – Five Years On
Recommendations
From these recurring themes came a number of recurrent 
recommendations, suggesting there are fundamental 
issues still to be addressed, including:
• Appropriate vocational training and subsequent skilling-up 
of the early years workforce
• Flexible parental leave and family-friendly workplaces
• Facilitating research to evaluate the efficacy of 
established programs and following up that research, 
where appropriate, with funding to ‘scale up’ 
• Obtaining sound epidemiological data that can be used 
to inform policy and resource allocation
• Providing credible, accessible and practical information 
to parents and supporting them in their parenting role.
Our progress
We have seen some impressive government policy 
initiatives at both the commonwealth and state/territory 
level, particularly over the past five years. 
The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 
released the National Early Childhood Development 
Strategy – Investing in the Early Years in 2009, building 
on earlier policies such as the National Agenda for Early 
Childhood (FaHCSIA, 2003), the Stronger Families 
and Communities Strategy (FaHCSIA, 2003) and 
Communities for Children (FaHCSIA, 2003). The vision 
expressed in the Strategy was that ‘by 2020 all children 
have the best start in life to create a better future for 
themselves and for the nation’.  
As part of the Strategy, two very important pieces of 
work have arisen that are likely to have a profound 
impact in the short and long term:
1. the National Quality Framework for early childhood 
education and care (DEEWR, 2010), and 
2. the Early Years Learning Framework (COAG, 2009). 
These two frameworks have the potential to facilitate 
radical change for children in the years before they 
start formal schooling. Grounded in research findings 
and introduced following widespread consultation 
with academics and practitioners, these frameworks 
represent a paradigm shift in our approach to early 
childhood education and care (ECEC). They mark a move 
away from the traditional conceptualisation of services for 
children in the preschool years as child minding, towards 
an understanding of the importance of providing rich 
learning environments for young children. 
Further evidence of government commitment to the early 
years can be found in four other policies: 
• Universal Access to Preschool – mandating that by the 
end of 2013 all four-year-old children will have access 
to at least 15 hours per week of preschool for at least 
40 weeks in the year before they attend school. Each 
preschool program will be delivered by an early childhood 
teacher with four years of university training (COAG, 2008).
• The National Framework for Protecting Australia’s 
Children – a long-term national approach to protect 
the safety and wellbeing of Australia’s children (COAG, 
2009). 
• Growing up in Australia: the Longitudinal Study of 
Australian Children (LSAC), 2004, and Footprints in Time, 
2008 – funding to continue to follow the development of 
10,000 children and families from around Australia and 
1687 Indigenous children, their families and communities. 
These studies are investigating the contribution of 
children’s social, economic and cultural environments to 
adjustment and wellbeing.
• The Australian Early Development Index (AEDI) – 
funding to continue to roll out the national census of the 
health and development of Australian children in their first 
year of full-time schooling (DEEWR, 2009). 
These policies are a significant achievement and 
represent a far-reaching government acknowledgement 
of the importance of investing in the early years. They 
mark real progress for Australia and are the envy of other 
countries. 
More importantly, they provide a robust, broadly 
conceived base from which to launch the second and 
third phases of reform: moving from broad strategies and 
frameworks to specific action plans that are grounded 
in evidence and best practice, and then implementing 
those plans in a systematic and efficient manner. This 
is likely to be more difficult and challenging, and will 
require ongoing investment of considerable material and 
intellectual capital. 
Looking forward
Despite the considerable progress, there are still many 
issues that have not been adequately addressed and 
recommendations that are still to be actioned. At best we 
can say that these reforms represent a work in progress.
Continuing with the common themes of our 21 Policy 
Briefs to date, following are the areas that have been 
recommended in previous Policy Briefs and that we 
would argue need much more attention:
Strategic communication (PB 1,15)
Although early childhood is clearly on the policy radar 
of governments, academics and practitioners, there is 
considerable evidence that it has not yet grabbed the 
attention of the mainstream media nor the lay public 
(Open Mind Research Group, 2008; MCEECDYA, 
2010). Little attention has been paid to the importance 
of framing the messages so that they are understood 
by the lay public. A recent study documented the 
lack of awareness about the importance of the early 
years amongst most of Australian media, and its poor 
coverage as a serious issue worthy of discussion (Centre 
for Advanced Journalism, 2010). 
As we enter the next phase of reform, understanding and 
support from the community and media will be crucial. 
When the government is developing far-reaching and 
costly policy initiatives, thought needs to be given to 
the best way to communicate the rationale and benefits 
to the various stakeholders; this needs to be far more 
than a simple media release. Serious thought needs 
to be given to how best to frame messages about the 
importance of the early years, and where possible, the 
framing should be informed by empirical research.
Integration of policies between government 
departments and levels of government and improved 
coordination and integration of services  
(PB 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14)
This has been the most common recommendation 
across the life of Policy Brief, and arguably remains 
our biggest challenge. Further policy alignment is 
required between government departments (horizontal 
coordination), and between commonwealth and state 
governments (vertical coordination). Indeed, in many 
jurisdictions there is little or no policy coordination within 
the same department, let alone any coordination of 
department-funded programs for children and families. 
Current programs tend to be delivered in discrete, 
narrowly defined service silos with rigid eligibility 
requirements, sometimes with a ‘one size fits all’ 
approach. Programs and services need an integrated 
approach that is supported by all levels of government.
We continue to see programs that focus on a single 
problem or risk factor, despite research repeatedly 
showing that problems and risk factors cluster together 
(CCCH, 2010). At best, this lack of coordination leads to 
duplication and inefficiency; at worst, it creates barriers 
to the many families who would benefit from well-
conceived and accessible programs. 
This issue needs to be addressed at multiple levels as a 
matter of urgency. No new policies should be developed 
or announced without consideration of what already exists, 
and attention needs to be paid to how the new policies or 
programs would integrate seamlessly with existing ones. 
At the community level, service redevelopment should be 
guided by a concept of virtual integrated centres with ‘no 
wrong doors’. This approach has been well described 
(DEECD, 2010), and there are evidence-based resources 
that demonstrate a step-by-step approach for how to 
achieve this ‘no wrong doors’ approach.
Research and evaluation (PB 7, 9, 14, 17, 21)
While LSAC and the AEDI are wonderful examples of our 
governments’ understanding of the importance of data, 
this area is still in its infancy. 
Most of the evidence we have about early childhood 
programs comes from overseas studies, and there are 
obvious caveats in translating these into the Australian 
context. In our own communities, we know very 
little about what works, for whom, and under what 
circumstances, let alone the dose/response effects – 
intensity, frequency and duration of programs. 
No new policies should be developed or 
announced without consideration of what 
already exists... 
Most of our existing programs have never been 
evaluated for their efficacy, so that we have little idea of 
whether or not they meet their stated goals. Indeed many 
programs that are in existence do not have clear and 
measurable goals and objectives. We continually miss 
opportunities to introduce new programs or policies in a 
research paradigm, so that we can document whether or 
not they work. 
We need to embrace Drucker’s concept of ‘organised 
abandonment’ (Drucker, 1999) of policies and programs 
where there is no evidence of efficacy. From here we 
can begin to build our own strong Australian research 
and evaluation base and start to focus on policies and 
programs that are shown to work. Although this requires 
investment of scarce resources, in the long term it is 
likely to pay for itself many times over. 
Policy Brief 22 - Five years on_print.indd   2-3 14/07/2011   9:52:53 AM


Policy Brief - five years on

http://apo.org.au/sites/all/modules/pubdlcnt/pubdlcnt.php?nid=53078&file=http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/policy_brief_22_-_five_years_on_final.pdf

Policy Brief - five years on

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Analysis and Policy Observatory (APO)