4. Reporting early childhood development
4.2 Monitoring early childhood development outcomes in the SDGs
SDGS
51ECD is a maturational and interactive process involving an ordered progression of motor, cognitive, language, socio-emotional and regulatory skills and capacities across the first few years of life.
During these years, a child’s newly-developing brain is highly plastic and responsive to change as evidenced by the billions of integrated neural circuits that are established through the interaction of genetics, environment and experience. This makes early childhood a critical time for cognitive, social, emotional and physical development and sets the stage for lifelong thriving.
The importance of ECD as a necessary and central component of global and national development has been recognised by the international community through the inclusion of a dedicated target and indicator within the SDGs. Target 4.2 specifically calls upon countries to “ensure that, by 2030, all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education”. One of
51 Written by Claudia Cappa and Nicole Petrowski, UNICEF. UNICEF is the custodian agency for Indicator 4.2.1.
Table 4.2 Options for defining “developmentally on track“
Method of
comparison National standards Creation of global scale Leave undefined Absolute Percentage of children
reaching agreed-upon set of skills/competencies, using national standards as starting point.
Set of skills defined by experts but no “absolute”
threshold because would be structured as a relative scale.
Up to countries to define standard set of skills to measure against, could look across countries over time to identify points in common.
Source: Anderson and Raikes, 2017.
the indicators selected to measure this target is Indicator 4.2.1 (the percentage of children under 5 years who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being). ECD is also linked to the achievement of other SDG targets, including those related to eradicating poverty and hunger, promoting economic growth and productivity, attaining gender equality, and building peaceful and inclusive societies.
4.2.1 Measuring ECD in household surveys
Measuring children’s development is a complex undertaking. While the overall developmental process is similar across cultures, children develop at different speeds and may reach developmental milestones at different times. What is considered “normal”
child development also varies across cultures and environments, since expectations and parenting strategies may differ not only among countries but also among cultural, ethnic or religious groups within the same country. Finally, child development encompasses many dimensions of wellbeing, all of which need to be measured to provide a comprehensive assessment of children’s development outcomes and possible risk factors.
UNICEF has been working with countries to collect data on ECD through the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), a global household survey programme that produces statistically-sound, nationally-representative and comparable data on several key indicators of the health and wellbeing of children, women, men and families.
MICS questionnaires cover several aspects of child development and wellbeing, including access to early childhood care and education, nutritional status, immunisation and parenting practices, as well as the conditions and quality of care within a child’s home environment, for example, the availability and variety
of learning materials in the home, early stimulation and responsive care and non-adult supervision.52
In order to capture information on children’s achievement of universal developmental milestones across countries, UNICEF formed a technical advisory group in 2007 to develop, within the context of MICS, a set of specific questions posed to mothers/
caregivers to measure the overall developmental status of children within physical, literacy-numeracy, social-emotional and learning domains. Following a review of existing tools, consultations among a broad group of experts, and field-testing and validation, a 10-item index – ECDI – was added to MICS beginning with the fourth round of surveys, primarily implemented between 2009 and 2012 (see Figure 4.2).53
The ECD data from MICS have been used in a number of academic articles and data-driven
advocacy flagship reports (UNICEF, 2018; Miller et.al., 2016; McCoy et.al., 2016; Jeong, Bhatia and Fink, 2018) and data quality has been analysed through various reliability and validity tests (Kariger et al., 2012). For instance, the validity of the ECDI was confirmed through an analysis of data collected in 12 countries during the fourth round of MICS and a number of studies have also conducted cross-country comparisons using the index (McCoy et.al., 2016b;
Miller et.al., 2016). With the inclusion of the ECDI, MICS has become the largest source of comparable data on developmental outcomes for children, producing country-level estimates for more than 60 mostly low- and middle-income countries.54
When UNICEF started the process of creating a tool for measuring ECD outcomes in household surveys,
52 Learning materials include books and play materials, which are defined as household objects, objects found outside (such as sticks, rocks, shells, etc.), homemade toys and manufactured toys. Activities that provide early stimulation and responsive care include: reading books to the child; telling stories to the child; singing songs to the child; taking the child outside the home; playing with the child; and naming, counting or drawing things with the child.
53 The literacy-numeracy domain is captured by ECDI Items EC6, EC7 and EC8, while the learning domain is measured by ECDI Items EC11 and EC12.
54 Some countries collected data on ECDI in multiple rounds of MICS. The ECDI has also been collected in approximately ten countries through its inclusion in demographic and health surveys.
Figure 4.2 UNICEF’s Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI).
there was only a handful of available measures with the aim of collecting data on child development outcomes at the population level in order to produce representative national prevalence estimates as opposed to evaluating interventions or conducting clinical assessments of individual children. However, the landscape has changed since that time, and a number of groups have been working to develop, test and validate measures of ECD with various purposes in mind. In many instances, these other tools rely on direct assessment of children and/or teachers’ reports and are not designed to produce representative estimates at the national level. Furthermore, only a few of these tools have been tested or used to collect data across a variety of country contexts, and some of the available measures have only been designed and validated for use in certain countries or regions.
This has limited the ability to make cross-country comparisons or to reliably aggregate data into global and regional estimates of child development.
4.2.2 Evidence on child development outcomes collected through the ECDI
In 68 countries with comparable data generated through the implementation of the ECDI for the period 2010 to 2017, around two in three children aged 3 to 4 were developmentally on track in at least three of the following domains: literacy-numeracy, physical development, social-emotional development and learning.55 In all countries with available data, more than 80% of children between the ages of 3 and 4 are considered to be on track in their physical development. With regard to learning55 The four domains are defined as follows:
Literacy-numeracy: Children are identified as being developmentally on track if they can do at least two of the following: identify/name at least ten letters of the alphabet; read at least four simple, popular words; and/or know the name and recognise the symbols of all numbers from one to ten.
Physical: If the child can pick up a small object with two fingers, like a stick or rock from the ground, and/or the mother/primary caregiver does not indicate that the child is sometimes too sick to play, then the child is regarded as being developmentally on track in the physical domain.
Social-emotional: The child is considered developmentally on track if two of the following are true: The child gets along well with other children; the child does not kick, bite or hit other children; and the child does not get distracted easily.
Learning: If the child follows simple directions on how to do something correctly and/or when given something to do, and is able to do it independently, then the child is considered to be developmentally on track in the learning domain.
Figure 4.2 UNICEF’s Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI)
EC6. I would like to ask you some questions about the health and development of (name). Children do not all develop and learn at the same rate. For example, some walk earlier than others. These questions are related to several aspects of (name)’s development.
Can (name) identify or name at least ten letters of the alphabet?
EC7. Can (name) read at least four simple, popular words?
EC8. Does (name) know the name and recognise the symbol of all numbers from 1 to 10?
EC9. Can (name) pick up a small object with two fingers, like a stick or a rock from the ground?
EC10. Is (name) sometimes too sick to play?
EC11. Does (name) follow simple directions on how to do something correctly?
EC12. When given something to do, is (name) able to do it independently?
EC13. Does (name) get along well with other children?
EC14. Does (name) kick, bite, or hit other children or adults?
EC15. Does (name) get distracted easily?
Note: The response options for each questions are yes, no or don’t know.
Source: UNICEF.
Figure 4.3 Percentage of children aged 36 to 59 months who are developmentally on track in at least three of four domains of child development (as measured by the ECDI) and gross national income (GNI) per capita in 2016 according to the Atlas method in US$, in countries with available data
Notes: Each dot represents a country. Only those countries with data on both the ECDI and GNI per capita are included in this chart.
Source: Data on GNI per capita are from World Bank national accounts data and OECD national accounts data files available at <https://data.world-bank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD>. Data on the ECDI are from UNICEF global databases, 2018, based on MICS and other nationally-represen-tative household surveys, 2010–2017.
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
GNI per capita (2016), Atlas method, current US$
Percentage of children aged 36-59 months who are developmentally on track according to the ECDI
10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure 1.1 Interim reporting of SDG 4 indicators
and social-emotional development, the proportions of children on track vary widely across countries but are above 50% in practically all countries with data. Children are least likely to be considered developmentally on track in the area of literacy-numeracy across all countries.56
Figure 4.3 shows the relationship between the prevalence of children who are developmentally on track and national income per capita. This seems to indicate that most high- and upper-middle-income countries with available data generally have a relatively high proportion of children aged 3 to 4 considered to be developmentally on track with few exceptions.57 On the other hand, there are noticeable disparities among children living in low- and lower-middle-income countries, with wide differences in the proportion of children developmentally on track even in some countries with similar income levels.
Access to high-quality care and education
programmes outside the home can provide children with opportunities to develop the basic cognitive and language skills they need to flourish, build social competency and foster emotional development.
Across all countries with data, children who attend early childhood education are found to be around two times more likely, on average, to be developmentally on track in the literacy-numeracy domain compared to children not attending early childhood education programmes.58 Despite its proven benefits and clear impacts on children’s early learning, nearly 57 million children aged 3 to 4 (just over two in three) do not attend an early childhood education programme in the 67 mostly low- and middle-income countries with available data.
56 UNICEF analysis based on data from MICS and other nationally-representative household surveys, 2010–2017.
57 These results are partly skewed given the limited data availability for high-income countries.
58 UNICEF analysis based on data from MICS and other nationally-representative household surveys, 2010–2017.
4.2.3 The need for an improved measure of ECD to monitor SDG Target 4.2
Currently, Indicator 4.2.1 has been classified as Tier III, meaning that the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDG) has decided that methodologies and standards for measurement do not currently exist and need to be developed and tested. As the custodian agency of this indicator, UNICEF has been tasked with the responsibility of undertaking methodological work to develop, test and validate a survey module that can be used to collect nationally-representative data using a standardised approach and measure in order to monitor and track progress towards achieving Target 4.2. In the interim, the ECDI is being used as a proxy measure to report on Indicator 4.2.1, and for the past three years, ECDI data have been featured in the United Nations Secretary-General’s report, Progress
towards the Sustainable Development Goals, and the accompanying statistical annex.
There are several key reasons that necessitate the development of an improved measure of ECD within the context of SDG monitoring and reporting.
Currently, the main differences between the existing ECDI and the formulation of Indicator 4.2.1 pertain to the inclusion of the health domain and the broader age group of children under 5 years in the SDG formulation. In addition, the principle of universality within the SDG agenda and the need to ensure that tools are relevant and applicable for all countries also needs to be considered. The intention is to build an improved measure of ECD that will be aligned with the definition set by Indicator 4.2.1. A comparative advantage of this measure is that it is being designed for integration into existing national data collection efforts and will not require the implementation of a separate, dedicated survey effort, which are often time- and resource-intensive. These population-level data, collected as a component of household surveys, will allow disaggregation of the findings by key demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, as well as sub-national geographical areas.
The methodological work is being led by UNICEF, in collaboration with an expert advisory panel and under the auspices of a Global Inter-Agency Expert Group on ECD Measurement tasked with overseeing the revision, testing and validation of the improved measure of ECD outcomes.
Key activities completed to date include: a scoping exercise and review of more than 500 items that assess ECD through both caregiver and teacher reports, as well as direct assessments included in ten existing tools/instruments; cognitive testing of a bank of items in six countries (Bulgaria, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Uganda and the United States); and commissioning of a series of background papers on young children’s development in health, learning and psychosocial wellbeing to inform the development of a conceptual framework and a report on psychometric considerations to ensure the development of a strong tool/instrument for measurement purposes. UNICEF has also hosted a series of technical consultations in 2015, 2016 and 2018 to bring together academics, technical experts and key partners in the field of ECD measurement and tool development in support of the methodological work.
A dedicated field test of the measure will take place in Mexico in 2018. Following this, additional testing, validation and piloting of the measure in a number of selected countries may follow. By the end of the process, the final output will be a standardised and validated tool to measure ECD outcomes, along with guidance on its implementation that can be broadly used by countries in national household surveys for monitoring of SDG Target 4.2. As is the case with all MICS tools, the improved measure will be a public good that will be freely accessible to all countries interested in undertaking data collection on ECD at the population level.