Early childhood, defined most commonly as the period between birth to eight years of age (UNESCO, 2010) has been established as a critical or sensitive period in the life cycle of an individual, with much discourse on the impact of early experiences on later development (e.g. see Lilienfeld & Pasamanick, 1954; NCERT, 2006; Nelson, 2000; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000; Sylva & Wiltshire, 1993; and World Bank, 2004). Early Childhood Education and Care services include preschool programmes and children’s care centres as well as informal, home-based care options and arrangements. Additionally, ECEC policy embraces not only provisions for young children but also some leave and benefits schemes for their working parents (OECD, 2006).

Movements within the country as well as worldwide have lent support to the growth of ECEC programmes in India. What started off as voluntary initiatives for ECEC in the pre-independence era slowly grew into significant initiatives such as the setting up of the Central Social Welfare Board by the Government of India in 1953, and the launch of the Integrated Child Development Services scheme in 1975. Since then a number of schemes and programmes have been launched by the Government, although a dedicated ECEC policy is still lacking. More recently, the 86^th constitutional amendment has made education for all children between 6-14 years a fundamental right. Nonetheless, the (0-6) age group has been left out and is not protected under any law or government mandate.

Despite basic descriptive evidence of poor implementation and flaws inherent in early childhood schemes, existing research has seldom explored parents’ perception of programmes and reasons behind non-take-up. Moreover, where existing, such research is piecemeal and in many cases, anecdotal and journalistic rather than empirical. There is also limited insight into the policymaking process and how that ties in with implementation and take-up at the local level.

It is in light of such research gaps that an exploration of user perspectives’ on early childhood schemes was undertaken. This was based on the underlying rationale that in addition to studying child outcomes as a measure of the success or failure of ECEC programmes (as is usually the case), studying the take-up of services is also an important step in mapping effectiveness of early years services. In addition to user perspectives, children’s centre workers running the two schemes under study and experts in the field of ECEC also participated in the study. The primary research question that framed the research is: What is the nature of take-up, expectations and experiences vis-à-vis the ICDS and the RG Crèche services among low-income working mothers in Delhi?

The research question is nestled in Lilian Katz’s work on perspectives on child care quality (1993) which says that quality in early childhood programmes can be viewed from a number of perspectives, each contributing uniquely to overall programme performance. Ceglowski and Bacigalupa (2002) are of the view that of all four perspectives, evaluations centre mostly on researcher/professional perspectives, modestly on parental views, and least on staff and children’s perspectives. 

Ceglowski, D., & Bacigalupa, C. (2002). Four perspectives on child care quality. Early Childhood Education Journal, 30, pp.87-92. Denzin, N.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill. Katz, L. (1993). Multiple Perspectives on the Quality of Early Childhood Programs. ERIC # ED355 041. Lilienfeld, A. M., & Pasamanick, B. (1954). Association of maternal and fetal factors with the development of epilepsy, I: Abnormalities in the prenatal and paranatal periods. Journal of the American Medical Association, 155, pp.719-24. National Council of Educational Research and Training (2006). Position Paper, National Focus Group on Early Childhood Education [Internet]. New Delhi, NCERT. Available from: [Accessed 27 April 2011]. Nelson, C.A. (2000). The neurobiological bases of early intervention. In: Shonkoff, J.P., & Meisels, S.J. (Eds.) Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention, 2nd ed. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp.204-227. OECD (2006). Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care [Internet]. Paris, OECD. Available from: < http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/14/32/37425999.pdf> [Accessed 27 April 2011]. Ritchie, J., Spencer, L., & O’Conner, W. (2003). Carrying out qualitative analysis. In: Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J. eds. Qualitative Research Practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London, Sage Publications, pp. 199-218. Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2000). From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Child Development. 1st ed. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press. Sylva, K., & Wiltshire, J. (1993). The impact of early learning on children's later development. A review prepared for the RSA inquiry “Start Right”. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 1(1), pp.17-40. UNESCO (2010). Early Childhood Care and Education [Internet]. Paris, UNESCO. Available from: [Accessed 27 June 2011]. World Bank (2004). Reaching Out to the Child: An Integrated Approach to Child Development. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.