Maintain pressure on reforms to protect NHSUnder-fives' health 'not improving' despite £10bn investment
The health of under-fives has not significantly improved despite more than £10bn of investment, a report by the Audit Commission has said.
Government policies and programmes over the last decade have failed to bridge the gap between the poor and well off, according to the Audit Commission study.
While some aspects have got better, including a fall in the number of babies dying, other results are “disappointing”.
The report - Giving Children a Healthy Start - says an estimated £10.9bn has been spent, directly or indirectly, on improving the health of under-fives in England since 1998.
Of this, £7.2bn has been spent on Sure Start, a programme to improve services for young children.
It includes children’s centres, maternity grants to cover essentials and family lessons on areas such as health and nutrition.
The report said such investments have “not produced widespread improvements in health outcomes”.
Childhood obesity rose from 10.1% to 13.9% between 1995 and 2008, although the rate of growth may now be slowing, the report goes on.
Infant death rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.8 deaths per 1,000 live births but the figure is “still relatively high” compared with other European countries.
Following the MMR scare on a possible link with autism, immunisation rates for mumps, measles and rubella among five-year-olds have decreased from 93% to 89% between 1999 and 2009, the report went on.
Summing up, the study said that between 1999 and 2008 “health outcomes for the under-fives, on the whole, have only marginally changed”.
Steve Bundred, chief executive of the Audit Commission, added: “Overall, the findings are disappointing. Children need a healthier start in life and policies are not delivering commensurate improvement and value for money.”
The Audit Commission calls for councils and the NHS to be clear about how much they are spending on the under-fives.
The cash should be targeted at improving the lives of the most vulnerable and progress must be monitored.
Royal College of Nursing chief executive and general secretary Peter Carter called for more investment in the family nurse partnership programme, which provides intensive nursing support for vulnerable mothers, and is currently being piloted.
He said: “It is deeply concerning to learn that children living in deprived areas continue to have poorer health outcomes than those in more affluent areas.
“The benefits of family nurse partnerships are only just starting to be seen – their true value will be seen in the improved health of generations to come. To avoid missing this crucial window of opportunity in a child’s early years, it is vital that the government makes sufficient investment in family nurse partnerships, as well as in health visiting teams.”
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
PDF, size 1.2 MbOnline training units, written and reviewed by experts. Earn two hours' CPD and a personalised certificate for your portfolio.
Subscribers get five FREE learning units and non-subscribers can access each learning unit for £10 + VAT.
Share
Readers' comments (4)
Anonymous | 3-Feb-2010 3:56 pm
Sure Start has been a depressing failure despite its flagship status with New Labour. It has not reached the families that really need the services.
Regrettably, the Politicians have been too blind to Sure Start's failings to even attempt to put them right.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 4-Feb-2010 12:59 pm
See the other article about health visiting. None of this money has been invested in health visiting - nurses trained to deliver public health services for families and children. Health Visiting should be given the resources and time to manage properly. When you see a family once, it is impossible to address everything. Local Authorities are guilty of setting up services with unqualified staff, no knowledge of governance or audit and sometimes not even in discussion with other services.
Unsuitable or offensive?
lisa sollis | 13-Apr-2010 4:46 pm
as a student nurse and a mother to a young child i dont feel sure start has been a failure in the slightest. its a good way to meet like minded people and swap new ideas. the staff there are very friendly and approchable. its just unfortunate they dont get the money they deserve. before anyone bad mouths it they should visit a session and see the hard work that is put in.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 30-Apr-2010 2:20 pm
Lisa it's not a question of bad mouthing the Centres or their staff it is more about meeting the needs and accessing vulnerable families. Not many of these people want to be forced to go out to socialise with more confident and educated mums or families. They require more intensive 1:1 to build these communication skills and confidence. HV's are perfectly placed as are school nurses with the next step of supporting 5-19 year olds. More of these elks would be a significant starting point. The number of newly designed support agencies is baffling for the best of us although I do agree that a range of resoures is the best option. Not much input or recognition of the overstretched services already in place is being addressed which i feel is a serious oversight!
POST reg school nurse student x
Unsuitable or offensive?