Sure Start reduced likelihood of ending up in youth custody by a fifth

New research from the IFS, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, finds that Sure Start – an integrated family support programme serving families with children under the age of 5 in England in the 2000s – significantly reduced serious offending in adolescence. Children with access to the programme at ages 0–5 were less likely to have been convicted or to be in custody for a criminal offence by age 16. 

The research also finds that while access to Sure Start did not change the overall number of contacts families had with children’s social care services between ages 7 and 16, the programme did reduce the amount of time children spent in care. 

While these adverse outcomes are rare (only 1 in 200 children were in custody by 16 and 1 in 175 children were looked after among the cohorts living close to Sure Start centres), the costs of the youth justice and children’s care systems are such that these impacts translate into important savings for government: for every pound spent at its peak in 2010, Sure Start saved approximately 19 pence in public spending on youth justice and children’s social care. These cost savings are on top of other benefits identified in earlier IFS work showing that Sure Start improved children’s health and educational outcomes. 

But the research also shows that Sure Start may not have had universally positive effects for all children: the behaviour of some children who grew up near a Sure Start centre worsened, evidenced by an increase in suspensions and unauthorised absences from school. Such findings could be consistent with evidence that group-based childcare – a key component of the Sure Start programme – can hinder the behavioural development of some children. 

These are among the findings from new IFS research, which studies the effect of access to Sure Start for children under the age of 5 on youth crime, school attendance, and interactions with children’s social care. 

Introduced in 1999, Sure Start operated as a network of ‘one-stop shops’, integrating services for families with children under the age of 5 under one roof. These ranged from ante- and post-natal health services, parenting support, early learning and childcare, and parental employment support. Previous IFS work has shown that Sure Start reduced hospitalisations, improved academic performance and decreased the number of children identified as having special educational needs. 

• Focusing on the expansion of the programme up until 2010, the latest report finds:
  Living near a Sure Start centre between the ages of 0 and 4 reduced young people’s likelihood of receiving a criminal conviction by 13% (from a baseline of 3.7%) and a custodial sentence by 20% (from a baseline of 0.5%). These reductions were concentrated among theft and drug offences.
• Access to Sure Start had no detectable effect on referrals to children’s social services or receiving support as a child in need (CIN) or as a child looked after (CLA) between ages 7 and 16. But it did reduce the amount of time looked after children spent in care – by 13% during late primary school – which could be consistent with Sure Start making children’s needs somewhat less severe.
• These effects represent savings to the government worth approximately one-fifth of the upfront cost of Sure Start. These benefits are on top of other benefits reported in previous IFS research arising from educational improvements, reductions in special educational needs and reductions in hospitalisations.
• However, access to Sure Start was also found to be associated with increases in lower-level misbehaviour for some children. For example, rates of suspension and unauthorised absence from secondary school increased by 5–10%, amounting to an additional 0.2 days of school missed per student. Those with access to Sure Start also received more police cautions in some rare categories of offending, such as criminal damage. This suggests that not all children benefited equally from access to Sure Start. 

Nick Ridpath, a Research Economist at the IFS and a co-author of this report, said:

‘Sure Start reduced serious criminal convictions among young people, an additional benefit on top of those arising from improvements to health and education outcomes identified in our earlier work.  However, the combination of a reduction in crime and an increase in lower-level misbehaviour suggests that not all children benefited equally from access to Sure Start. While we find Sure Start had a lot of large and significant benefits, these findings also suggest there were areas where it could have done more to improve children’s outcomes.’

Elaine Drayton, a Research Economist at the IFS and a co-author of this report, said:

‘Integrated support for children and families early on in life through programmes such as Sure Start can be an effective way to reduce the need for costlier, late interventions, as shown by the reduction in youth custodial sentences and time children spent in care. But Sure Start was not a silver bullet for prevention, and averting some outcomes, such as children’s social care use, may require more specifically tailored interventions.’

Ruth Maisey, Education Programme Head at the Nuffield Foundation said: ‘Sure Start has been eroded, but there is a growing body of evidence about its many positive benefits. This latest IFS report shows again how early intervention improves the lives of children and young people, ultimately saves the government money, and contributes to a more positive society. When finances are tight, it’s a timely reminder for politicians to think longer term.’