Early Stimulation and Enhanced Preschool: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impacts of 2 interventions, early stimulation (ES) for children aged <3 years and enhanced preschool (EP) for children aged 3+ years, and their interactions. METHODS: In Odisha, India, 192 villages were randomly assigned to ES or to no ES. Within each village, about 8 mothers with children initially aged 7 to 16 months were enrolled, receiving ES or no ES accordingly (n = 1449). Subsequently, when children were aged ∼3 years, the villages were rerandomized to either EP at Anganwadi centers or no EP. This yielded 4 groups: (1) ES and EP, (2) only ES, (3) only EP, and (4) no intervention. Trained Anganwadi workers ran the EP. Primary outcomes, measured at baseline and follow-up after ∼1 year, were children's IQ (summarizing cognition, language, and executive functioning) and school readiness (SR). Secondary outcomes were home environments, caregivers' child-development knowledge. and preschool quality. RESULTS: Fifteen months after ES ended, onlyES had a sustained benefit on IQ (0.18 SD, P <.04) and on SR (0.13 SD, P <.08). Only EP improved IQ (0.17 SD, P <.04) and SR (0.24 SD, P <.01). Receiving both interventions improved IQ (0.24 SD, P <.01) and SR (0.21 SD, P <.01). No statistically significant interactions between the 2 interventions were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Both ES and EP increased IQ and SR. Only ES impacts were sustained for 15 months. Only EP resulted in considerable catch-up for children who did not receive only ES. The absence of significant complementarities should be investigated further because of its profound policy implications.

Lively Minds: improving health and development through play-a randomised controlled trial evaluation of a comprehensive ECCE programme at scale in Ghana.

INTRODUCTION: Many children in developing countries grow up in environments that lack stimulation, leading to deficiencies in early years of development. Several efficacy trials of early childhood care and education (ECCE) programmes have demonstrated potential to improve child development; evidence on whether these effects can be sustained once programmes are scaled is much more mixed. This study evaluates whether an ECCE programme shown to be effective in an efficacy trial maintains effectiveness when taken to scale by the Government of Ghana (GoG). The findings will provide critical evidence to the GoG on effectiveness of a programme it is investing in, as well as a blueprint for design and scale-up of ECCE programmes in other developing countries, which are expanding their investment in ECCE programmes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial, in which the order that districts receive the programme is randomised. A minimum sample of 3240 children and 360 schools will be recruited across 72 district school cohort pairs. The primary outcomes are (1) child cognitive and socioemotional development measured using the International Development and Early Learning Assessment tool, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and tasks from the Harvard Laboratory for Development Studies; (2) child health (measured using height/weight for age, height-for-weight Z scores). Secondary outcomes include (1) maternal mental health, (using Kessler-10 and Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale) and knowledge of ECCE practices; (2) teacher knowledge, motivation and teaching quality (measured with classroom observation); (3) parental investment (using the Family Care Index and Home Observation Measurement of the Environment and the Child-Parent Relationship Scale); (4) water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) practices; (5) acute malnutrition (using mid-upper arm circumference). We will estimate unadjusted and adjusted intent-to-treat effects. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study protocols have been approved by ethics boards at the University College London (21361/001), Yale University (2000031549) and Ghanaian Health Service Ethics Review Committee (028/09/21). Results will be made available to participating communities, funders, the wider public and other researchers through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, social and print media and various community/stakeholder engagement activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15360698, AEARCTR-0008500.

Inequalities in Children's Experiences of Home Learning during the COVID-19 Lockdown in England.

This paper combines novel data on the time use, home-learning practices and economic circumstances of families with children during the COVID-19 lockdown with pre-lockdown data from the UK Time Use Survey to characterise the time use of children and how it changed during lockdown, and to gauge the extent to which changes in time use and learning practices during this period are likely to reinforce the already large gaps in educational attainment between children from poorer and better-off families. We find considerable heterogeneity in children's learning experiences - amount of time spent learning, activities undertaken during this time and availability of resources to support learning. Concerningly, but perhaps unsurprisingly, this heterogeneity is strongly associated with family income and in some instances more so than before lockdown. Furthermore, our analysis suggests that any impacts of inequalities in time spent learning between poorer and richer children are likely to be compounded by inequalities not only in learning resources available at home, but also in those provided by schools.

Group Sessions or Home Visits for Early Childhood Development in India: A Cluster RCT.

OBJECTIVES: Poor early childhood development in low- and middle-income countries is a major public health problem. Efficacy trials have shown the potential of early childhood development interventions but scaling up is costly and challenging. Guidance on effective interventions' delivery is needed. In an open-label cluster-randomized control trial, we compared the effectiveness of weekly home visits and weekly mother-child group sessions. Both included nutritional education, whose effectiveness was tested separately. METHODS: In Odisha, India, 192 villages were randomly assigned to control, nutritional education, nutritional education and home visiting, or nutritional education and group sessions. Mothers with children aged 7 to 16 months were enrolled (n = 1449). Trained local women ran the two-year interventions, which comprised demonstrations and interactions and targeted improved play and nutrition. Primary outcomes, measured at baseline, midline (12 months), and endline (24 months), were child cognition, language, motor development, growth and morbidity. RESULTS: Home visiting and group sessions had similar positive average (intention-to-treat) impacts on cognition (home visiting: 0.324 SD, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.152 to 0.496, P = .001; group sessions: 0.281 SD, 95% CI: 0.100 to 0.463, P = .007) and language (home visiting: 0.239 SD, 95% CI: 0.072 to 0.407, P = .009; group sessions: 0.302 SD, 95% CI: 0.136 to 0.468, P = .001). Most benefits occurred in the first year. Nutrition-education had no benefit. There were no consistent effects on any other primary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Group sessions cost $38 per child per year and were as effective on average as home visiting, which cost $135, implying an increase by a factor of 3.5 in the returns to investment with group sessions, offering a more scalable model. Impacts materialize in the first year, having important design implications.