News

Sure Start defended

I was disappointed to read the article 'Poor show' (Nursery World, 22 June) and I want to respond to a number of the criticisms of Sure Start that it made. The author is incorrect in suggesting that the early evaluation of Sure Start shows that the initiative is ineffective. The evaluation actually gives us an indication that it is succeeding in making a difference to the vast majority of parents and children.

The author is incorrect in suggesting that the early evaluation of Sure Start shows that the initiative is ineffective. The evaluation actually gives us an indication that it is succeeding in making a difference to the vast majority of parents and children.

The objectives of Sure Start were clear from the beginning, but it was right that we allowed Sure Start local programmes freedom in how they met them so that services met the needs of the local community.

Local evaluation has contributed to the evidence base about what works, particularly in giving parents and children a role in determining the way local services are provided. It has also helped local areas to improve their own service delivery. Programmes were supported in their evaluations by a team of locally based researchers and academics led by Birkbeck College.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Nursery World and making use of our archive of more than 35,000 expert features, subject guides, case studies and policy updates. Why not register today and enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Free access to 4 subscriber-only articles per month

  • Unlimited access to news and opinion

  • Email newsletter providing activity ideas, best practice and breaking news

Register

Already have an account? Sign in here