Thriving Together: breaking the cycle of disadvantage for a stronger economy

Early Childhood Development must be a priority for government funding if we are to achieve a positive post pandemic reset

To be successful, the post pandemic reset cannot be driven by the current operating systems of government, business, and community. Our mindset needs to change. The pre-Covid approach to complex health, social and economic problems is not fit for purpose. Maybe it never was.

A thriving economy is good for everyone, right? When business is doing well, there are more jobs for everyone. When we are working, we feel better, we have money in our pockets and a roof over our heads.

In truth, the gap between those who are wealthy and those who live in poverty is growing. The rates of suicide, homelessness, out of home care, domestic violence and addiction are trending in the wrong direction. A strong economy does not translate to positive health, welfare, and social outcomes for all.

A strong economy does not translate to positive health, welfare, and social outcomes for all.

To build a strong and fair economy we need to start with early childhood. 1 in 5 children in Australia start primary school with an educational vulnerability. Often these children live in environments defined poverty and discrimination. Their start in life means that they are less likely to complete year 12, complete post graduate education or join the workforce. The vicious cycle of disadvantage is sustained.

The science on early childhood development and the link between adverse childhood experience and life outcome is clear. The good news is that the research is now available for policy makers, legislators, and funders to make decisions that will reduce early childhood development vulnerability.

Simply put, access to high quality, local, adaptable early childhood education for all children will improve their educational, psychological, social and health outcomes.  It will also improve the workforce participation for women which in turn will improve the home environment for children. Of course, it is not that simple.

Simply put, access to high quality, local, adaptable early childhood education for all children will improve their educational, psychological, social and health outcomes.

The evidence of "what works" must be contextualised within the community and with "what matters" to that community. Building a model and inserting it into a community will fail just as a virus is rejected by the human body. The local solution must consider the context so as not to do harm and ultimately fail. Communities must be engaged in the design of the local solution if it has any chance to succeed.

Thriving Together is a placed based process that is designed specifically to work with 4 systems that influence a child’s development. These are: the parent and family, the community, the early childhood education and care (ECEC) sector and the local health and community care sector.

This program is currently running from the New School of Arts in South Grafton to raise awareness of early childhood development within vulnerable communities; to “turn outwards” and listen deeply to the community, to support the ECEC sector adapt to the needs of vulnerable children and parents; and to co-design with local services a coordinated pathway to early intervention.

The aim of Thriving Together is to build local capacity and capability within the resources and assets already available within community, in order to reduce educational vulnerability by half. By achieving these results, we will be building the foundation for a strong and fair economy. By demonstrating results, we aim to fast-track the model in order that more children and families can benefit.

The aim of Thriving Together is to build local capacity and capability within the resources and assets already available within community, in order to reduce educational vulnerability by half.

There are clear signs that governments are alive to this issue. We are getting strong messages that the Federal Government is preparing a budget in May that will help address this important issue. This is good news for children, for parents and for women, if governments get it right.

So often we have seen funding directed to the big agencies without thought for "what works" and "what matters". And so, we see agencies get bigger while the health, social and economic problems worsen. The announcement gives governments the “sugar hit” of positive media, but this time around we need a “low GI” meal that will deliver results over time.

Agencies tend to sustain the problem they were set up to solve. Many have mission statements that point to their growth as an organisation as opposed to the resolution of the problem. If we prevent homelessness, we lose the need for agencies to support the homeless. And that means job losses for the agency. Where is the incentive to prevent homelessness?

Agencies tend to sustain the problem they were set up to solve.

Governments can choose another way to fund. Participatory budget is a well-known model, and there are other approaches to decentralised commissioning. But it is common sense that the people with more incentive to solve a health, social or welfare issue are likely to be the ones experiencing those issues.

So, my call to Governments looking to invest in improving early childhood development outcomes is to consider investing in place-based programs where the communities impacted by poor outcomes are engaged in commissioning the local response.

We have an opportunity to make a difference. Let’s hope we take it.