Parenting programmes are a crucial tool to support early childhood development for babies and young children. One challenge for people in local authorities who are commissioning programmes for parents is that it is hard to know which ones will be the best fit for their local population. 

This can lead to parents not engaging in the programmes on offer, so the potential of a programme to support child development is lost and public funds - already stretched - are wasted.

Until now, there hasn’t been any experimental evidence on which sorts of programmes are most appealing to parents. We ran a discrete choice experiment survey with a sample of more than 2000 parents with children aged six or under across the UK to find out more about parents’ preferences.

In the experiment, participants were asked to choose between various options - in this case, different parenting programmes. Our goal was to pinpoint which programme features (eg, online or in person, its duration, its location) make them most attractive to parents. By analysing thousands of choices made by parents in our sample, the model learns which features contribute most to a parent's decision to sign up. 

1. It is common for parents to have concerns about their child’s behaviour and emotional development, especially among parents on Universal Credit

Among parents claiming Universal Credit, over half (56%) said they were slightly, moderately or very concerned about their child’s social and emotional skills and their behaviour with 13% being ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ concerned. Parents with reported income of more than over £40,000 were less likely to be similarly concerned (45%) and a much smaller percentage (3%) said they were ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ concerned.

A smaller proportion of parents overall were concerned about children’s cognitive development (language, communication, reading, writing, maths), but the same pattern applied. More parents on Universal Credit had some level of concern about their child’s cognitive development (37%), with 9% being ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ concerned. By contrast, parents with a reported income over £40,000 were less likely to have some concern (29%), and a smaller number (5%) were ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ concerned.

2. Parents may not be aware of, or accessing, local support, even if they think it would be helpful

The vast majority of parents across both income groups (97% of those on Universal Credit and 98% of those not on Universal Credit) thought that parenting programmes like the ones presented in the survey were at least somewhat helpful. However, this doesn’t necessarily translate into knowing about and using local services.

In England (1,756 responses), awareness of children’s centres and family hubs, which are the main providers of local parenting support in England, was higher among Universal Credit claimants (73%) than among non-claimants (65%) and parents with no concerns about their child’s development (70%), compared to those with concerns (66%). The combined effects of income and concern are at play here: parents on lower-incomes are more likely to report concerns, and parents with concerns have lower awareness overall. However, it is striking to see that parents who did not have concerns about their child’s development were more likely to have attended a family hub or children’s centre (ever or in the last 12 months) than parents who did have concerns.

Across all groups, a relatively small proportion had visited family hubs or children centres recently, with Universal Credit claimants more likely to have attended. 37% of Universal Credit claimants in England had visited a family hub or children centre, and 28% had been in the last year.  Meanwhile, 12% had attended at least once a month in the last year. Of respondents who were not Universal Credit claimants, 29% had ever visited, 23% in the last year, and 12% at least once a month in the last year.

Claimants of Universal Credit in England were also more likely to have heard of parenting programmes (like the ones included the survey) and have used a programme. 57% of respondents who were Universal Credit claimants (compared to 52% for non Universal Credit claimants) had heard of parenting programmes and 27% (24%) stated that they had been to one. 47% of respondents who had concerns (compared to 47% for respondents who had no concerns) had heard of parenting programmes and 26% (24%) stated they had been to one.

3. Convenience is key: parents preferred online, 1:1, and child-friendly options

Convenience appears to be a primary driver of parent preference for those in our sample. Figure 3 shows the effect of programme features on a parent’s likelihood to say they will attend that programme. Across all groups, parents strongly favoured convenience, and specifically programmes that do not require them to arrange childcare.

Parents showed favour for online programmes. We estimate that parents would sign up and attend 22% of programmes if they were in person, but if all programmes were online, this would increase to 30%. Offering online programmes could increase sign-up rates. 

Similarly, if all programmes allowed children to be present, we estimate parents would sign up to 28% of programmes, but if children cannot be present, this drops to 19%.  Parents who report a preference for programmes that allow children to attend said in their written responses that it makes childcare easier. The written comments also mentioned that there is a preference for interactivity where children are actively involved. 

As might be expected, programmes are less popular when there are logistical hurdles to attending. For example, group-based programmes were less popular than 1:1 models, with an estimated six percentage point decrease in sign-up rates for group-based delivery. Group-based programmes may present logistical challenges, as their timing and location are often less flexible due to the need to accommodate multiple participants.

It may seem surprising that parents in our sample did not necessarily prefer programmes delivered in the home. Even when accounting for other factors, such as the availability of childcare or online access, parents had a preference for programmes that are not home-based, suggesting that practical support does not fully offset the potential drawbacks of home-based delivery. It’s possible that this is because home-based programmes are often more intensive, which some parents may find demanding, and/or that parents may feel more comfortable participating in public or less private settings. 

4. Parents with concerns about their child’s development show higher interest in parenting programmes 

We estimate that parents are more likely to sign up for and attend programmes if they have a concern about a child’s development. Respondents would sign up for and attend around 21% of programmes if they didn’t have a concern, rising to about 25% if all respondents had a concern. 

Parents receiving Universal Credit are not more interested in programmes than those who are not claimants of Universal Credit. However, these parents are more likely to report concerns about their children’s development (although not all of them do, and parents on higher incomes can report concerns too). Once the level of concern is taken into account, it becomes clear that it is the level of concern, rather than the fact of being a Universal Credit claimant, that drives interest in the programmes.

5. There is no ‘one size fits all’ programme

Parents in our sample had a range of different preferences for accessing parenting programmes, which vary according to their circumstances. Therefore, there can be no ‘one size fits all’ programme; instead it would work best for parents if there are a range of different parenting programmes available to them.

Parents without concerns about their child’s development preferred universal programmes to targeted ones. 

A universal programme is one that is open to anyone, whereas a targeted programme would be for specific parents or children with a particular identified need or risk. In the survey, we ask why parents pick the programmes that they do. This can help us unpick the reasons behind the quantitative estimates we find.

Parents with concerns about their child’s development may look for programmes to support these needs, meaning they have less of a preference for universal programmes. These parents may also feel like the content of universal programmes may not be relevant to the specific needs of their child. 

This is highlighted by parents of neurodivergent children. Often they feel like existing programmes are not designed for the needs of their families or worry that they will not be relevant. 

Parents in our sample with concerns about their child’s development leaned toward online, more intensive programmes and those focusing on communication, language or maths, whereas parents without concerns tend to favour reading and writing content and 1:1 delivery. 

To respond to parents’ concerns, offer a menu of programmes, including ones that specifically address communication, language, or maths skills (as well as children’s socioemotional development), and consider tailoring content for neurodivergent or developmentally atypical children. 

Parents with concerns about their child’s development are more likely to say they would sign up and attend a parenting programme, but also often report that programmes they access are too generic or not relevant to their specific needs. There are gaps in the market which may mean that the programmes on offer are not tailored enough, or are not appealing enough to parents to motivate them to engage. For example, around 80% of the 35 programmes shown in our survey were focussed on children’s social, emotional, and behavioural concerns, but focussing on this domain did not make a programme more attractive for respondents unless they were specifically concerned about this aspect of their child’s development. 

Raise awareness by running targeted outreach campaigns, especially to attract families with higher needs, to ensure parenting programmes reach those who could benefit most.

While nearly all respondents think parenting programmes could be helpful, awareness is uneven: 73% of Universal Credit claimants versus 65% of non-claimants knew about local family hubs or children’s centres in England. It is also notable that parents who had concerns about their child’s development were less likely to have ever been to a family hub or children’s centre. Nesta is currently creating an open library of tactics for engaging parents which will share insight on how to improve parental awareness of programmes, alongside consideration, sign up and continued engagement.

Offer a mix of universal and targeted programmes to suit different needs and preferences.

Parents without concerns about their child’s development prefer universal programmes, while parents with concerns show stronger interest in targeted programmes aligned to their child’s specific needs. 

Make it easier and more convenient for parents to take part. 

Consider choosing programmes that are delivered online as well as in-person programmes to ensure the choice is there, and provide opportunities for children to be present or childcare to be covered. Logistical factors are critical to engagement and seem to be a strong driver of parents’ preferences. Online programmes increase estimated sign-up by eight to nine percentage points compared with in-person, while allowing children to attend boosts sign-up by six percentage points. 

Consider parent preferences in your area when commissioning your menu of parenting support. 

Alongside other considerations, such as size of impact, quality of evidence and cost of a programme, information on parent preferences can be helpful to inform commissioning decisions. Nesta has recently designed a decision-making assistant called PASCAL that incorporates data on all these factors, including estimated parent preferences, to help simplify the complex process local authorities face when trying to identify the best programmes for their area.