Policy: Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 - Case Study Example

Policy Analysis Name: Unit: Course: Professor’s name: Submission Date: Policy: Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 In 1999, the UK government, Tony Blair then Prime Minister did pledge to reduce child poverty by half by 2010 and by 2020 eliminate child poverty. Although it was a neglected issues for many years, it did become a political issue to address child poverty in a generation. Subsequently this has led to development of various policies including Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 which tries to explores modalities of Ending Child Poverty by 2020. Rationale The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 focuses on ensuring sustainability via income support of poor families. Its focuses shifts from income transfers to addressing the poverty root cause via parents support to attain employment and earn more. Secondly to break the intergenerational child poverty cycle by educating the poor child (Wickham, et al., 2014). Wickham et al., (2014) in the UK, child poverty levels are still high. In comparison to the last two decades child poverty is escalating so fast. In reference to the 2013-2014 UK’s figures 3.7 million were children living in poverty; 3 of 10 children. Poverty levels are still rising and for the first time for the last two decades in 2011-2012 UK’ child poverty rose in absolute terms. Higher child poverty are correlated with worse child health outcomes. This policy paper did aim at putting in measures to address child poverty from 2014-2017. Such measures includes: raising educational attainment among poor children to curb poor adulthood in future, improving living standards and supporting families of these children into employment and raise their earning (HM Government, 2014 p.11). Child Poverty and SDH As a social determinant of health, children in the UK growing up in poverty environmental child poverty is linked with numerous health-damaging consequences, adverse long-term psychological and social outcomes and negative educational outcomes. The poor health linked with child poverty does limit potentiality and development of the child, resulting into poor life and health chances in adulthood. Researchers, argue that in the UK eliminating child poverty would save 1400 lives of children aged below 15 years per year. Also, due to Child poverty, the UK’s economy in 2008 and 2013 did drop by £25 and £29 billion respectively. Following child poverty childhood mortality for 0-14 years in the UK, is quite high compared to other similar nations like Europe. The under-fives mortality rate in the UK is the highest among Western Europe two times that of Sweden. For countries with high rate of children living below 60% median income have pronounced infant death rates Figure 1 below. In the UK, a poverty child is likely to die through accident, perform poorly in education, have tooth decay, suffer from asthma, become overweight, suffer from secondhand smoke, be bottle fed, be born small for age ad die within the first year after birth. Figure 1: Infant death rates versus child poverty Critical analyses of the policy Understanding the theoretical aspect of ‘poverty’ is fundamental in this case. This is because it helps in shedding light on the policy being focused here. According to Whitham, (2012 p.6), poverty is defined as, “individual families and various groups within a given population who lack resources to access the diet needed, participate in the activities and have the living amenities and situations which are customary, or at least widely encouraged and approved in the societies in which they belong, (p.6).” The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 points out that the primary causes of poverty in families is low earnings emanating from work shortage or low pay and worklessness. Among workless families, children are three times more likely to become relative poverty in comparison to families with a single working parent (Family Misfortunes, 2016 p4). This policy did consider supporting families to secure jobs in 2014-2017 to address the underlying reason to child poverty. The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 does agree that there has been progress achieved via End Child Poverty by 2020 government commitment in 1999 via direct income. However, still there are gaps that need to be addressed to ensure sustainability and ultimate achievement of the goal. There is no time that proportion of children will have all-working parents. Thus, there is a need to address reliable financial support strategies, more so the strategies of uprating it (HM Government, 2014 p17). From 1996-2006, there was a 64% decrease in child poverty risk as non-working parents decrease by that rate, and 58% for lone parents children, with 71% to 68% decrease among children living with both parents. But, the risk still was high due to the fact that basic benefits are limited to remove families from poverty. Hirsch, (2008 p5) this risk can only be reduced by considering benefits rise, unlike having some benefits increase with earning and with some through prices. The benefits need to increase faster than earnings. This rise is important as in-work earning among parents paid relatively low. Secondly, there is a need to reestablish a policy that works to reduce and lower the chances of poverty in work. In the UK, in an household where both parents are working, the child has 8% opportunity of poverty and this is 26% for single parent working household, as per 2006 stats same as 1996 survey. Tax credits are delivering more children from poverty, but the number of those likely to be in working poverty with no tax credits offsets the benefits. Belfield, et al., (2015) this could be due to the fact that tax credits pressures earnings and wages and most parents still work in poorly-paid part-time jobs, there is more than 1.7 million children living in working families living below poverty line in the UK. Thus, there is a need to address, the current measure in ending child poverty in UK. Social health perspectives Huston, (2011) for people living in poverty in reference to income, the children face various challenges that render them socially excluded. Various aspects of social exclusion might be influenced by increasing income only. With social exclusion in respect to poverty in children, the government is forced to address other aspects affecting children. For instance, subjective wellbeing, behavioral and risks, peer and family relationships, educational wellbeing and health and safety wellbeing. In reviewing overall child wellbeing index among 21 OECD nations, both the UK and the US ranked lowest. Shonkoff, (2010) Children born and raised within poor families do have relatively poor social and intellectual skills following environmental and genetical influences from their parents. Huston, (2011) behavioral problems during adolescents is a concern as child poverty that goes passed adolescent did predict adult psychological distress, non-marital child bearing and arrests even for families where poverty was controlled earlier on. Early interventions directed on disadvantaged children are more beneficial compared to later interventions. However, Sherman, Debot & Huang (2016) early intervention may not address most of poverty linked problems as they do not address short term poverty, but address long-term consequences like health, behavioral and intellectual problems so as to reduce intergenerational poverty. The policy aim to tackle child poverty drivers such as parent experiencing ill health, with more than two children to take care, single parenting, low academic qualification and long-term workless status. The 2014-2017 strategy work to address these problems via intensive supporting long-term unemployment, supporting health needs for poor parents, reducing costs among all families, one-parent families directed support and raising poor parents (HM Governemnt, 2014 p19). Policy Analysis Framework Rodway, (2013 p.1) this research uses the Eightfold Path by Bardach’s policy-analysis process to evaluate the Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 policy. Step 1: Problem Definition Being ranked among the wealthiest countries, UK has too many children living in poverty. The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 policy aim at ruling out poverty in household that subsequently affect children. In 2013-2014 before the policy was implemented there were 3.7 million children in the UK living in poverty. The policy which gears at achieving vision 2020 of no child should be living in poverty is yet to realize positive results. Step 2: Assemble some evidence In the 2015/16 survey children living in poverty did record the highest number since the campaign to end child poverty began in 1999, reaching at 4 million. Since late 1990s children poverty rates had decreased, and for working-age parents and pensioners. But, the possibility of working-age adults with no dependent children entering in relative low income is on the rise. In future, there is a possibility of the proportion of population living in relative low income on housing costs deduction increasing to 24% by 2021/22 according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) approximates. This is accounted from the fact that earnings growth benefits mostly the middle-income households compared to the poorer households widening their income difference. The direct tax impact and benefits reforms announced or implemented from 2015/16 going forward will account for the projection as well. Further, although absolute low income upon housing costs deductions is foreseen to stay flat up to 2020/21, children in absolute income will rise by about 3% to hit 30% in 2021/22. Absolute child poverty is correlated with the benefits reforms and tax impacts adapted by the UK (McGuinness, 2016 p5). Thus, the question remains is worklessness the main reason to child poverty in the UK, an issue The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 endeavor to address? Step 3: Construct the alternatives The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 did lay various measures of addressing child poverty from grassroots. This included creating jobs, providing support to families to work, making work pay, tackling low pay and assisting people to shift into jobs with better pay. Previously, various policies have been put forth to address children poverty. The 1999 policy on Ending Child Poverty by 2020, using child tax credit and child benefits and getting parents to work. The 2010 legislation on The Child Poverty Act called upon the government to come up with sound Child Poverty Protection Strategy. The Act agreed that work did not pay well and not many parents were absorbed to work, leading to more poor children. To meet the Act, a call via 2011 policy on a new approach to child poverty to tackle and transform poor families from 2011-2014 was set, to combat child poverty by 2020. Then in 2014 The Child Poverty Strategy, 2014-2017 was brought on board to address child poverty for good (Wickham et al., 2016). However, other researchers point to various aspects that can be intertwined with the above to ensure sustainable livelihood. First, there is a need for credible institution in place to ensure civil and social order. Such as the judiciary, the police, common law arm, a constitution and self-policing. These institution are fundamental in reassuring mutual trust within the system. Secondly, there is a need for contracts impartial enforcement, property rights and code of conducts, with no politicians’ intervention or bureaucracy and trustworthy judicial system. Third, good governance is fundamental in supporting monetary and fiscal policies. Finally, ensuring effective factor is attained via secure contract enforcement, property rights and individual land title or ownership processes. These factors fosters confidence among fixed investments owner in a nation and subsequently result into increased productivity, growth of financial sector as they can access loan. Finally, education for all and disease prevention modalities ensure economic growth at the end (Duncan & Pollard, 2002 p12). Step 4: Criteria selection Despite, addressing worklessness, the UK government need to address issues on housing and the government should take a role lead in addressing and ending child poverty. This is important as statistics show that London is leading in child poverty degrees due to high housing costs. The government, does not seem to accept these analysis as poverty was not part of this year’s budget (Coughlan, 2017). A sustainable livelihood is achieved where the population has activities, assets and capabilities fundamental as means of living. A sustainable livelihood is achieved if population is able to cope with and recuperate from shocks, and stresses and enhance or maintain its assets and capabilities without suppressing the natural resource base (Scoones, n.d. p7). Housing cost reviewing. Statistics shows that 2011/12 and 2014/15, persistent low income was 9% of the population before housing cost (BHC) and after housing cost (AHC) 11%. Following AHC data, relative low income was most likely among children and least likely among pensioners. Persistent low income was highly likely to be experienced by pensioners unlike other groups as majority own homes. Persistent low income is determined where relative low income has been experienced for the last three years (McGuinness, 2016 p23). Housing and poverty is thus intertwined discipline in the burden of poverty among children in the UK. Addressing child poverty elimination without addressing housing will bear futile results (Birch, 2015 p1). Further, there is a need for policies that address income inequality disparity experienced in the UK. More so, there is need for policies that look into the middle and the poor class to mitigate the inequality. The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 is still sensible, but has not achieved its goal towards free-child poverty UK nation by 2020. Although, addressing child poverty calls upon a lot of input, governmental support is the cornerstone of all. Most policies do not meet their objective because they lack governmental support in most nations. Legislation and government directives are important in supporting policies. The policies also, missed the need of the medium earners who are slowly entering poverty line, thus credit transfers need to be reviewed as a modality of addressing short-term poverty among children (HM Government, 2016 p22) (Dabla-Norris, Kochhar, Suphaphiphat et al., 2015). Step 5: Outcomes projections The Child Poverty Strategy, 2014-2017 policy did assert that success can not only be achieved by the government alone, but by working with others. Such as local areas, devolved administration, employers’ actions, community and voluntary sector (HM Government, 2014 p113). However, such broad-based highlights of supporting arms, with no defined objective on where to handle in addressing the issue makes the Child Poverty Strategy, 2014-2017 draft inefficient to some degree. Network governance is both more inclusive and effective compared to rigid bureaucratic limitation of top-down models. Citizen participation is the primary solution to modern democracies which ought to be embraced in a policy formulation both in local and central level (Veronesi & Keasey, 2009 p2). Therefore, for effectiveness all stakeholders need to be involved and continuously be educated on the war against child poverty to attain the goal of no poor child by 2020. Step 6: Trade-off confrontation Strategy formulation is fundamental in addressing any policy. Strategy will always give information of present status of the issue, the vision to be achieved and modalities of reaching the goal (Butler, 2008 p3). The 2010 strategy to reduce child poverty failed to halve child poverty by 2014. This however, was not accounted in the Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 as the number of poor children has increased to 4 million unlike in 2010 (McCkhamen, 2016). Continuous communication helps stakeholders assess where they are and where they are supposed to be at any given time within the projects progress (Hazel & Jacobson, 2014 p3). There is need to decent, low-cost housing access in UK to enhance disposable incomes, improve work incentives and prevent material deprivation (Birch, 2015 p1). Income inequality disparity policies in the UK, will help in addressing incomes opportunity and polarization ensuring most people benefit from economic growth within the nation (Darton and Strelitz, 2003 p. 93). Adapting sustainable measure to End child Poverty in the UK, will ensure that every household has the capacity to absorb financial shocks without stress, strain and deprivation of other material resources. Step 7: Decide The UK need to evaluate their self-interests versus altruism in addressing child poverty in in helping close the income inequality gap. Poverty eradication in any given nation is everyone business. However, legislations that support end of child poverty ensure the adaptations are embraced both in the public and the private sector. Therefore, the government in forefront, the financial institutions, both public and private stakeholders need to be involved in the war against child poverty in the UK (Hills & Stewart, 2005). Waiting for too long raises the number of poor children, and risks intergenerational cycle of poverty as poor children are likely to end up poor parents (RCPCH, 2017 p4). They will continue suffering from low education access, poor environmental health exposure, poor health, poor intellectual growth and adaptation and subsequently end up in low paid jobs those are unsustainable to meet their daily need (Piachaud & Sutherland, 2000 p.34). Step 8: Tell a story Chances are that the 2020 vision to end child in poverty in the UK will not be possible. But, regardless of the economic level development, access to better health care, education and well-targeted social policies and ensuring institutions in the labor market do not punish the poor may help raise the income share among the middle and the low income earners in the UK (Dabla-Norris, Kochhar, Suphaphiphat et al., 2015). Thus, it is the interplay between the government, the employment sector and housing disciplines that may help address child poverty in the UK. As thus, by 2020 at least each child should be able to access affordable, high-quality childcare and all families with under-fives should be guaranteed access to a minimum income and ensure that all children as part of nation mission are reading well as they reach age 11 (Wickremasighe, 2014 p. 31). Alternatives to Ending Child Poverty in the UK Proposals Hirsch, (2008 p2) by late 1990s child poverty started falling. Optimistic lines revealed that the progress was ending towards achieving the goal of no poor child by 2020. The government has made tremendous effort in ensuring that the budget puts into consideration the redistribution income to low-income families. The Stationery Office London, (2012 p7) the ultimate aim was to halve child poverty by 2010 and eradicate by 2020, by the 2010 mark was missed by 600,000 only reducing to 2.3 million in 2010/2011. The program was not sustainable. Redistribution faced lack of follow-through. Redistribution faced backlash from 2003 and not continued for other 5years. Although redistribution measure was one way to solution, its inconsistency remains unreliable in addressing child poverty eradication in the UK. Other measures recommended include strengthening back-to-work models among lone parents. Missing the 2010 goal of reducing poor child by half led to a new policy, Ending Child Poverty: everybody business. This, strategy cannot be effective without work opportunities and intensive involvement with employers to provide opportunities for the poor. Other measures include tax credits, improved employment incentives and in-work tax credits and incentives. These measures though rewarding to the poor, they are highly drawing poorer group from middle class earners. Further, tax rates, inflation and cost of living are yet to be streamlined in the UK. High marginal tax rates on operation are affected by childcare costs, council tax and rent rates. These factors have direct impact on disposable income. Therefore, they hinder working families from crossing the poverty line (Evans & Scarborough, 2006). Influential modalities to policy makers From this collection, the policy makers need to understand what is more likely to bear fruits, not actually for poverty eradication by 2020, but at least somewhat thereafter. First the housing cost need to be streamlined. There is a need to evaluate inadequate housing indicator in addressing child poverty. A paradigm shift housing quality measure should be used to evaluate poverty with no after or before housing costs modalities being employed. Worklessness, should not be seen as the only reason behind child poverty and only primary solution to out-of-child poverty despite the fact it is a key contributor to child poverty. In-work poverty has been misrepresented. This is because worklessness is not a material resource. Statistics support that those on savings or pension (out-of-work) are not living in poverty as they have access to material resource. But, worklessness can be incorporated as an indicator of child poverty causes. Parental skill and education qualification need not be seen as the reason behind child poverty, but indicators to child poverty as they are not material resources (The Children’s Society, n.d. P12-16). Income inequality in the UK need to be addressed. Being among the wealthiest nations in the world, the number of poor children is unacceptable. Financial position of households is fundamental in addressing child poverty. This is because poverty stress and financial strains have positive correlation. Further, the employers need to be put on limelight and laws that requires an organization to have a given percentage of workers from poor families be passed and enforced. This will ensure more poor parents with any form of qualification from low-skilled to professional level get job opportunities. Further, employer flexibility is a concern as some pressure from employers limit parenting, family relationships and other support (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2011 p2). Universal credit should be reviewed as it not only weakens. Conclusion In conclusion, Child Poverty in the UK being one of the leading wealthiest nations is a concern. The 2015/6 stats shows that the number has risen to 4 million. End Child Poverty was begun in 1999. The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 was started, following the failure of the End Child Poverty by 2020 to reduce the poor children by half by 2010. A poor child is affected greatly; psychologically, physical health, environmental, social and intellectual aspect among others. The Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017 aims at addressing worklessness as employment is seen as the main leeway to poverty line. However, more middle-earners are falling to the poverty bracket. Rents, inflation rates, increased tax rates are financially putting pressure on the middle and low income earners further contributing to poorer children. End child poverty is a broad discipline and needs everyone’s efforts. However, employers need to have in mind the war against child poverty. The government need to steer the nation towards achieving the free child poverty nation, by providing funding, employment guiding laws targeting the poor parent and ensuring transference in the legal and other formal institutions. Income inequality gap should be addressed. Housing cost ought to be reviewed as high housing cost force more people to poverty. Finally, the government and policy formulators need to focus on material resources rather than looking at income, education qualification and worklessness as the reason to child poverty in the UK, but as drivers to Child Poverty. References Belfield, C., Cribb, J., Hood, A., et al., 2015. Nearly Two-Thirds of Children in Poverty Live in Working Families. Institute for Fiscal Studies, Birch, J. 2015. Housing and Poverty: Inspiring Social Change. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Butler, Y. 2008. Governance in the Boardroom: How Project Management Can Deliver Organizational Strategy. [Online]. https://iccpm.com/sites/default/files/kcfinder/files/YButler%20The_Role_of_Project_Management_and_Governance_in_Strategy_Implementation%20160808.pdf , accessed 6/28/2017. Coughlan, S. 2017. Record levels of poverty in working families. Education and Family. [Online]. http://www.bbc.com/news/education-39291999, accessed 6/28/2017. Dabla-Norris, E., Kochhar, K., Suphaphiphat, N. et al., 2015. Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective. IMF Staff Discussion Note. Darton, D. & Strelitz, J. 2003. Tackling UK Poverty and Disadvantage in the 21 Century. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Duncan, R. & Pollard, S. 2002. A Framework for Establishing Priorities in a Country Poverty Reduction Strategy. ERD Working Paper Series No.15. Economics and Research Department. Asian Development Bank. Evans, M. & Scarborough, J. 2006. Can Current Policy End Child Poverty In Britain By 2020? Joseph Rowntree foundation. Family Misfortunes, 2016. A research report examining the key characteristics of families living in poverty in the UK. [Online]. http://www.ymca.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Family-Misfortunes-v1.1.pdf, accessed 6/28/2017. Hazel, S.M. & Jacobson, W.S. 2014. Project Management Principles for Use in the Public Sector: Tools for the Everyday Project Manager. Public Management Bulletin. Hills, J. & Stewart, K. 2005. Policies towards Poverty, Inequality and Exclusion since 1997. Joseph Rowtree Foundation. Hirsch, D. 2008. What is needed to End Child Poverty In 2020? Joseph Rowntree Foundation. [Online]. https://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/2275_0.pdf retrieved 6/27/2007. HM Government, 2014. Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017. [Online]. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/324103/Child_poverty_strategy.pdf, accessed 6/27/17. Huston, A.C. 2011. Children in poverty: can public policy alleviate the consequence? Farm Matter, No. 87, PP. 13-26. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2011. Response to the UK Government’s tackling Child Poverty and Improving Life Chances: Consulting on a New Approach. [Online]. http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/ifssoca/migrated/documents/jrfpoverty.pdf, accessed 6/28/2017. McGuinness, F. 2016. Poverty in the UK: Statistics. Briefing Paper, no. 7096, 16th June, 2016. Piachaud, D. & Sutherland, H. 2000. How Effective Is The British Government’s Attempt To Reduce Child Poverty?. CASE Paper 38, London School of Economics. Rodway, P. 2013. CTPD-Rodway Fiscal: Bardach’s policy-analysis process. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, (RCPCH), 2017. Poverty and Children’s Health: Views from the Frontline. Child Poverty Action Group. Scoones, n.d. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods A Framework for Analysis. IDS Working Paper 72. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/3390/Wp72.pdf?sequence=1, accessed 6/28/2017. Sherman, A., DeBot, B. & Huang, C.C. 2016. Boosting low-income children’s opportunities to succeed through direct income support. Acad Pediatr, Vol.16, No. 3 Suppl, PP. S90-S97. Shonkoff, J.P. 2010. Building a new biodevelopmental framework to guide the future of early childhood policy. Child Dev, Vol. 81, No., 1, PP. 357-67. The Children’s Society, n.d. Measuring Child Poverty: A New Approach. [Online]. https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/tcs/measuring_child_poverty_final.pdf, accessed 6/28/2017. The Stationery Office London, 2012. Child Poverty in the UK: The Report on the 2010 Target. UK: Crown Veronesi, G. & Keasey, K. 2009. Policy Implementation and Stakeholder Involvement within the National Health Service. [Online]. http://soc.kuleuven.be/io/egpa/org/2009Malta/papers/EGPA%202009%20Veronesi%20and%20Keasey.pdf, accessed 6/28/17. Wickham, S., Anwar, E., Barr, B. et al., 2014. Poverty and child health in the UK: using evidence for action. BMJ, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2014-306746. Wickremasighe, R. 2014. (ed). A Fair Start for Every Child. Why We Must Act Now To Tackle Child Poverty In The UK. Save the Children Fund [Online]. https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/A_Fair_Start_for_Every_Child.pdf, accessed 7/2/2017. Whitham, G. 2012. Ending Child Poverty: The Importance of Income in Measuring and Tackling Child Poverty. Save the Children. Read More