Measuring National Well-being Technical Advisory Group - seminar on measuring
children's and young people's well-being
Note of the third meeting – Tuesday 21st June 2011
Attendees:
Duncan Law (British Psychological Society)
Paul Anand (Open University)
Sara Scott (Natcen)
David Hand (Imperial College)
Sarah Stewart Brown (University of Warwick)
Christian Kroll (LSE)
Richard Layard (LSE)
Vincent Tang (DfE)
Karen Hancock (DfE)
Martin Howarth (DfE)
Rob MacPherson (DfE)
Richard Bartholomew (DfE)
Richard White (DfE)
Shirley Dex (Child Well-being Research Centre)
Jeni Beecham (Child Well-being Research Centre)
Alison Patterson (DoH)
Stephen Hall (DEFRA)
Edith Maier (MoJ)
Tim Andrews (BIS)
Peter Kinderman (University of Liverpool)
Kevin Sweeney (NISRA)
Stephen Hicks (ONS)
David Halpern (Cabinet Office)
Julie Newton (BRASS)
Paul Allin (ONS)
Launa Anderson (WG)
Andrew Rzepa (Gallup)
Gwyther Rees (Children’s Society)
Larissa Pople (Children’s Society)
Roger Morgan (Ofsted)
Fiona Brooks (Hertfordshire University)
Lucy Tinkler (ONS)
Sally McManus (Natcen)
Felicia Huppert (University of Cambridge)
Tessa Peasgood (Sheffield University)
Amy Everton (DoH)
Eric Harrison (City University)
Conal Smith (OECD)
Sam Thompson (NEF)
Roger Morgan (Children’s rights)
David Pritchard (New Philanthropy Capital)
1. Introductions
Paul Allin (ONS) introduced the meeting, thanked members for attending and DfE for hosting
this seminar. Paul gave an update of the measuring national well-being programme.
2. How to include the well-being of children and young people in wider measures of
national well-being, including in the measures of subjective well-being?
Stephen Hicks (ONS) gave a brief overview of children's well-being and the importance of
capturing children's and young people's well-being in terms of measuring overall national wellbeing. The importance of children’s and young people’s well-being came through strongly in
the national debate. There is a need for comparison over time, and across countries. It is
important to consider policy needs when considering measurement.
Stephen recognised that there is already a lot of research into children and young people’s
well-being. However, there are limitations of the data already available such as the lack of
trend information over time, (for example, the British Household Panel Survey only dates back
from 1994) less is known about the differences in sub-groups of children, e.g. hard to reach
groups and estimates are generally available for older children. Stephen proposed that there
is a need to have agreement on the dimensions of well-being that are important for young
people and consensus around what age bands should be included. Stephen also added that
one of the criticisms that have been made is that more attention is given to negative aspects
of children's well-being than to positive aspects.
Stephen highlighted the following questions for the later discussion:
1. How best can we collect children and young people’s subjective well-being (SWB)
data?
2. What research is already being carried out and could be drawn on?
3. Can we harmonise?
4. How do we ensure children and young people are consulted about the measurement
of their well-being?
Sarah Stewart-Brown (Warwick) commented that the 'every child matters' initiative had
generated relevant research on measuring children’s and young people’s subjective wellbeing.
3. Overview of existing work:
Jeni Beecham and Shirley Dex (Child Well-being Research Centre) gave an overview of the
work of the Child Well-being Research Centre with the Institute of Education and Childhood
Well-being. Focusing on subjective well-being a partnership group was formed with the
Universities of Loughborough and Kent. Work has been carried out on range of well-being
outcomes using available data (objective measures of well-being) and analysis of these
measures has been carried out. Well-being is measured at three levels, universal (life
satisfaction), domain measures (different event aspects of life), and targeted measures (those
which focus on particular group's such as vulnerable children). The work also included a
review of 'state of play' measures. Jeni raised concerns over the current quality of SWB
measures for children and whether they were fit for use in policy. Quite a lot of work is needed
before developing questions for measuring SWB for children. Jeni Beecham talked about the
development work that the centre carried out, looking at measures of SWB as influenced by
services that children use.
Richard White (DfE) spoke about the DfE research programme and stressed the importance
of support from policy colleagues to measuring well-being and working with ONS and other
stakeholders. The DfE carried out an in-house review of existing work on children and young
people’s subjective well-being measures. As a result, a decision was taken to include the
ONS overall subjective questions on the National Citizen's Service Evaluation Baseline
Survey. The survey collects information on smoking, drinking, drug-use, and self-esteem;
most respondents would be 16 and the survey is self completion rather than interviewer
administered. Richard explained how it will be a challenge is to obtain survey data from the
11-15 age group, although SWB questions have been tested on respondents of this age
group. Richard asked the group for comments on this issue.
Fiona Brooks (Hertfordshire University) spoke about the WHO study of health behaviour in
school aged children that the use of the Cantril ladder question and other pictorial questions
work well with children. Research has been carried out into this issue through focus groups
carried out with 7-8 year olds, and the Cantril ladder question was found to work well. This
finding was supported by Andrew Rzepa (Gallup).
Gwyther Rees gave an overview of the Children’s Societies' work in this area. Gwyther
explained that the Children's Society has been involved in research into children subjective
well-being since 1995 in conjunction with the University of York. Part of the remit of this work
was to include children's voices into the research. In 2005 research was carried out using
open ended questions asking children their ideas on well-being. This work gave an overall
grounding in key aspects of well-being and was followed up with a 2008 a survey of 8000
young people. This was taken forward into a survey in 2010 which aimed to aid
understanding of the variation in children's well-being. The 2008 questions proved to be
statistically robust and were published in an index. Five questions were asked on life
satisfaction; the other 10 questions used a 0-10 scale and ask about different aspects of life.
The same domains were used in the same order over four waves. The Children’s Society
worked internationally with UNICEF to develop a standard international survey, cognitive
testing was used to test for international sensitivity of the questions. In total, 25,000 children
and young people from age 10 onwards were included in the sample. The questions were
found to work well although the ‘agree/disagree’ questions tend to work less well with 8-9 year
olds, however, from 10 years onwards these questions were found to be very statistically
robust. Gwyther outlined how there is interesting work to be carried out in terms of uncovering
sub-groups that are faring less well, e.g. disabled children and the effects of household
income on well-being. The next planned survey will include positive and negative affect
questions and those on psychological well-being.
Roger Morgan (Children’s Rights) explained that he worked in a small team hosted by Ofsted
which has the statutory function in relation to vulnerable children e.g. children in care along
with all other children who live away from home. As part of this work a number of well-being
questions have been administered particularly in terms of domain area, e.g. what are the
good and bad things about certain aspects of life? An exercise is also being carried out
annually regarding surveying children's social care in England, including well-being questions
on aspects of care and bullying/absence of bullying. A consultation programme has been put
in place with the theme of well-being /happiness.
Focus groups may be included in order to develop questions and scales of measurement.
There is also a mobile phone text survey. The results from this showed that 'friends and
family' rank very highly, concepts of stability and security, and concept of personality were
also seen as important, though the research is fairly small scale.
Andrew Rzepa (Gallup) gave an overview of the Gallup world poll of global well-being which
has taken place since 2006, Andrew explained how a sample of national well-being in US, UK
and Germany is carried out in addition to the world poll. Gallup have developed a list of 20
well-being indicators regarding well-being in student’s education, (12 – 17 year olds). The
results help distinguish between high and low performing schools and students.
David Pritchard (New Philanthropy Capital) explained how in helping charities track 'soft'
outcomes the New Philanthropy Capital developed a survey tool which had eight different
components. Although the tool has research limitations, (it is self selection of which aspect
want to answer questions about) it can be used as a practical measure for organisations
which don't have their own research and monitoring applications.
Fiona brooks (Hertfordshire University) gave an overview of the ‘health behaviour in school
aged children study’. The survey was initiated in 1982 and is administered in 43 countries in
Europe and North America including England, Wales, and Scotland. The survey is conducted
every 4 years and trends analysis, additionally cross-national analysis can be carried out on
the dataset. Age related analysis has been carried out on the 11, 13 and 15 age groups. The
survey includes measures on physical, emotional, social health and well-being, as well as
behaviours that risk and promote health and places behaviour in children in social context.
Additionally the survey looks at tobacco, alcohol and drugs, physical activity, consumption of
food and drink, tooth brushing, weight control, fighting and bullying, sexual behaviour, TV and
computer use, electronic communication, self-rated health, life satisfaction, health complaints,
body image body mass index, injuries, and more recently happiness has been included.
Analysis is carried out by gender and different age groups. There are also family affluence
questions including family car ownership, having own bedroom, number of family holidays,
and number of family computers.
4. Round table discussion regarding overall comments and action planning
Comments were received around the topics of question design and measurement, location of
potential surveys, collecting data from young children, and, the need to consult with young
people in the design of the survey.
Questions/Measurement:

Tim Andrews (BIS) commented that different SWB questions may be needed at
different ages throughout life.

Sarah Stewart-Brown (University of Warwick) stressed that it is important not to put
on adults feelings when designing questions on children’s well-being and instead try
to measure children’s real feelings.

Sara Scott (Natcen) raised the importance of language and concepts and how it is
hard to harmonise internationally.

Richard Layard (LSE) highlighted that the questions asked in the ‘strengths and
difficulties’ questionnaire (SDQ) used by Robert Wyman would be a very useful tool.

Felicia Huppert said that she was impressed by what is going on in children’s wellbeing arena. Felicia thought it would be a challenge to combine children and adults
well-being. So far there has not been a lot of discussion about children's assessment
of their own capabilities and resilience and about empathy in the questions tasked
about so far and that this should be an important aspect in terms of measurement.
Felicia agreed with others that SDQ is primarily about disorder and therefore would
not cover all aspects of well-being.

Martin Howarth (DfE) stated that it may be difficult to identify the drivers of children’s
well-being for use in policy as there are so many aspects.
Location of survey:
Richard Layard (LSE) raised the issue of where a survey into children's well-being should be
carried out. The setting of the survey should be the location where it will have the biggest
impact for local government policy makers, therefore the surveys should be based in schools.
Richard stated that parents, teachers and children above age 11 should be asked the
subjective well-being questions. If every school carried out this exercise it would have the byproduct of helping schools understand their students. The questions would need to be
different from the IHS adult questions and questions for the under 11’s would also need to be
different.
Paul Allin (ONS) asked the group for comments on this, especially around the sensitivities of
administering a survey in school:

Karen Hancock (DfE) stated how presently the government is trying to reduce data
collection in schools and also to let schools decide for themselves what they allow.
Any survey work will compete with study time. Karen added that the school
environment will affect responses and that this needs exploring. DfE is keen to work
with ONS on measuring children’s as well as vulnerable adult’s well-being.

Richard Layard (LSE) suggested that there could be an incentive for schools to take
part such as access to survey results. Andrew Rzepa (Gallup) added that schools in
the US are very receptive to taking part in similar surveys if they can have access to
results

Fiona Brooks (Hertfordshire University) added that if schools are given scores and a
financial incentive it helps build up rapport with schools. Regarding the school
environment affecting results Fiona stated that the survey can be carried out in
informal exam conditions to help anonymity.

Roger Morgan (Children’s rights) stated that children feel it is important for their wellbeing to have their say. It is also important to feed survey data back to children and
not just to schools and that children and young people have a high level of suspicion
regarding preservation of confidentiality, especially when children know that feedback
will be sent back to schools. Roger also drew attention to the fact that children might
mention something in the survey that needs to be followed up, this could be in conflict
with a policy of confidentiality.
Collecting data from young children:

Sarah Stewart-Brown (University of Warwick) stressed how young children should be
surveyed as research has found that very early parenting is the key. Sarah added
that the SDQ focuses on the negative aspects of children’s well-being and therefore
does not cover all aspects of children's well-being.

Duncan Hall (British Psychological Society) described how attachment is probably
one of the biggest aspects of children’s well-being, however, it is difficult to measure.
SDQ has been used many times and would be useful to drive policy as it allows you
to measure children, parents, and teachers, although there is need for both positive
and negative aspects to be measured.

Paul Anand (Open University) stated that capabilities in younger children could be
measured by for young children using techniques measuring mother's subjective wellbeing. Paul added that he was optimistic about collecting data from young children.

Sarah Stewart Brown (University of Warwick) added that it is possible to collect useful
data on parent’s relationship with a child at a young age as this has a big impact on
their current and future well-being.
Consulting with children and young people at the design stage:

Julie Newton (BRASS) drew attention to the fact that children and young people’s
voices should be involved in commenting over the types of measures designed to
assess well-being. This view was supported by Fiona brooks and Roger Morgan.

Gwyther Rees (Children’s Society) stated how the Children’s Society has already
consulted with children re what they feel is important to well-being. A key theme was
the importance of choice, this is often neglected in children’s well-being measures.

Sarah Stewart Brown (University of Warwick) stated that this group could consult with
children to get their views on what we have discussed/decided. Sarah added how
longitudinal data on this topic would be very valuable.

Richard Batholomew (DfE) commented how the Children's Society questionnaire
does already take account of what children think is important to well-being. Richard
stated how the environment in which the survey takes place will have an effect on the
answers children give to the questions.

Jeni Becham (Child Well-being Research Centre) added that there has been a lot of
research already carried out on this topic and that it is possible to get very good
decisions from children on this, Jeni added that focus groups can be useful for this
exercise.
Next Steps
Karen Hancock (DfE) noted that ONS now has the remit to measure national well-being.
Quite a lot is already known regarding the influences on children’s well-being and we need to
include these in national well-being while still developing the measurement of children's wellbeing.
Julie Newton (BRASS) pointed out that there are an many different domains that are
important for well-being for all ages. However, at some point measures have to be cut down
so that they can be used by policy makers, as it is not practical to ask survey questions on
every single aspect of well-being.
Felicia Huppert (Cambridge University) drew attention to the fact that ONS is also developing
additional questions other than the main four SWB questions asked on the IHS for the 16 and
above age group.
Karen Hancock (DfE) stressed the need for starting to measure children’s and young people’s
well-being as soon as is feasible even if its not the ultimate answer and we continue to refine
and develop the survey.
Stephen Hicks (ONS) summarised the points raised in the discussion:
how do we make most use of the questions we already have?
the probable need for different measures for children than the adults measures.
how can ONS can make use of existing sources of data?
the importance of considering harmonisation on a small set of questions for use on a
number of different surveys
the need to also discuss objective measures of well-being, and of deciding what
these should be both for subjective and objective measures.
there are questions around indicators versus a bespoke/tailored approach.
Paul Allin (ONS) concluded that there is a need to think how to take these ideas forward, Paul
suggested continuing the group for measuring children and young people's well-being. The
next TAG meeting should also be dedicated to children’s well-being and a timetable for work
should be put together.
Action – ONS to review the practical steps and draft a timetable for this work
Action – to discuss again the measurement of children and young people’s well-being
as part of the next TAG meeting.
Paul thanked everyone for their input to the meeting, and for their interest in taking this work
forward.