CONSULTANCY

eptember 2018STUDY ON THE LONG-TERM

DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD CARE SERVICES

1
AUTHORS

Paul Siu Fai YIP, PhD

Chair Professor, Department of Social Work and Social Administration, The University of Hong Kong,
and Director, The Hong Kong Jockey Club Centre for Suicide Research and Prevention, The University
of Hong Kong.

Team members

Dr. Chee Hon CHAN

Dr. Frances LAW
Dr. Yingqi GUO
Dr. Lucy JORDAN
Ms. Cynthia XIONG

Other members

Dr. Mengni CHEN

Miss Kristy CHAN
Mr. Daniel LUNG
Mr. Jacky WONG
Mr. Sam SO
Miss Sara ZENG

Acknowledgements

The vector used on the cover page is created by Macrovector - Freepik.com.

2
 Table of Contents
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................. 3
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................... 5
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 1 Introduction, objectives and methodology .................................................................... 13
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 13
1.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 13
1.3 Data and methodology .......................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 2 The philosophy and policy objectives of child care services .......................................... 18
2.1 The existing philosophy and policy objectives of Hong Kong’s child care services ............... 18
2.2 The existing philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in other
jurisdictions ................................................................................................................................. 27
2.3 Comparing the system in Hong Kong with the six international jurisdictions ...................... 39
2.4 Summary................................................................................................................................ 56
Chapter 3 The current modes of operation and positioning of child care services ........................ 57
3.1 The overall profile of child care services ............................................................................... 57
3.2 Government financial assistance to services......................................................................... 63
3.3 Availability of child care services ........................................................................................... 65
3.4 Accessibility of child care services ......................................................................................... 66
3.5 Affordability of child care services ........................................................................................ 68
3.6 The current positioning of child care services ....................................................................... 69
3.7 Summary................................................................................................................................ 71
Chapter 4 Identifying service gaps and assessing the existing supply and demand of child
care services .................................................................................................................................... 72
4.1 Reasons (factors) for using (not using) child care services.................................................... 72
4.2 Estimating the demands for the child care services.............................................................. 73
4.3 Summary................................................................................................................................ 77
Chapter 5 Service modes and financing modes of the child care services...................................... 79
5.1 Stakeholders’ opinions on the current service modes and financing modes ....................... 79
5.2 Expected financing modes of child care services .................................................................. 85
5.3 Summary................................................................................................................................ 86
Chapter 6 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 87
6.1 Recommendations in the short-term .................................................................................... 88
6.2 Recommendations in the long-term ..................................................................................... 91

3
 6.3 Others ................................................................................................................................... 94
Chapter 7 Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 95
Appendix 1 Country reports of Finland, Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and
Sweden ............................................................................................................................................ 97
1.1 Finland ................................................................................................................................... 97
1.2. Australia ................................................................................................................................ 98
1.3 Singapore ............................................................................................................................. 100
1.4 South Korea ......................................................................................................................... 101
1.5 Japan ................................................................................................................................. 103
1.6 Sweden ................................................................................................................................ 104
Appendix 2 The means test and levels of assistance .................................................................... 107
Appendix 3 Criteria for assessing social needs .............................................................................. 108
Appendix 4 Maps and spatial distributions of child care centres ................................................. 109
Appendix 5 Estimation procedures of the key metrics: availability, accessibility and
affordability ................................................................................................................................... 132
Appendix 6 Questionnaire design, sampling and promotion methods ........................................ 134
Appendix 7 Identification of the reasons that affect the demand for child care services ............ 139
Appendix 8 Methodology of demand estimation on child care services ...................................... 145
Appendix 9 Components in the demand estimation and projection and the results ................... 147
9.1 Hong Kong children population in age group i and household combination j (nijt),
population projection (Nit1*) and total population ................................................................. 147
9.2 Expected proportion of children population using child care services in age group i
and household combination j at year t (pijt) .......................................................................... 150
9.3 Results on demand estimation ............................................................................................ 172
Appendix 10 Number of children in 2016 stratified by the parents’ working status and
family types ................................................................................................................................... 177
Appendix 11 Focus Group interview methodology and data analyses ......................................... 178
Appendix 12 Views from Government representatives ................................................................ 183
Appendix 13 Summary and analyses of the comments from the general public by
deputations and emails ................................................................................................................. 184
Appendix 14 Analyses of the willingness-to-pay for child care services and its implication
on the financing mode................................................................................................................... 186
Appendix 15 Australia’s national quality standard(“NQS”)………………………………………………….......193
Appendix 16 Comparison between Australia’s NQS and the Operation Manual for
Pre-primary Institutions ................................................................................................................ 195
Glossary ......................................................................................................................................... 196
References ..................................................................................................................................... 198

4
 List of Tables

Table 2. 1 Qualified staff-to-child/teacher-to-pupil ratios ............................................................ 26

Table 2. 2 Distributions (%) of family composition by household types in 2010/2011 ................. 33
Table 2. 3 Number of households with children aged under 6 in Hong Kong, 2016 ..................... 33
Table 2. 4 Female labour force participation rates by age group in seven jurisdictions, 2016 ..... 35
Table 2. 5 The four types of welfare regimes ................................................................................ 37
Table 2. 6 Comparison of the specific measures implemented by the seven jurisdictions........... 40
Table 2. 7 ECEC staff-to-child ratios ............................................................................................... 46
Table 2. 8 Requirements of child care givers in the seven jurisdictions ........................................ 52
Table 3. 1 Overview of the six types of child care services in Hong Kong as of June 2017 ........... 58
Table 3. 2 Number of centres and places of aided and non-aided standalone CCCs .................... 60
Table 3. 3 Financial assistance scheme –Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission
Scheme ................................................................................................................................... 65
Table 4. 1 Estimated and projected demand of the child care services for children population
aged under 3 in year 2016 to 2031 ........................................................................................ 73
Table 4. 2 Estimated number of places for centre-based and voluntary-based child care services
(percentage of specific types of services to child care services as a whole) for children
population aged under 3 in years 2016 to 2031 .................................................................... 75
Table 4. 3 Estimated places of aided centre-based child care services (percentage of places to
age-specific population) for children population aged under 3 in year 2016 to 2031,, ......... 76
Table 4. 4 Planning ratio of aided centre-based child care services for children population aged
under 3 in year 2016 to 2031, ................................................................................................ 77
Table 6. 1 Recommendations and others for improving child care services in Hong Kong .......... 88

5
 List of Figures

Figure 2. 1 Hong Kong – male and female labour force participation from 1986 to 2016...................... 21
Figure 2. 2 Hong Kong – labour force participation of single-parent families from 2001 to 2016.......... 21
Figure 2. 3 Women’s (aged 15 and over) labour force participation rate by marital status from 1986 to
2016, in Hong Kong ......................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 2. 4 Women’s (aged 15 and over) labour force participation rate by age (5 years’ interval),
marital status and with or without children aged 0 to 6 in 2016.................................................... 23
Figure 2. 5 Hong Kong’s expenditure on pre-primary services from 2013 to 2018 ................................ 25
Figure 2. 6 Brain malleability ................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 2. 7 Human brain development .................................................................................................... 29
Figure 2. 8 Female labour force participation rates by age groups in seven jurisdictions, 2016 ............ 35
Figure 2. 9 The percentage of GDP and government's spending on the pre-primary education/services
......................................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 2. 10 The governance of child care services in Hong Kong ........................................................... 54
Figure 3. 1 The three major providers of child care in Hong Kong ………………………………………..………..…..70

6
Executive Summary

Introduction

The Social Welfare Department (“SWD”) has commissioned The University of Hong Kong to
conduct a consultancy study on the long-term development of child care services in Hong Kong.
In order to improve on the quality and provision of these services, this study aims to review and
evaluate the overall provisions of the current six types of day child care services in Hong Kong,
namely standalone Child Care Centres (“CCCs”), Child Care Centres attached to Kindergartens
(“CCCs attached to KGs”), Occasional Child Care Service (“OCCS”), Extended Hours Service (“EHS”),
Mutual Help Child Care Centres (“MHCCCs”) and Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project
(“NSCCP”), and provide recommendations on the future planning and various aspects.

This study encompasses a variety of data collection methodologies. In-depth literature research
was conducted to review the current philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in
Hong Kong as well as in six international jurisdictions. In addition, data regarding the provision of
day child care services were compiled through comprehensive stocktaking and analysis, and
geographical information system was used for the data analyses. Furthermore, opinions were
gathered through interviews with 106 stakeholders and by distribution of questionnaires to child
care services users and non-users.

The philosophy and objectives of child care services in Hong Kong, comparing the situation in
Hong Kong with the other six jurisdictions

Hong Kong’s current philosophy and objectives in child care services were developed decades ago
and guided by the 1991 White Paper which was primarily care-oriented and welfare-based in
providing assistance to children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Meanwhile, changes in the
socio-economic and demographic profiles, e.g. more women participating in the labour force and
the increase of single-parent families in Hong Kong, demonstrated that despite efforts made over
the years by the Government to help families in need, the current child care services still cannot
meet the demands arising from these changes. At the same time, at the international level,
catapulted by the advances in the understandings of early brain and early childhood development,
policies on Early Childhood Education and Care (“ECEC”) have moved from two separate systems,
‘care’ and ‘education’, towards one unified system to provide both education and high-quality care
to help young children develop holistically. However, researches also showed that parental care
and bonding is the foundation of a child’s development and that all early experiences are
educational, no matter whether the child is at home, with extended families and friends, or in child
care centres.
7
Different policies and aspects of ECEC in the six jurisdictions were measured and compared with
Hong Kong. Owing to their different welfare regimes and objectives in child care, it was
discovered that:
 On universal child care, defined as child care benefit provided for every child regardless of
background, four of the seven jurisdictions reviewed have some kind of universal child care.
One has plans to implement universal child care in the future; another is similar to Hong
Kong, which uses the means-test and targets families in need. Hong Kong, however,
adopts the approach of targeting low-income families together with social needs;
 On the expenditure of pre-primary education and services, Hong Kong has one of the
lowest expenditure among the seven jurisdictions as a percentage of GDP and as a
percentage of known government spending;
 On the qualified staff-to-child ratio, although one jurisdiction has no regulation, taking into
account the typical ratio in practice, Hong Kong has the highest staff-to-child ratio, and it
can be up to 2 or 3 times higher than certain jurisdictions for children aged 24 to 36
months;
 On regulatory and monitoring system, two of the seven jurisdictions studied have a unitary
system. Similar to the other four, Hong Kong has two distinct ordinances and regulatory
systems overseeing pre-primary care and education;
 On the qualification of child care staff in child care centres, while Hong Kong is comparable
to certain jurisdictions, when compared with the jurisdictions such as Finland and Sweden
which have the highest level of qualification requirement in this study, there is still room
for improvement. Regarding home carers, unlike other jurisdictions such as Sweden and
Singapore, Hong Kong has no education and training requirements; and
 On tax rate, among all the seven jurisdictions, Hong Kong has the lowest rate at 15%, while
the tax rates in the other six jurisdictions range from 20% to 57%.

Analysing the current child care services in terms of availability, accessibility and affordability

With the comprehensive stocktaking, analyses of the current child care services show that there
are differences between the general profile of government-subsidised and
non-government-subsidised services. In terms of:
 Availability - The demand for government-subsidised places is relatively more intense than
non-government-subsidised places for children aged 0 to under 3. The availability of
government-subsidised places for children aged 0 to under 2 is significantly fewer than the
availability for children aged 2 to under 3. There are also some spatial differences in the
profile of child care services which can be identified from the maps with relatively higher
and lower provision. At the level of the 18-districts, the demand-to-supply ratio indicates

8
 that in some districts, there is no provision of standalone CCCs for children aged 0 to under
2.
 Accessibility - At the level of smaller areas, children who live in some street blocks are
facing problems accessing child care centres. In some street blocks in the New Territories,
the distance to the nearest centre is significantly farther than the overall Hong Kong
situation. Furthermore, the demand for places is much higher in the New Territories than
in the overall Hong Kong situation.
 Affordability - There are also spatial variations in affordability, calculated as the median
monthly child care service fee divided by the median monthly household income and
expressed in percentage (%). For the aided child care centre services, the median
affordability of the lowest affordable group is 39% and that of the highest affordable group
is 3%, accounting for a difference of 36%.

Estimating the demand for child care services and planning ratio

 Upon examination of the questionnaires, the analyses show that from the sample of
households which were using/not using child care services, it was identified that the major
reasons affecting the decision of using the services include parental employment status,
household composition, locations of the service centres and the quality of the services,
whereas the lack of information on the availability of services is a major reason for not
using the services.

 Based on the prediction models, built upon logistic regression analyses, that consider the
characteristics of the household socio-economic status and composition, and the census
population data, it was estimated that the demand for child care services in 2016 would be
32 736 for children aged under 2 and 36 568 for children aged 2 to under 3; and according
to the population projection data from the Census and Statistics Department, the demand
for child care services in 2021 to 2031 for children aged under 2 was estimated to range
from 27 711 to 32 818, and from 30 955 to 36 660 for children aged 2 to under 3. It is
also important to note that these estimates represent the demand for child care services
as a whole irrespective of the types of services, service nature and financing modes.

 Scenario analyses were also conducted to further estimate the number of places needed
for aided centre-based child care services. First, assuming that the Government becomes
a single provider (i.e. responsible for 100% of child care services), in the centre-based child
care service, it needs to provide 31 099 places for children aged under 2 and 36 335 places
for children aged 2 to under 3 in 2016 - the corresponding planning ratio would thus be 85
and 99 per 20 000 general population, respectively. On the other hand, assuming that
the public and the private split the market provision at the existing proportion,

9
 the Government is then expected to provide 16 628 places for children aged under 2 and
7 557 places for children aged 2 to under 3 in 2016, and the corresponding planning ratio
would be 45 and 21 per 20 000 general population respectively. Still, if a further
approach is taken with the assumption that the existing number of non-aided
centre-based places remains the same, the Government is expected to provide 30 247
places for children aged under 2 and 13 492 places for children aged 2 to under 3 in 2016,
and the corresponding ratio would be 82 and 37 per 20 000 general population.

Given that the private market shows relatively less interest in the market provision of child care
services for children aged under 2, it is believed that the Government should play a greater role in
service provision for this age group, i.e. in providing 30 247 places or a planning ratio of 82 per
20 000 general population. On the other hand, for the service provision for children aged 2 to
under 3, private market shows relatively greater interest. With a principle of not driving out
other providers in market participation, the Government could take a more balanced approach in
their service planning mechanism, i.e. in providing 7 557 places or a planning ratio of 21 per
20 000 general population. Thus, overall speaking, for children aged under 3, the Government is
recommended to adopt a planning ratio of 103 places per 20 000 general population (i.e. 82 places
per 20 000 general population for children aged under 2, plus 21 places per 20 000 general
population for children aged 2 to under 3).

Views from the stakeholders

Focus group interviews were conducted and opinions were collected from different stakeholders,
such as, government representatives, service providers involving the management and frontline
staff, service users, non-service users and the general public. The purpose is to understand their
comments, views and discrepancies between the parents’ expectations and the existing services in
terms of service modes and financing modes.

The eight themes generated from those interviews are as follows:

 Discrepancies exist between the parents’ expectations and the existing services;
 Even with similar qualifications, child care workers are not receiving the same
remunerations as their counterparts in the kindergartens;
 There were requests for a lower staff-to-child ratio and better staff training and
development;
 The location, service targets and accessibility should be considered in service planning;
 Service positioning and operation of MHCCCs and NSCCP need to be enhanced
respectively;
 The positioning of OCCS need to be reviewed;
 Analysis on the reasons for not using day child care services; and

10
  Analysis on the role of the Government vis-à-vis the private market in the provision of day
child care services.

The findings shed light on the future development of the service modes and financing modes of
child care services. It was confirmed that there were gaps in the current child care services.
These gaps were suggested to be bridged by improving the planning mechanism, the service
availability, accessibility and affordability of the overall child care services. In addition, a more
diversified subsidy mechanism was suggested to enhance the affordability of child care services,
while as a longer term measure, user’s income-based co-payment methods might be explored with
the collection of more data and analyses.

Recommendations and conclusion

It is common knowledge that children need good care to thrive, and to ensure that children receive
quality care is of key concern to both parents and policy makers. In ensuring that their children
receive the best care, some parents make the decision to put aside their careers and stay at home
to care for their children, others rely on relatives or foreign domestic helpers, and still others
choose to use child care centres or volunteer-based programmes. With the increased number of
women participating in the work force, single parent families and nuclear families compounded
with the advanced knowledge of early brain development and early childhood development, the
existing child care services may no longer be sufficient in today’s context. Service expectations
and gaps in the current child care services have been identified through different channels.
Taking an overall perspective to improve child care services, the following recommendations are
generated for the Government’s consideration:

1. Increase funding in child care services, upgrade infrastructure as well as provide more
subsidies and relax the application threshold for fee subsidy;
2. Improve the qualified staff-to-child ratio for children aged 0 to under 3 so as not to only
alleviate the burden on the staff, but also enhance the interactions with the children and their
development;
3. Upgrade and improve the qualification and training for child care workers as well as offer
training for other child carers in the home setting with a view to providing quality care to the
children;
4. Encourage effective dissemination of information on child care services to potential users;
5. Improve the service quality of the NSCCP, re-position the MHCCCs and review the distribution
of the OCCS;
6. Enhance the quality of child care services by embracing and incorporating the elements of
early childhood development and care in the long-term development of child care services;

11
7. Establish an appropriate planning mechanism for the provision of child care centre service with
continuous review to ensure sufficient provision of places for child care;
8. Enhance the monitoring system, financial management procedures and guidelines to reduce
unnecessary workload;
9. Develop a set of quality indicators for monitoring and assessment based on child development
and with reference to international practices;
10. Explore a more efficient and cost effective financing mode to cater for different types of
families to reduce their financial burden and simultaneously enable resource deployment for
the Government; and
11. Conduct evaluation on child care services on a regular interval to measure its development for
continuous improvement.

Improvement of child care services would not be effective if it is only treated as a standalone
measure. It requires all the stakeholders in the community to foster a family-friendly
environment to provide an integrated and holistic support for raising all children in Hong Kong.

12
Chapter 1 Introduction, objectives and methodology

1.1 Introduction

In December 2016, the Social Welfare Department (“SWD”) commissioned the Department of
Social Work and Social Administration of The University of Hong Kong (the consultant team led by
Professor Paul Yip) to conduct a “Consultancy Study on the Long-term Development of Child Care
Services” in Hong Kong. In light of the experiences of relevant jurisdictions, the consultant team
was tasked to review the overall provision of day child care services in Hong Kong to assess the
current policies, and present recommendation on the long-term development of those services.
The scope of the study is on six types of day child care services, namely standalone Child Care
Centres (“CCCs”), Child Care Centres attached to Kindergartens (“CCCs attached to KGs”),
Occasional Child Care Service (“OCCS”), Extended Hours Service (“EHS”), Mutual Help Child Care
Centres (“MHCCCs”) and Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project (“NSCCP”), excluding
residential child care services and pre-school rehabilitation services.

The study involves a mixed-method research design, adopting both qualitative and quantitative
work. The work includes an in-depth review of the existing child care policies in Hong Kong as
well as international experiences. It also encompasses interviews with stakeholders to solicit
their comments and key reflections on the service provision. The quantitative approach involves
a comprehensive stocktaking via census data and questionnaires to thoroughly analyse the child
care services provision. Taking into account the population spatial distribution, the geo-spatial
analysis technique and population projection technique are further used to analyse the supply and
demand of child care services in Hong Kong.

1.2 Objectives

The objectives of the consultancy study are as follows:

1. To make observations on the philosophy and policy objectives of day child care services;
2. To take stock of the modes of operation and positioning of day child care services with
reference to the demographic changes after the harmonisation of pre-primary services and
other relevant considerations;
3. To identify service gaps, to gauge the demand and supply of day child care services, and to
explore a systematic and workable planning mechanism; and
4. To advise on the service modes and the financing modes of day child care services with
reference to the needs of different types of families, and other relevant considerations
including cost-effectiveness, sustainability, etc.

To address these research objectives, the consultant team carried out a range of research activities,
including reviewing the relevant literature from the local and international settings, conducting
focus-group interviews with stakeholders, analysing existing relevant available data, and
conducting a large-scale territory-wide data collection exercise by means of questionnaire. While

13
a summary of the methodology of the research activities and their respective analytical framework
is presented in this chapter, the details are embedded in each relevant chapter.

Objective 1
In making observations on the philosophy and policy objectives of child care services, the
consultant team focused on the following questions:
i. What are the existing philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in Hong
Kong?
ii. How well do the policy objectives meet the expectations of different stakeholders?
What are the unmet expectations if any?
iii. What guidance can the international experiences of child care system in the six selected
jurisdictions offer to Hong Kong?

Chapter 2 of this report summarises the findings and results in answering the specific research
questions listed in (i) and (iii) of Objective 1. Chapter 5 of this report summarises the findings and
results in answering question (ii) of Objective 1 above.

Objective 2
To take stock of the modes of operation and positioning of day child care services with reference to
the demographic changes after the harmonisation of pre-primary services and other relevant
considerations, the consultant team analysed the most recently available data obtained from
various sources to reflect the existing provision of child care services in Hong Kong, (including, but
not limited to the number of places, their hours of operation, fees, and trained staff). In this
regard, the consultant team addressed the following questions:
i. What is the existing provision of child care services in Hong Kong like (e.g. the number of
places, their hours of operation, fees, and trained staff)?
ii. What are the general profile and the three key indicators (accessibility, availability and
affordability) of child care services in Hong Kong?
iii. Are there any differences between the general profile and the three key indicators of
government-subsidised child care services verses non-government-subsidised child care
services in Hong Kong?
iv. Are there any spatial differences in the profile of child care services in Hong Kong?

Chapter 3 summarises the findings and results in answering the specific research questions listed
in Objective 2 above.

Objective 3
In order to identify the service gap, to gauge the demand and supply of day child care services and
to explore a systematic and workable planning mechanism, the consultant team engaged different
research activities, including conducting a large-scale data collection exercise by means of
questionnaire, reviewing local and global literature, as well as data, and conducting focus group
interviews.

The consultant team collected information from a large-scale data collection exercise by means of
questionnaire to address the following specific research questions:
i. What factors affect the demand for child care services (e.g. family composition, quality of
services, cost) and how do those factors affect the choice?
ii. Based on the identified factors influencing the demand, what is the expected demand of
14
 child care services in Hong Kong?

Chapter 4 reports on the results of those estimates. The findings in this chapter will help explore
a systematic and workable planning ratio, which can respond to the changes in child care services
demand in the coming decades.

Objective 4
To advise on the service modes and the financing modes of day child care services with reference
to the needs of different types of families, and other relevant considerations (including
cost-effectiveness and sustainability), the consultant team addressed this objective by answering
the following research questions:
i. Given the variety of service modes and financing modes identified in the international
practices, how they are relevant and applicable to the context of Hong Kong?
ii. What are the culturally applicable changes to child care services that might increase
cost-effectiveness and ensure sustainability of such services?

Chapter 5 summarises the findings from the examination, assessment, and exploration mentioned
in Objective 4 above.

Based on the findings and insights collected over the entire research process, the consultant team
derived recommendations for Hong Kong’s child care system in nine areas, summarised in Chapter
6. These nine areas are as follow:
i. The service objectives, service contents, target user groups and planning parameters of
aided standalone CCCs which are under the planning and regulatory control of SWD,
including a review of the planning for centre-based day child care services which are
substantially provided in Kindergarten-cum-Child Care Centres (“KG-cum-CCC”s);
ii. The relationship of CCC service, including standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs, with
kindergarten education;
iii. The manpower planning and training for child care staff, including child care workers and
child care supervisors;
iv. The appropriate planning mechanism for centre-based day child care services;
v. The functions of NSCCP and MHCCCs and proposed changes to enhance the service
quality and optimisation of the use of public resources;
vi. The appropriate service model(s)/mode(s) and financing mode(s) for different types of
day child care services;
vii. The projection of the demand and supply of day child care services including
government-subsidised and non-government-subsidised services, as well as the ancillary
services, i.e. EHS and OCCS in the territory;
viii. The need for re-engineering and integration of different types of day child care services;
and
ix. The role of Government vis-à-vis the private market in the provision of day child care
services.

1.3 Data and methodology

The consultant team gathered the data mainly through four research activities as follows:

15
 i. Conduct in-depth researches to review the relevant information from both the local and
international contexts;
ii. Conduct stocktaking of the existing provision of day child care services in Hong Kong
including government-subsidised and non-government-subsidised services;
iii. Conduct questionnaires through online and paper forms to solicit comments and
experiences of service users and potential service users who are now on the waiting list,
and non-service users; and
iv. Conduct focus group meetings, interviews with relevant stakeholders and governmental
officials to collect opinions and concrete experiences on the provision, design, and
financing modes for child care services.

The following sections of this chapter provide a brief description on the data collection and
methods of the present study. A more detailed explanation on the methodology of data
collection and data analyses are provided in the relevant chapters.

1.3.1 In-depth literature review

In-depth research was performed to review the existing philosophy and policy objectives of day
child care services in Hong Kong. The consultant team collected relevant information from
various sources, including government policy papers, research reports, past studies, government
department articles and pamphlets, websites, as well as CCCs and KGs.

Literature on international experiences in developing and reforming systems from academic

scholars, published reports, and commissioned country reports were also reviewed on six selected
jurisdictions, namely Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Sweden.

These reviews helped the consultant team draw the implications for policy development in day
child care services in Hong Kong.

1.3.2 Stocktaking

To fully understand the existing provision of day child care services in Hong Kong, a comprehensive
stocktaking was conducted on both government-subsidised and non-government-subsidised
services. With the collected information, geographical information system (“GIS”) was used to
analyse the geocoded service data, and spatial techniques were applied to maps, to summarise,
explore and analyse the current service provision.

1.3.3 Questionnaires

To collect the views and opinions of users and non-users of day child care services, the consultant
team compiled the data collected through questionnaires which consist of two sets of questions,
one for users and the other for non-users. Separate questionnaires were designed for the six
types of services, including CCCs, CCCs attached to KGs, OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs and the NSCCP. To
capture a wider range of respondents, the questionnaires were conducted in e-format and paper
form. With the collected data, statistical analyses were performed to address the research
questions mentioned above.
16
1.3.4 Interviews with stakeholders

To elicit the stakeholders’ views and opinions on the existing philosophy and policy objectives of
child care services, one-on-one discussions with government officials and focus group interviews
were carried out. The focus groups included service providers at the management level, service
providers at the frontline level, as well as service users and non-users. In total, the consultant
team interviewed 106 stakeholders. Comments were also received from the general public.
Thematic analysis approach was adopted to analyse the data and to address the research
questions and objectives mentioned above.

17
Chapter 2 The philosophy and policy objectives of child care

services

This chapter provides an overview of the social welfare regimes to contextualise the diversities in
policy approaches. The commissioned comparison study reports serve as case studies to
demonstrate how the six different jurisdictions, namely Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea,
Japan and Sweden, approach the development and reform their own Early Childhood Education
and Care (“ECEC”) systems. In this context, ECEC, also known as Educare, is a holistic concept
comprising the intertwining components of care and education for children from birth up to the
age of eight. In accordance with the age of the child and the situation, these components receive
different emphasis. The main goal is to support children’s interaction and expressive skills, as
well as self-knowledge and responsibility through play and discovery, embarking their first step
towards developing into a healthy individual. A more detailed explanation about ECEC is given in
Section 2.2.1.

The consultant team reviewed the current child care policies and objectives in Hong Kong on
several areas, including the rationale of child care services, human resources planning of child care
services, training for child care personnel, and service and financing modes for different types of
child care services. This assessment enabled the consultant team to understand their rationales
and articulate a comparison of the six jurisdictions mentioned above to advise on how to bring the
child care services of Hong Kong to the next level.

The consultant team addressed the following research questions in this chapter:
1) What are the existing philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in Hong Kong?
2) What guidance can the international experiences of child care services in the six selected
jurisdictions offer to Hong Kong?

2.1 The existing philosophy and policy objectives of Hong Kong’s child

care services

The following section examines the current provision of child care services in Hong Kong from a
historical perspective. It is divided into several sections, looking at different dimensions of child
care services, ranging from the philosophy and policy objectives to specific operations.

2.1.1 Rationale of child care services

In the White Paper of Social Welfare into the 1990s and Beyond, the overall philosophy for Hong
Kong’s social welfare was illustrated. First, Hong Kong, like other societies, accepts “an obligation
to assist their members to overcome personal and social problems and to fulfil their role in life to
the optimum extent in accordance with the particular social and cultural development of their
18
society” 1. The responsibility to help those disadvantaged attain an acceptable standard of living
is well recognised. The White Paper also states that “the extent to which societies can meet these
obligations depends very much on their system of values and the resources available”.

Second, the means for discharging the obligation is through “the provision of social services”, and
child care service is one of these social services. Third, social welfare including laws, programmes,
benefits and services, is to address the social needs and promote the well-being of individuals and
groups “in harmony with the needs and aspirations of their families and the community”.

Regarding child welfare services, the White Paper states that the overall objectives are “to support
and strengthen families so that they may provide a suitable environment for the physical,
emotional and social development of their children and to provide assistance to those
disadvantaged and vulnerable children who are not adequately looked after by their families.”
From the early 1990s when the White Paper was published till the present, Hong Kong’s child care
system has followed these objectives, addressing four main issues: 1) working mothers; 2) single
parent families; 3) child delinquency and abuse; and 4) children being left unattended (neglected).

In the following section, the development of Hong Kong’s child care system is briefly described, so
that the readers can have a better understanding about how the child care services in Hong Kong
are established step by step.

The Development of Child Care Services in Hong Kong

In the early 20th century, Hong Kong child care services, defined as services assisting parents who
cannot take care of their young children because of work or other reasons, were almost
non-existent. At that time, there were only non-governmental organisations (“NGO”s) providing
care and welfare for orphans and neglected children. 2 After World War II, the demand for child
care services increased significantly among the working parents, in part because many former
residents of Hong Kong and refugees from the Mainland were flowing into Hong Kong.3 During
the period between 1960 and 2000, the number of child care centres rose tremendously, from
eight centres for 920 children in 1959 to 401 centres for 47 365 children in 1999 4. In 1975, the
Hong Kong Government enacted the Child Care Centres Ordinance (“CCCO”) and Child Care
Centres Regulations (“CCCR”) to regulate the standards in registration, operation and inspection of
CCCs. After the implementation of the legislation, programmes were developed by the
Government to upgrade the CCCs, including the infrastructure and training for child care workers
(“CCW”s).

In the past three decades, the population structure of Hong Kong had undergone rapid and
substantial changes. The number of mothers participating in the workforce was rising, the
number of single-parent families arising from divorced families was increasing, and the number of

1
White Paper: Social Welfare into the 1990’s and Beyond, March 1991.
2
Rao, Nirmala and Maggie Koong, 2000, Enhancing Preschool Education in Hong Kong, International Journal of Early
Childhood.
3
Wong, JMS and Rao, N, 2015, The Evolution of Early Childhood Education Policy in Hong Kong, International Journal
of Child Care and Education Policy, Vol 9, Article No. 3
4
Rao, Nirmala and Maggie Koong, 2000, Enhancing Preschool Education in Hong Kong, International Journal of Early
Childhood.

19
delinquencies amongst the young was climbing. There was also concern about the incidence of
child abuse and neglect. These phenomena attracted much attention from the public. Faced
with these problems, child care services were designed to address the four main issues mentioned
in the last section. At the time, the responsibility between the Government and family in child
care was also defined in the White Paper that “the primary responsibility for the adequate care for
children rests with parents and the separation of children from their families should be tolerated
only where there is no better other alternative” 5, and that the Government only plays a supporting
role.

The Government has introduced a variety of child care services in response to the changing
environment and expectation from the public on child care services. There are six types of
services, including centre-based child care services and volunteer-based child care services, i.e.
standalone CCCs, CCCs attached to KGs, EHS, OCCS, and MHCCCs and NSCCP to support families
and young children. To reduce parents’ financial burden on child care, the Government has also
implemented different forms of fee subsidy/reduction scheme. However, there is a continuous
call from the public for the Government to do more to support child care by empowering parents
and providing more options for parents to enter the workforce, to address the developmental
needs of children and to provide better support for families in need.

In the next section, the changes in socio-economic and demographic profiles in Hong Kong will be
presented to enable readers to understand why the current child care system cannot meet the
rising demand resulting from the socio-economic and demographic changes.

2.1.2 Demographics in the labour force

Females and males in the labour force - On average, the female labour force participation rate
gradually grew from 54% in 1980 to 71% in 2010 among the 34 Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) countries (OECD, 2013). In Hong Kong, women’s
participation in labour force in terms of population has increased drastically in the past decades.
However, as seen from Figure 2.1 below, the actual labour force participation rate of women in
1986 and 2010 had remained at a similar level at 50% and 49.6% respectively, and then rose
modestly to 54.2% in 2016. The overall size of the female labour force grew significantly from 1
031 400 in 1991 to 1 865 000 in 2016, an increase of 80.8% (C&SD, 2017 p. 97), but it is clear that it
masks the restrained growth in the overall rate of female participation in the labour force.
Despite modest growth in Hong Kong, the female labour force participation rate is still lower than
that for male, even though the male labour force participation rate showed an overall decline
during the same period from 80% in 1986 to 70% in 2016.

5
White Paper: Social Welfare into the 1990’s and Beyond, March 1991.

20
Figure 2. 1 Hong Kong – male and female labour force participation from 1986 to 2016 6

Single-parent families and single mothers in labour force - Single parents are defined as either
mothers or fathers who are never married, widowed, divorced or separated, living with a child or
children under the age of 18 in the same household. If their child/children under 18 is/are not
living in the same household, they are not counted as single parents. Figure 2.2 highlights how
the number of single parents has declined in 2016 as compared to 2011, but shows an overall
increase of 19.5% from 2001’s number of 61 431 to 2016’s 73 428. Single mothers continued to
outnumber single fathers from 2001 to 2016; although the proportion decreased in 2016 with
single mothers at 70% and single fathers at 30%, there are almost three times more single mothers
than single fathers in 2006. Despite the increase in the labour force participation rate of single
mothers from 59.3% in 2001 to 68.8% in 2016, the labour force participation rate of single fathers
was still noticeably higher at 81.3% in 2016.

Figure 2. 2 Hong Kong – labour force participation of single-parent families from 2001 to 2016 7

6
Source: https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11303032017AN17B0100.pdf (p. 108)
7
Source: 2011 Population Census Thematic Report: Single Parents, 2016 Population Census Thematic Report: Single
Parents

21
Female labour force participation rate among married and non-married women - Figure 2.3
shows the group of women participating in the labour force by marital status. From 1986 to 2016
the labour force participation rate of never-married women is the highest at about 70%. The
labour force participation rate of now-married women slightly increased from 42% in 1986 to 49%
in 2001, and then to 52% in 2016. The widowed/divorced/separated group was the lowest the
labour force participation rate among the three groups in the labour market, and are very likely to
be an at-risk population.

Figure 2. 3 Women’s (aged 15 and over) labour force participation rate by marital status from
1986 to 2016, in Hong Kong 8

Female labour force participation rate among mothers and non-mothers - Figure 2.4 shows the
labour force participation rate of women of different ages, with or without children aged 0 to 6 in
2016. The now-married women with children aged 0 to 6 and aged 20 to 49 had the lowest
labour force participation rate. The widowed/divorced/separated women with children aged 0 to
6 had the second lowest labour force participation rate. The never married women without
children aged 0 to 6 in all ages had the highest labour force participation rate. In general, the
labour force participation rate of women with children is lower than that of women without
children.

8
Source: C&SD, 2017.

22
Figure 2. 4 Women’s (aged 15 and over) labour force participation rate by age (5 years’ interval),
marital status and with or without children aged 0 to 6 in 2016 9
Note: Data for never married women (with children aged 0-6) is only available for the age range
of 30-34.

2.1.3 Service modes and Government spending on child care services

Service Modes

In the past, CCCs comprised of day creches (“DCs”) for infants and toddlers aged under 2 and day
nurseries (“DNs”) for children aged 2 to 6 which were registered under the CCCO. KGs used to
admit children aged 3 to 6 and are registered under the Education Ordinance (“EO”). In April
2000, the Working Party on Harmonisation operated by Education Bureau (“EDB”) and SWD was
formed to advise the Government on matters related to the goal of unification of practices
between CCCs and KGs, in the light of government policies, societal demands, and developmental
and educational needs of local children.

Prior to the implementation of harmonisation of pre-primary services in September 2005, SWD

had planned for former DNs according to the planning standard of providing 100 subsidised day
nursery places for every 20 000 persons of the general population under Hong Kong Planning
Standards and Guidelines (“HKPSG”). For former DCs, relevant population was not used as the
planning indicator on the expressed demand was used for reference. The above planning
standard for DNs has become obsolete after the harmonisation of pre-primary services.
According to the existing HKPSG, the provision of aided standalone CCCs 10, which are serving

9
Source: 2016 population by-census 5% sample dataset in Hong Kong, Statistics and Census Department
10
Aided standalone CCCs refer to Child Care Centres receive subsidies from SWD.

23
children under 3, is based on the estimated demand, socio-economic factors, district
characteristics and the provision of other child care support services for the area.

Since the harmonisation of pre-primary services in 2005, CCCs for children aged 0 to under 3 are
regulated by SWD under the Child Care Services Ordinance (“CCSO”) and the Child Care Services
Regulations (“CCSR”), while KGs for children aged 3 to 6 are regulated by EDB under the EO. CCCs
are more care-oriented while KGs are more education-oriented. KG-cum-CCCs receiving children
aged 0 to 6 or 2 to 6, though governed by different ordinances, are provided with one-stop
regulatory and monitoring services through the Joint Office for Kindergartens and Child Care
Centres (“JOKC”) staffed with officers from SWD and EDB and housed under EDB. The previously
aided DNs (for children aged 2 to 6) and DN-cum-DCs (for children aged 0 to 6) under SWD have
been converted to become KG-cum-CCCs and turned under the administration of JOKC since the
harmonisation.

Today, there are six types of child care services which are grouped into two broad categories,
namely, centre-based child care services and volunteer-based child care services. While details
are given in Chapter 3, a summary of the services11 is provided below:

1) Centre-based child care services

There are two main types of centre-based services providing care to children under the age of 3.
The 27 Standalone CCCs provide child care services for children aged under 2 with only two service
units also providing services for children aged 2 to under 3. The 517 CCCs attached to KGs with
some provide full-day while others half-day child care services for children aged under 3. Most of
the CCCs attached to KGs serve children aged 2 to under 3. The number of aided KG-cum-CCCs
which are formerly aided child care centres remains at 246 since the harmonisation of pre-primary
services in 2005.

The centre-based child care services also comprised of two ancillary services, OCCS and EHS. The
OCCS was started in 1989 to provide a safety net for unattended children aged under 6 on full-day,
half-day or two-hour sessional basis attached to aided standalone CCCs and aided KG-cum-CCCs
within their operation hours for parents or carers with sudden engagements or various
commitments. There are 214 service units operating OCCS. The EHS was started in 1988 by a
NGO for children aged under 6 as a pioneering project, which provided longer hours of child care
assistance to meet the needs of working parents. Like OCCS, EHS is also attached to aided
standalone CCCs and aided KG-cum-CCCs. In 1994, SWD implemented the service by extending it
in the then day creches and day nurseries. Then in 2015, to allow more flexibility in resources
deployment, the Funding and Service Agreement (“FSA”) of EHS was changed from unit-based to
organisation-based, giving the service operators more flexibility in administering the distribution of
EHS places with reference to the service utilisation in individual units. As at June 2017, there are
165 service units providing EHS.

2) Volunteer-based child care services

One of the two volunteer-based child care services is the MHCCCs. There are 20 MHCCCs which
are set up by non-profit-making local organisations, women’s associations, church groups, etc. to
serve children aged 0 to under 3 or 6 on a non-profit-making and self-financing basis. Children at

11
Key figures of the six types of child care services were as at June 2017 provided by SWD.

24
the MHCCCs are looked after by volunteers, neighbours and/or parents of the mutual help child
care group on a mutual help and voluntary basis. MHCCCs are exempted from the full set of
registration requirements of the CCSO but they are still required to satisfy the safety requirements
of children attending the centres.

Another volunteer-based child care service is the NSCCP. This service was piloted in October
2008, covering 11 districts and provided flexible forms of child care services for children aged
under 6 to avoid them being left unattended in the community or neighbourhood. At the end of
the 3-year pilot project in 2011, the NSCCP was regularised and extended to 18 districts while the
age limit of the service users was extended to children from aged under 6 to under 9 in October
2014. The NSCCP offers two service components: home-based child care service and
centre-based care group.

Government spending on child care services

The Government supports child care services through various financial means which is detailed in
Chapter 3. In terms of total spending which comprises all pre-primary services, it has increased
from HK$4,152 million in the 2013-14 financial year to the revised estimate of HK$7,199 million in
the 2017-18 financial year with an increase in spending of 73%. The total government spending
also increased by 9% from HK$433,500 million to HK$471,000 million for the same period. As
Figure 2.5 shows, the Government is allocating more expenditure on pre-primary services which
grew from 0.96% of total government spending in 2013-14 to 1.53% in 2017-18. In terms of
percentage of GDP, the increase is from 0.19% in 2013-14 to 0.26% in 2017-18. The expenditure
on child care services which is depicted below has consistently been lower than the expenditure
on KGs by 2.6 to 3.4 times.

Figure 2. 5 Hong Kong’s expenditure on pre-primary services from 2013 to 2018 12

Note: Spending on pre-primary services includes – (1) Child Care Services, i.e. six types of day child
care services, pre-school rehabilitation services and residential child care services; (2) KGs
including the Pre-primary Education Voucher Scheme, new KG education scheme, refund of rents,
12
Source: SWD 2018, C&SD and EDB

25
rates and government rents and others; and (3) subsidies offered by the Student Finance Office
which include the Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission Scheme, Grants for
School-related Expenses for Kindergarten Students and others.

2.1.4 Human resources planning of child care services

The operation of all the CCCs, irrespective of being aided by the Government or not, standalone or
attached to KGs, shall comply with the statutory requirements under the CCSO (Cap. 243) and
CCSR (Cap. 243 A). There are prescribed standards for the service delivery in various aspects such
as qualifications of child care supervisors, child care workers and staffing ratio for children, etc.
For operational needs, CCCs are also required to employ other staffs, e.g. clerks for clerical work,
cooks and helpers for cooking, cleaning and general duties in accordance with the Operation
Manual for Pre-primary Institutions (“Operation Manual”,『學前機構辦學手冊』). The number of
supporting staff to be appointed depends on the operational needs of individual centres. The
number and age of children, hours of operation, number of meals provided and the floor area of
the centres affect the size of the staff establishment.
Table 2. 1 Qualified staff-to-child/teacher-to-pupil ratios

Service Staff-to-Child/Teacher-to-pupil Ratios

Age of Child Age under 2 Age 2 to under 3 Age 3 to under 6
Child Care Centres 1:8 1:14 NA
Kindergartens NA NA 1:15* under EO
1:11*under the new kindergarten
education scheme (the new KG
education scheme) of the EDB

* The qualified teacher-to-pupil ratio for KGs joining the new KG education scheme was improved
from 1:15 to 1:11 with effect from the 2017/18 school year. The minimum teacher-to-pupil ratio
as stipulated in the EO remains unchanged at 1:15.

2.1.5 Qualification of staff in child care services

To be eligible for registration as child care workers or child care supervisors, the person must have
successfully completed a training course approved by the Director of Social Welfare. Child care
workers or child care supervisors are required to register in accordance with the CCSO.
Information concerning the approved training courses offered by various tertiary institutes is
disseminated via the EDB website:
(http://www.edb.gov.hk/en/teacher/qualification-training-development/training/index.html).

2.1.6 Training programmes of child care centres

Service operators of aided CCCs are required to deliver the service in accordance with CCSO and
CCSR as well as the Operation Manual. For aided standalone CCCs, they are also required to

26
comply with FSA and Service Quality Standards (“SQS”) to ensure service quality and facilitate the
development of children. The Operation Manual and FSA include both components on child care
and training elements of child development. The philosophy of early childhood education and
care, defined as teaching and care to young children with a focus on learning through play and
discovery, in which the Operation Manual provides guidelines for choosing furniture and
equipment to cultivate children’s interest in learning, stimulate creativity and learn naturally.
The Operation Manual also provides sufficient guidelines to integrate both the concept of “care”
and “education” to meet children’s needs. In the context of early childhood education and care,
education does not solely refer to solid brain knowledge, but also addressing the holistic
development of children including their cognitive, emotional and social needs. Both the FSA and
the Operation Manual highlight that the learning programmes should be designed with flexibility
so as to cater for the developmental needs of children of different ages and strengthen their
all-round-development through play. For example, singing nursery rhymes, playing with
plasticine, toys, conversation etc. to develop their fine motor skills and sensory power. Besides,
parent’s participation is also important as their strong bonding with children is significant for their
social and emotional development. To that, service operators are required to provide family
support activities and encourage children to carry out what they have explored during daytime
back at home with parents to facilitate parent-child bonding.

2.2 The existing philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in
other jurisdictions

This section looks at the philosophy and policy objectives of child care services in other
jurisdictions. Insights herein are provided from global experiences in developing and reforming
ECEC systems from academic scholarship, published reports and commissioned country reports
from six selected jurisdictions, namely Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and
Sweden. A summary of the commissioned reports of the jurisdictions is in Appendix 1.

Historically and globally, policies for the “care” and “education” of young children have gone
separately, with different understandings of children’s development, the role of family and state,
and the fractured systems of governance (OECD, 2006). In particular, the rising demand for child
care services is driven by the importance of high-quality care and educational service to children’s
development and well-being, changes in family composition, the growing number of one-parent
families, female participation in the labour market, and the need to reconcile family and work
responsibilities (OECD report, Chapter 5). As can be seen from the international comparisons
which provide different examples of how to approach a unified system, this separation between
care and education for children has been reduced in the 21st century.

2.2.1 Importance of care and education to children’s development and well-being

ECEC often refers to providing teaching and care to young children from birth up to age eight, with
more focus on learning through play and discovery. ECEC helps children to develop their
attachment with the environment, their personalities and cognitive functions, etc. ECEC
emphasises helping children develop holistically, addressing their physical, cognitive, emotional,

27
and social needs. Care includes nutrition, hygiene, safety and health, while education includes
learning, participation, socialisation, and stimulation activities.

Over the past two decades, advances in the understandings of Early Brain Development (“EBDv”)
and Early Childhood Development (“ECD”) have shaped policies related to ECEC in the global
context. It has since been widely recognised that the care and education of young children are
playing complementary roles to enhance EBDv and ECD.

Through a process of rapid and dramatic growth and development, an infant’s brain reaches a
quarter of its mature size by the time a full-term baby is born, half its mature size by 6 months old
and 90 percent of its adults’ size by the age of 8 years old (Gerhardt, 2015). The human brain is a
unique organ in that its growth and development is not just dependent on food and nutrition, but
the course that this development takes - especially in the first three years of life - depends heavily
on experience as is shown in Figure 2.6 below. Early development, including the prenatal period
and infancy, is critical to longer term life chances. In the period from two to three weeks post
conception and to roughly two years of age, the nervous system itself is established and shaped by
experiences (Gerhardt, 2015 p.11). Synaptic connections are formed during this stage in
response to stimuli from the environment through the senses (e.g. eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and
skin) (McCain and Mustard, 1999).

Different interconnected sections of the brain develop at different stages particularly during early
childhood, and these sections are responsible for different abilities, skills and competencies
(Gerhardt, 2015). The more connections there are, the better the performance and the greater is
one’s ability to use particular areas of the brain. These stages are critical periods of EBDv and
Figure 2.7 illustrates the critical periods for some components of brain development and function.
Critical periods are “windows of opportunity in early life when a child’s brain is exquisitely primed
to receive sensory input and develop more advanced neural systems, through the wiring and
sculpting processes” (McCain & Mustard, 2011 p.24). In development areas, brain sensitivity
peaks before the age of 3, including emotional control, social skills, language and numeracy
(Gambaro, Stewart and Waldfogel, 2014, Naudeau et al, 2011).

28
Figure 2. 6 Brain malleability
Source: Centre on the Developing Child, Harvard University 2017 (Levitt 2009)
Note: The vertical axis denotes the degree of neuroplasticity influenced by experience across
lifespan and the amount of effort required.

Figure 2. 7 Human brain development 13

Note: The vertical axis denotes the rate of synapse formation for sensory pathways, language
and higher cognitive function across childhood and adolescence.

ECD encompasses the physical, cognitive, linguistic, and socio-emotional development of a child
from the prenatal stage up to aged eight (World Bank, 2010). ECD can occur across diverse
13
Source: Nelson (2000) in Shonkoff & Phillips (eds), 2000

29
settings (e.g. homes, schools, health facilities, and community-based centres). It involves a wide
range of activities (such as child care, nutrition support, and parents’ education for children).
Early childhood is a very critical stage which can lay foundations for children’s well-being and
learning. Positive experiences early on produce a more richly networked brain (Gerhardt, 2015).
Thus, it should be emphasised that education does not only happen in kindergartens while care is
not only limited to homes or child care centres. Early education and care should be integrated
rather than separated. According to the American Academy of Paediatrics (“AAP”), “children’s
early experiences are all educational, whether they are at homes, with extended family and friends,
or in early education and child care settings” (Donoghue, 2017). The failure of young children to
realise their developmental potentials and achieve satisfactory education may lead to
intergenerational transmission of poverty, thus imposing a long-lasting impact on economic growth
and inequality of the society. It should be emphasised that babies and young children are very
dependent on their living environment; and that exposure to high levels of “toxic stress” which
might be caused by their carers and their surroundings will have a negative impact on their brain
development and well-being (Gerhardt, 2014). Therefore, carers (no matter the parents, other
family members, or child service providers in institutions) should be responsive, reliable, consistent,
predictable, and ready to respond to children’s signs of distress and discomfort (Gerhardt, 2015).
Hence, the World Health Organisation has highly recommended that local, regional, and national
governments should incorporate the science of ECD into policy formation for child care and
education (Irwin, 2007).

To benefit child development and equity, OECD member countries have made effort to increase
places in ECEC services. Data from the OECD Family Database indicate that the number of
children under the age of 3 participated in ECEC has increased from 29% in 2006 to 35% in 2014
(OECD 2017). Different countries institute different types of ECEC services including centre-based
and family day cares. The type of programme can be a full-day programme which is typically 5 –
6 hours a day, 5 days a week whereas part- time programmes have less number of hours per day or
days. In general, full-day programmes are considered better for children’s development and
learning because longer days give staff a longer period to develop a more complete programme
and children can be more involved. The full-day programme is also assumed to be more
beneficial, particularly, for economically disadvantaged children (OECD 2018). Some countries
adopt specific target measures focusing on children from disadvantaged background, others adopt
universal provision.

The entry age and the duration of centre-based child care affect children’s social and cognitive
development as well as personality development. In Finland, 28% of children aged 0-2 year
received formal ECEC service, for an average of 33 hours per week in 2013 (OECD, 2015). In
Australia, about 31.4% of children aged 0-2 received approved child care services for about 23.8
hours per week in 2012 (Australian Government, 2013). The existing research in the US has
suggested that the greatest cognitive gain is for children who start receiving centre-based child
care service at the age of 2-3 rather than at younger or older ages, while the negative behavioural
effects are greater the younger the start age (Loeb et al, 2007). A report from the Sutton Trust
argues that the “fundamental role of the parent [is] not only as the first teacher but [also] as the
first caregiver and provider of love and security.” The parent-child bonding, and specifically a
high- quality bonding, “supports the child’s social and emotional development,” which affects the
‘bigger picture’ - the child’s “cognitive development and ultimately their life chances” (Moullin,
Waldfogel, & Washbrook, 2014). It would be most beneficial for the child if both these functions
worked together in the supportive stages, in particular, during the “first year when the baby’s brain
30
doubles in weight” and “burst of brain development when attachment bonds are made” between
six to twelve months (Moullin, Waldfogel, & Washbrook, 2014). As such, it is vital not to miss this
crucial period for the child to be cared from a home care setting and then transitioning into
enrolment in professional ECEC services for the remainder of the pre-primary years. This also
helps with maintaining a consistent level of care, as there are positive inputs by both parents at
home, and caregivers at child care centres. An Australian study (Yamauchi & Leigh, 2011) has
found that compared to part-time child care services, full-time centre-based child care service
(more than 20 hours per week) in children’s early years was associated with higher level of
parental-reported difficulty temperament.

Implications for Hong Kong - In Hong Kong, close to 100% of children aged 3 to 6 attend KGs,
and while it is not mandatory for children to attend KGs, KGs are provided on universal basis by
the Government. There are parents who choose to care for their children at home, up to the
entire six years before compulsory primary education. About 55%14of children aged 2 to 3 are
cared by CCCs. However, for children aged 0 to under 2, up to 1.6% 15 of the population use CCCs
and up to 0.9% 16 use the volunteer-based child care services. With long waiting list for CCCs,
some parents may choose to resign from work and care for their children themselves, others may
arrange to have a foreign domestic helper to assist in child care while they continue to pursue
their careers, still others may enlist the support from relatives. However, some parents believed
that only CCCs can provide high-quality child care for their children and that care by qualified
carers would benefit children’s development in the long term.

Recapturing the AAP’s statement that “children’s early experiences are all educational, whether
they are at homes, with extended family and friends, or in early education and child care
settings”(Donoghue, 2017), child care provided at home-based and in centre-based setting are
equally important. It is paramount that parental care is acknowledged as the foundation of a
child’s development. The term “child care” in this report not only refers to the traditional
understanding of centre-based child care services, but it also encompasses the care and nurture
manifested through parents especially when the child is very young. To repeat from the Sutton
Trust report, parental care and bonding is necessary for children’s holistic development. In
addition, according to the existing US research, negative behavioural effects are greater if children
receive centre-based child care services at an age earlier than 2, which can aggravate the
parent-child bonding (Loeb, 2007), thus best care achieved during a child’s young age would be
parental care. However, due to short maternity leave, current limited options available to the
public and long waiting list at aided CCCs, most parents are obliged to arrange child care on their
own; i.e. with the support from foreign domestic helper, grandparents and other extended family
members or volunteer-based care, which are highly unlikely to be uniformed in quality.

Short-term and long-term positioning - Under this current state, the consultant team on one hand,
urges the Government to do more by providing more options of quality child care to support
children and families; and on the other hand, acknowledges that there is difficulty for the

14
Based on CCCs places (for children aged 2 to under 3) of 28 842 available for a population of 52 780.
15
Based on CCCs places (for children 0 to under 2) of 1 831 available for a population of 111 240.
16
Based on information from SWD 2018, for NSCCP, children aged 0 to below 2 are only eligible to use home-based
child care service (“HCCS”). As such, number of NSCCP places is 39 HCCS places x 18 service unit = 702 places. For
volunteer-based child care services, total number of places for children 0 to under 2 is 702 (NSCCP) + 275 (MHCCCs) =
977 for a population of 111 240.

31
Government to provide sufficient child care places to address the service demands in the short
term. Hence, the positioning of child care services in the short term should be upon enhancing
the importance of parental role in child care to the public as well as strengthening the existing
practices through upgrading the qualification/training for all carers including parents, extended
family members, foreign domestic helpers and child care service staff including volunteers at the
neighbourhood. To enhance the role of parents, one area that can be improved is to increase
paid leave for both parents, and supplement with educational opportunities for parents on
child-rearing skills (i.e. workshops held at community centres or hospitals), and increase
intervention programmes for families needing support. Although the Government and social
institutions should provide as much support as necessary, at the end of the day it is up to parents
to create the close attachment with their children, which is unique to each family. Therefore, it is
also important to balance out the effective provision of professional centre-based child care
services, with adequate parental leave, in order to give parents the opportunity to have quality
attachment and bonding time, through a period of home care. The above-mentioned evidence
illustrates how this time for parental care has a positive impact on the development of the child,
and is certainly as important as the child care and education they receive at the pre-primary level.

In terms of long-term positioning, it would be most beneficial for the child if both parental care
and child care services support from the Government can achieve a balance in the supportive
stages, from a home care setting and then transitioning into enrolment in professional care
services for the remainder of the pre-primary years. This also helps with maintaining a consistent
level of care, as it consists of positive inputs by both parents at home, and caregivers at child care
centres.

2.2.2 Changes in family composition

The above section has highlighted one of the key policy objectives in child care services in
international practices and achieving high-quality child care in Hong Kong, that is, optimisation of
child development and well-being. In this section, another policy objective is reviewed in
response to the changes in household composition. Table 2.2 shows the distribution of family
composition in the early 2010s in Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Sweden and
Hong Kong. As seen, compared to the three western jurisdictions, i.e. Australia, Finland and
Sweden, households with couples with children are the most common type of households in
Singapore, South Korea, and Hong Kong, accounting for 56%, 37.0% and 39.4%, respectively, but
single parent households is also relatively high in proportion at about 13.1%, 9.2% and 11.9%,
respectively. Japan, Finland and Sweden have relatively lower proportion of single parent
households at 2.6%, 5.5% and 6.6%, respectively.

32
Table 2. 2 Distributions (%) of family composition by household types in 2010/2011

Households with couples

Sub With Without Single parent Single person Other
total children children households households household types
Australia(a) 56.9 31.0 25.9 10.4 23.9 8.7
Finland(b) 49.4 20.5 28.9 5.5 41.0 4.0
Singapore(c) 69.8 56.0 13.8 13.1 12.2 4.9
South
Korea(c) 52.4 37.0 15.4 9.2 23.9 14.5
Japan (d) 46.8 16.6 30.2 2.6 34.5 16.2
Sweden (b) 52.2 24.3 27.9 6.6 36.2 5.0
Hong Kong(c) 54.4 39.4 15.0 11.9 17.1 16.6

Source: OECD family database

Note: (a) For Australia, children are defined as those of any age who live with their parent(s) and
as long as they do not have a partner or children of their own living in the same household. (b) For
Finland and Sweden, children are defined either as dependent resident children under 25 or as all
children under 25. (c) For Singapore, South Korea and Hong Kong, children are defined as
unmarried children of any age. (d) For Japan, children refer to unmarried children under the age of
20.

Table 2.3 shows the family composition by the number of children (aged under 6) in 2016 from the
latest census in Hong Kong. In 2016, there were 322 180 households with at least one child (aged
under 6), 75.4% of which are 1-child households, and 23.4% are 2-children households, while only
1.2% are 3-or-more-children households. It should be noted that at present, there are 22 320
(6.9%) lone parent with children aged under 6 and this group would be most in need of child care
support from the public, especially those lone parent households with two or more children.
Table 2. 3 Number of households with children aged under 6 in Hong Kong, 2016

No. of children aged under 6

Household types 1 2 3+ total
Couples with children aged under 6 154 740 52 580 2 940 210 260
Lone parent with children aged under 6 17 660 4 420 240 22,320
Couples with at least one of their parents
and children aged under 6 29 800 9 320 400 39 520
Others with children aged under 6 40 580 8 960 540 50 080
Total 242 780 75 280 4 120 322 180

Source: 2016 population by-census 5% sample dataset in Hong Kong, Statistics and Census
Department.
Notes:
1. It may or may not include other unrelated persons (e.g. foreign domestic helpers).
2. “At least one of their parents” refers to parents of the couple.

In Hong Kong, over the period of 2001-2016, the number of nuclear family households has
increased from 1 358 920 to 1 605 646 (an increase of 18.1%); the number of single-parent families
33
has risen from 61 431 to 73 428 in the same period (an increase of 19.5%, as shown in Figure 2.2);
and the labour force participation of parents is also very high. These phenomena suggest that 1)
relying on intergenerational support may neither be adequate to satisfy the demand for child care
nor is a preferred and practical choice for parents; and 2) there will be more and more parents,
whether from single-parent family or otherwise, resorting to the outside-home child care services.

2.2.3 Rise in female labour force participation

In the past decades, female labour force participation rates have increased tremendously across all
developed jurisdictions. On one hand, this signifies the important role of women in the labour
market and public sphere; on the other, it has reflected great challenges which many families will
face, that is “who will look after the children when parents are at work”. Partly due to the rise in
living costs as well as the aspiration of women with education attainment level to build meaningful
careers, the traditional model that families are supposed to take the responsibility of caring for
their children and mothers should look after them full-time while fathers work outside to provide
financial support, does not meet the current challenges.

Table 2.4 and Figure 2.8 show that in the seven western and eastern jurisdictions, women are
playing a very important role in the labour market, with the highest labour force participation rate
of about 90.6% amongst Singaporean women aged between 25 and 29 to the lowest rate of about
50.6% amongst Korean women aged between 20 and 24. It is even more interesting to note that
in Australia and Finland which have higher fertility rates, female labour force participation rates
have managed to remain at high levels across age groups or even increase with ages, and in places
with universal child care service such as Sweden, an overall female labour force participation rate
at 85% or above has been maintained across three age groups (25-34,35-44, and 35-39); in
contrast, in all four Asian jurisdictions, namely in Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Hong Kong,
across the age range of 30 to 39, there appears to be a significant drop in the female labour force
participation rate. This seems to be much related to different family policies, especially child care
policies in the seven jurisdictions. Somehow, women with young children in Asian jurisdictions
have to make a choice of staying at home looking after their children or continuing to work outside.
In Finland, early childhood education and care arrangements are considered to belong to the basic
and universal social services provided by the Government. According to the latest statistics in
2016 (THL 2017), in Finland, given such universal and easily available child care services, about 83%
of the children aged between 1 and 6 attended in municipal ECEC centres while only 7% children
attended private ECEC institutions and 10% were in family care. In Australia, the Government has
very strong commitment to make sure that all children have access to “a quality early childhood
education programme” and makes sure that ECEC service to be as flexible as possible to align with
the changing working patterns of parents, thus parental, especially maternal, workforce
participation can be maintained. With continuous improvement made by the Swedish
Government, the well-being of children is supported through the ECEC universal child care policy
plus providing options for mothers to pursue their career rather than being tied down by child
rearing. The drop in female labour force participation rate after the age of 30 observed in Hong
Kong, South Korea, Japan and Singapore indicates that many women leave the labour market when
they marry or give birth to children within the traditional Asian culture and mentality. The
transition to marriage and to parenthood has interrupted their working life and led to retreat from
the work-place. This interruption and retreat are related to the gendered division in housework

34
and care, the limited access to good child care services, inadequate support for the re-employment
of women after marriage and childbirth, and inflexible working arrangement (Kang, 2017).
Table 2. 4 Female labour force participation rates by age group in seven jurisdictions, 2016

Age group
Jurisdiction 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49
Australia 69.1 71.9 70.4 70.4 74.8 76.5
Finland 60.0 68.5 68.7 75.6 82.4 83.7
Singapore 62.0 90.6 85.3 82.3 80.2 77.2
South Korea 50.6 69.5 60.2 56.5 62.8 68.6
Japan 71.6 81.7 73.2 71.8 75.7 78.5
Hong Kong 61.9 83.6 74.9 69.1 69.6 70.9

Age group
Jurisdiction 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64
Sweden 70.1 84.9 90.6 89.9 76.9

Figure 2. 8 Female labour force participation rates by age groups in seven jurisdictions, 2016

35
Implications to Hong Kong- As the Government of Hong Kong only plays a supporting role in child
care services and does not have a universal child care scheme, as seen in Figure 2.8, there is a
significant drop in Hong Kong’s female labour force participation rate for the age range of 30-39,
where the transition from young adult to marriage or parenthood is of high occurrence. In this
transition, Hong Kong resembles the three other Asian jurisdictions - South Korea, Singapore and
Japan, where the conservative attitudes towards family-work roles and gender stereotypes are still
being endorsed by the public, and women’s primary duty is for caring of children and husbands
and doing household chores (Tang, 2016). And with increasing financial and social pressure,
women tend to be involved in multiple social roles but ended up having a difficulties in balancing
domestic work, child care and workforce demands, where then most of them retreat from the
work place. In contrast to the western countries such as Finland, Australia and Sweden, social
roles are blurred in context within Asian culture where work only serves as a utility for family
benefits, that family roles remain as the centre among all social roles (Tang & Tang, 2001).
Furthermore, as explained in the above, Hong Kong does not provide universal child care or
financial remuneration to support women not in the labour workforce as in western countries.
These research findings have important policy implications in terms of child care, if the
Government of Hong Kong is to implement more options in child care service provisions in the long
term, it would allow a better work-family balance for women and enhance the flexibility in terms
of their choice of focus (i.e. work versus family). Currently in Hong Kong, the female
unemployment rate from 2015 to 2017 for age 20-49 is low, at 3.4%, 3.3% and 3.1%, of the total
Hong Kong population (male and female), for the 3 years respectively (Census and Statistics
Department). Therefore, if full-time housewives were allowed to join the labour force, they
would not have difficulties in finding employment as the unemployment rate is not high. With
more government support in child care whether in the form of service provisions or monetary
support, this would smoothen the transition of women from marriage to parenthood and allow
themselves to fulfill both social and familial duties.

2.2.4 Underlying welfare regime and philosophy behind the child care policies

A welfare state broadly refers to how a government promotes, supports and/or offers social
protection, a safety net for its citizens. Currently, the welfare state regimes have been classified
into four types, namely the liberal system, conservative-corporatist system, the social-democratic
system, and the productivist system (Esping-Andersen, 1990; Holliday, 2003). This study tries to
explore the child care policies in Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Sweden and
Hong Kong under the theoretical framework of the welfare state regime and see how these
regimes shape the configuration of the ECEC systems in those seven jurisdictions. Why is it
important to link the ECEC with the welfare regimes? It is important because the features of the
social welfare regimes can determine the types of interventions likely to be or have been present
in ECEC, and are predictive of what reforms would be acceptable and feasible within a given
country or jurisdiction.

Table 2.5 shows some features of the four welfare regimes and highlights the specific regimes, to
which the seven jurisdictions belong. As shown, Australia belongs to the liberal system, with
targeted measures and low tax burden; Finland and Sweden belong to the social-democratic
system with universal access to social benefits but high tax burden; Singapore, South Korea, Japan
and Hong Kong, all belong to the productivist system, with social policies serving predominantly
economic growth.
36
Table 2. 5 The four types of welfare regimes 17

Liberal 18 Conservative-corporatist Social-democratic Productivist 21

19 20

Types of Means-test/ Social insurance Universal Social policy

benefits targeted subordinate to
economic growth
Purpose/ Labour Familiarisation De-familiarisation/ Familialistic
Goal market traditional gender roles autonomous tradition
activation individual rights maximisation of
economic
productivity
Tax Middle tax High tax burden High tax burden Low to
approach burden Middle/varied
Examples Australia, Continental Europe Scandinavia (e.g. East Asia (e.g.
U.K., USA Finland, Sweden) Singapore, South
Korea, Japan and
Hong Kong)

Under the framework of the different welfare regimes, the philosophies behind the child care
policies were examined. The importance of child care and education for children aged 0 to under
2 is being recognised increasingly, as mentioned above by AAP, that children’s early experiences
whether at home or in centre-based settings are all educational. Furthermore, factors such as the
changes in family composition, and the rise of female role in the labour market, would all
contribute to the variance in the approaches to address the increasing demand for child care
services among the seven jurisdictions, which have quite different welfare regimes.

In Finland, the rights of children are emphasised. Finland’s new ECEC Act 2015 approaches ECEC
from the perspective of the child, it is the right of a child to receive education and care, in support
of child development and growth. Children are entitled to a full-time day care place irrespective
of their parents’ employment status. Therefore, the core of “child’s right” underlying the child
care policies reflects the important feature of “autonomous individual rights” in Finland’s social
democratic regimes. In Sweden, socio-economic changes have been driving the Government to
provide quality care and education for the overall development and well-being of children.
Under the same principle, the right of children is being emphasised. The aim of the central
government and the municipalities is “to support and stimulate the child’s development and
learning and contribute to good conditions for growth” through the provision of universal
high-quality pedagogical activities (Ministry of Education and Science in Sweden, 1999, p.9).

17
Sources: Esping-Andersen, 1990; Holliday, 2003
18
The liberal welfare regime is based on market performance, believing that the market rewards those work hardest,
and bring most personal freedom and prosperity to the society. This regime is characterised by means-tested
programmes and very few universal benefits.
19
The conservative corporatist model is with aim of maintaining social order and status, by providing much support
to traditional family and preserving the male breadwinner model.
20
The social-democratic model is based on universalism, emphasises on the social rights of the entire population. The
granting of benefits depends on the needs rather the socioeconomic performance or status.
21
In the productivist welfare regime, social policies are subordinate to the economic policies and serve to maintain
the economic growth, social stability and peace.

37
In Australia, however, child care services are designed with more intention to help working parents.
The main objective of the Government spending is to support parental workforce participation.
The Government has been planning to introduce “a world-class system of integrated early
childhood learning and child care” designed to “boost national productivity, lift labour force
participation, and step towards an “education revolution”. Australia’s ECEC system has included
many tests, such as means-test and activity test 22. All these child care measures reflect the
features of Australia’s social liberal system.

In Singapore, the “pro-family” and “family values” are frequently and heavily referred to as
rationales and stance for child care support. The child care policy is seen as a part of the family
policy package, and this whole package is implemented as efforts to cope with demographic shifts,
political pressure, and the economic downturn. In South Korea, the Ministry of Health and
Welfare which oversees the daily care facilities, put child care support with other pronatalist
measures to ameliorate the demographic crisis and the potential economic problem that will arise
in the near future. In Japan, the child care system is also designed to serve different purposes,
including to alleviate the burden on working mothers and single parents as well as to address child
abuse problems. Therefore, Singapore, South Korea, and Japan indicate that their child care
policy is shaped by their welfare regime namely productivist system.

Implications for Hong Kong - Under Hong Kong’s current welfare regime and philosophy towards
child care services, it is unlikely, and certainly impractical, to implement the “child’s right”
philosophy of Finland and Sweden, where no matter what the family employment situation is,
children are entitled to full-time day care places. However, the Government of Hong Kong can
increase the number of centre-based child care places and offer support for needy families to
receive quality child care services. Australia is similar to Hong Kong in that the child care
subsidies offered are means-tested. Hong Kong can also implement a second level of checks
similar to Australia’s “activity test”, to gauge how many hours of subsidised child care services
should be provided, based on the number of hours the parent(s) work. Resources can be more
effectively distributed to those with greater social need. This is paired with Australia’s larger
integrated policies package, which increases the financial support for families to pay for child care
(co-payment). Hong Kong may consider learning from this system and implementing more
flexible policies that also help with economic development, as increased flexible child care
provision empowers parents with the opportunity for further skills development and education
attainment, which is important for sustaining the labour force and society-at-large (Australian
Government, 2015). The idea of ‘family values’ is as important in Hong Kong as is in Singapore,
and is part of their family policy package. Hong Kong can learn from this and integrate child care
provision with other social welfare policies, such as expanding intergenerational care and providing
longer paid parental leave. Although Hong Kong adopts a productivist welfare regime, it can
transition into a society where social policy is increasingly for social development, instead of just
for economic growth, just like Japan, where child care policy aims to mitigate child abuse and
relieve working mother’s burden. A balance should be found between providing social support
and developing the human capital/skilled manpower essential for boosting the economy and
enhancing the well-being of the population.

22
A test that specifies who is eligible for the assistance of Early Care and Learning Subsidy, which is based on the
hours of work undertaken by the parents. Exemption exists for those who cannot meet this criteria and are allowed to
access 36 hours of ECEC services per fortnight (Department of Education and Training, 2018)

38
2.3 Comparing the system in Hong Kong with the six international
jurisdictions

2.3.1 Integration with other related policies

After reviewing the child care systems in the six international jurisdictions, namely Finland,
Australia, South Korea, Singapore, Japan and Sweden, it is found that the child care policy is
sometimes embedded in a wider family policy package. Some governments, like Singapore, offer
baby bonus, medical insurance for newborns, paid maternity leave, and parental leave, child care
subsidies, tax arrangement, co-payment and so on. Table 2.6 shows the various measures
implemented in the seven jurisdictions.

As shown in Table 2.6, Finland, Singapore, South Korea and Sweden have universal child care
subsidies, while Australia and Hong Kong have more targeted measures, (the former targeting
low-income families and the latter targeting those entering non-profit-making kindergartens).
Japan is also aiming for both universal child allowance for children up until junior high school as
well as targeting low-income families. It is however necessary to mention that from July 2018
Australia has replaced universal Child Care Rebate (“CCR”) with Child Care Subsidy excluding those
families with annual earnings above AU$350,000. The change took place because it was argued
that this subsidy is simpler than the previous multi-level subsidy system, and targets low to middle
income families requiring more financial assistance. From a government perspective, this new
policy would help save money and subsidies would be provided more effectively based on the
means tests. From the perspective of parents, however, the response will likely to be mixed as it
may benefit low to middle income families more with higher subsidies, but overall families would
not automatically get subsidies; the previous system automatically gave CCR if both Child Care
Benefit (“CCB”) and CCR were applied for, no matter if CCB was approved or not (Department of
Education and Training, Australian Government, 2018). With regard to the tax arrangement,
Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong provide some tax reduction for parents. As for co-payment,
except for South Korea, all the other five jurisdictions offer some co-payment to reduce the child
care cost of families. Regarding paid maternity and parental leave however, there are great
variations: Hong Kong provides the shortest leave; in contrast, Finland provides the longest paid
leave for mothers to care for their children with an additional flexibility where the paid leave can
be shared among the mother and father.

39
Table 2. 6 Comparison of the specific measures implemented by the seven jurisdictions
Australia Finland Singapore South Korea Japan Sweden Hong Kong
23
Pre-primary Means-tested Universal Home Universal Universal Child Facility-type Benefit Central government and local For service operators -
Subsidies Child Care Care Allowance Basic Subsidy Care paid directly to the municipalities pay 93% of ECEC CCCSS, SME and/or SOE for CCCs
subsidy Supplement ECEC facility by the costs, and the remaining 7% is
government for the paid by parents.
child that is attending
Tax Family tax --- Tax rebate for --- N/A N/A Child tax allowance
arrangements benefit parents,
increase with
the number of
children
Personal 45% 52% 20% 38% 56% 57% 15%
24
income tax
Co-payments Income based Income based Income based --- Full or partial fee Fees according to family income Full or partial fee waived under the
parent parent (means-tested waived for low income but capped at a maximum of 7% Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee
co-payments co-payments ), parent families for parents to pay. The Remission Scheme for children from low
(highest ranging from 0 co-payments maximum monthly fees cannot income families receiving full-day child
earners to maximum, above basic exceed 157 USD for the first care service with social needs; fee
excluded from based on family subsidy child, 105 USD for the second subsidies for eligible service users of
subsidy) structure child, and 52 USD for the third other day child care services such as the
child, with enrolment of a fourth EHS, OCCS, MHCCCs and NSCCP
child being free.
25
Maternity/ 18 weeks paid 17.5 weeks paid 16 weeks paid 12.9 weeks paid 14 weeks of maternity 68.6 weeks of parental leave 10 weeks paid maternity leave , 3 days
paternity/ maternity, 2 maternity leave; maternity maternity leave; leave followed by 12 paid at 80% of salary, and can be paid paternity leave
parental leave weeks paid 143.5 weeks leave; 4 weeks 52 weeks paid months of parental shared between both parents
paternity or paid parental paid parental parental and leave (14 months if
eligible and home care leave home care leave both parents take it
partner leave leave together)

23
Subsidies for kindergartens are excluded from this table.
24
Personal income tax rate: The highest statutory marginal tax rate applied to the taxable income of individuals.
https://home.kpmg.com/xx/en/home/services/tax/tax-tools-and-resources/tax-rates-online/individual-income-tax-rates-table.html. Tax rate may vary according to income. Japan’s tax rate
per the commissioned report expert is more likely to be 45%.
25
Per Policy Address on October 10, 2018, maternity leave is revised from 10 to 14 weeks among civil servants with immediate effect. For the general public, the maternity leave at 14 weeks
bill will be tabled in late 2019 and passed before July 2020 (SCMP 2018).

40
As seen from the table above, there are several different tax rates and generic policy dimensions
that need to be considered in the design and reform of an ECEC system such as income eligibility
limits, co-payments by families, reimbursement rates to providers, subsidy applications and
eligibility processes, and supply-demand ratios (e.g. the use of waiting lists) (Adams, Snyder &
Sandfort, 2002; Blau, 2001; Meyers, Heintze, & Wolf, 2002; Blau & Tekin, 2001; Levy & Michel,
2002).

As for the child care subsidy, Australia, Finland, Singapore and Japan apply different means-tests to
determine eligibility based on family income thresholds. Higher income eligibility limits are likely
to appear in the potentially eligible population. As for parent co-payments, one rationale behind
higher co-payments is that requiring parents or carers to contribute may encourage greater
accountability and help to meet policy goals in promoting self-sufficiency (Blau, 2001). In
addition, higher co-payments may enable the provision of smaller subsidies to a larger proportion
of an eligible population. Thus, a higher co-payment could result in an increase in the number of
subsidy recipients overall; but on the other hand, higher co-payments could contribute to a
reduction in observed subsidy receipt for lower income families who may be “priced out” of
participation in a subsidy programme due to costs (Schulman & Blank, 2004). Hence, recognising
the complexity of co-payments, Sweden has capped the maximum fees required to be paid by
parents at 7%, and the maximum fee decreases as the number of children increases in the family,
up to the fourth child where no fees have to be paid, applicable to both municipally and
non-municipally run services. Finland implements a sliding scale for family co-payments. In
Finland, income limits differ with family size. In brief, for a family of four persons with a monthly
income lower than €2,395 (HK$23,275), there would be no fee for ECEC. If the income is above
€5,724 (HK$55,600), fees are €290 (HK$2,800) for the 1st child and €232 (HK$2,250) for the 2nd
child for full time care. As for maternity leave, the longer the leave, the better for the health of
the child; it has been found that an additional week of maternity leave in industrialised countries
will reduce the infant mortality rates by 0.5 deaths per 1000 lives (Winegarden and Bracy, 1995).

Implications for Hong Kong - Considering all the measures implemented in these jurisdictions, it
can be seen that a multi-pronged and integrated approach to support comprehensive family and
child policy is often adopted to enhance the quality of child care with focus on child development
and support to young families. Yet, as a jurisdiction with a low tax regime, it might not be
feasible for Hong Kong to fully adopt the welfare state philosophy whereby the Government takes
up the full responsibility of providing quality child care services for all children. At least there is a
need to examine the provision and what areas need to be improved to mitigate the current
shortage of child care centre service to children, especially for the age group of 0 to under 2.
Thus, the current situation in Hong Kong still has gaps to close.

At present, owing to being dual income earners for meeting their financial needs and/or single
parents, some parents in Hong Kong simply cannot perform their child care duties. Furthermore,
parents ought be given a choice and be supported in whether to choose to stay at home and
resume work after giving birth to their children. However, the unique situation in Hong Kong
should be taken into account. Hence, in this regard, it is worthwhile for Hong Kong to consider
some policy measures from jurisdictions such as Japan, Singapore and South Korea which have
some similar population demographics, Asian family cultures and values, and fertility rates.

Nonetheless, Hong Kong should bear in mind the challenges that other jurisdictions have faced
with regard to their child care measures. Until very recently, Australia, with the transition to a
41
new Child Care Subsidy, had two different child care subsidy programmes, one being the CCB and
the other CCR , where CCB applicants automatically and immediately received CCR, no matter
whether CCB is approved or not. This policy however faced criticism, that the Government could
be giving financial aids to families who may not need it. In Finland, there is also criticism that
education is prioritised over care in terms of ECEC, leading to rural areas not receiving enough
child care services. Critics are calling for both education and care services to be balanced and
equally distributed to all children regardless of geographic location. In Japan, since the
announcement of free nurseries and kindergartens were made, there have been criticisms
regarding the poor use of resources as removing fees for day care has not addressed the social
issues of day-care shortage and shortening the long waiting lists. It has been argued that money
and resources should rather be spent on increasing the number of facilities, locations, and staffs to
fulfil the high demand.

2.3.2 Public investments in services and infrastructures

The supply of child care services is strongly linked with government commitment and investment.
Structural arrangements of child care services (such as capacity, quality of care, training of staff,
and access to the economically disadvantage children), can be improved if the Government can
increase its financial support.

The Government financial investment in the seven jurisdictions in terms of the proportion of GDP
expenditure on ECEC is compared in this section. 26 Figure 2.9 shows that among the seven
jurisdictions, Sweden had the highest percentage of GDP expenditure in ECEC of about 1.6%; next
to Sweden is Finland, it had 1.1% of its GDP in ECEC, in which 0.6% was spent on child care while
0.5% on pre-primary education; next to Finland was South Korea, with 0.9% of its GDP in ECEC,
0.6% of which was also on child care. For Singapore, the public expenditure in ECEC was only
about 0.01% in previous years. The Singapore Government had noticed the rapidly increasing
demand for child care places as more and more parents realised the importance of pre-school27
education in child’s development, and more and more others returned to work. Therefore, the
Singapore Government had increased the expenditure up to 0.2% of its GDP in 2017. Such
significant increase of Singapore’s expenditure in child care and education reflected the
Government’s commitment to enhance its child care system. The Prime Minister of Singapore,
Lee Hsien Long, said “We want every child to go to a good pre-school, so that all children,
regardless of family background, have the best possible start in life” (The Straits Times, 2017). In
terms of ECEC spending as percentage of government spending, Sweden remains at the top with
6.20% government spending on ECEC, South Korea the second highest with 5.90%, Finland the
third with 4.53% and Australia at 3.78%, whereas Singapore and Japan’s data were unavailable.
Among the seven jurisdictions, the percentage of GDP expenditure on pre-primary
education/services in Hong Kong was only 0.19%, with 0.13% on the pre-primary education while
only 0.06% on child care services. In terms of percentage of government spending, Hong Kong
stood at 2.0%.

26
The term ECEC is consistent with OECD family database for Finland, South Korea, and Australia. However, in Hong
Kong it is known as ‘pre-primary,’ and education and care are separated.
27
The term “pre-school” is used in each country’s context to maintain its originality. In Hong Kong’s context the
term “pre-primary” is used. Both terms generally mean before primary school for children.

42
Figure 2. 9 The percentage of GDP and government's spending on the pre-primary
education/services
Sources:
1. OECD, “public spending on child care and early education”
2. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/government_spending_dollars/
3. The World Bank
Notes:
a. The year of public spending of pre-primary education/services is 2013, except for Singapore.
The data for Singapore refer to expenditure in both child care and pre-primary schools in
2017, and the government spending is unavailable.
b. Data for Australia, Finland, South Korea, Sweden and Japan are from OECD Family Database
in 2013.
c. Data for Japan government spending is unavailable.
d. Government spending = Total spending by all levels of government but excluding public
enterprises.

However, as shown in Figure 2.5, the Government of Hong Kong has increased its spending on
pre-primary education/services over the period of 2013-2018. The spending on child care
services has risen from HK$1,038.1 million to HK$1,538.3 million, an increase of 48%, while the
spending on kindergarten education has increased more than child care services, from HK$2,648.4
million to HK$5,159 million. In 2017-18, the percentage in terms of government expenditure
reached 1.53%, and the percentage of spending on pre-primary education/services in GDP has
reached 0.26%, but still it is much lower than Australia, Finland, South Korea and Sweden.
Currently, the spending in kindergarten education is more than 3 times of the spending in child
care services. The consultant team is aware that kindergarten education in Hong Kong is
provided on universal basis whereas child care service is not, hence the higher spending on
kindergartens. But this illustrates that the Government of Hong Kong has the capacity to increase
the spending on child care services if it deems necessary.

43
Implications for Hong Kong - After comparing the Government’s financial investments in
pre-primary education/services, it can be seen that at present, Hong Kong falls behind the other six
jurisdictions. If Hong Kong Government can increase its budget in child care services and spend it
effectively and efficiently, the situation of inadequate supply of quality child care services in terms
of human capital and learning environment can be improved. Specifically, it will be beneficial to
the children if the Government can consider increasing its spending on child care services.

Hong Kong should take note of the efficiency in terms of child care financial support and
distribution that are, or have been present, in other jurisdictions. In Singapore, prior to the
spending increase on child care services in 2017, quality pre-schools was generally expensive and
was usually not affordable for low-income families. There was criticism that not enough
government subsidies to support high-quality child care provision. Since the expenditure has
increased to 0.2% of its GDP in 2017 and spending on where needs are, much has improved in
Singapore.

2.3.3 Quality improvement and assurance

In recent years, in South Korea, Australia, Singapore and other OECD countries, a strong focus on
enhancing the quality of child care underscores the significant concerns in the overall quality of the
child care system. Although varies across jurisdictions, it is however well recognised that the
governments of Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Sweden provide high-quality
child care in different areas, but overall places are limited and they have long waiting lists,
categorically demonstrating a lack of capacity/supply in them. Despite the concentrated focus on
improving quality and the relatively well compensated ECEC workforce, it is also recognised that
there is variability in the quality of care provided. Although evidence suggests that the quality of
teachers in the middle and upper end child care and kindergarten facilities is quite high, however,
this also suggests the likely presence of variability, especially in the lower end facilities.

In terms of the quality of care, the structural characteristics, such as staff-to-child ratios, education
and qualification of staff, are relatively easy to legislate and monitor. Table 2.7 compares the
staff-to-child ratios. It clearly illustrates the position of Hong Kong on staff practice in the
international context. As shown, the staff-to-child ratios are noticeably different and the older
the children, the ratio gets larger. For the care of infant aged 0 to 24 months, Australia, Finland,
South Korea and Japan have a much lower staff-to-child ratio than Singapore and Hong Kong (1:8),
whereas Sweden has no central regulation on the staff-to-child ratio. For the care of toddlers
aged 24 to 36 months, the ratio in Hong Kong is 1:14, two to three times higher than Australia and
Finland. In Hong Kong, for kindergartens where children are over 36 months, the improved ratio
under the new kindergarten education scheme of EDB is 1:11, but for child care centres for
children aged 24 to under 36 months, the ratio is 1:14. Overall, Hong Kong seems to be far
behind other jurisdictions, while Finland so far has the most favourable staffing ratio.

Scientific research on whether lower staff-to-child ratios benefit child development is mixed.
Some researchers have argued that as staff can spend more time interacting with each child
individually, there are inherent positive child development outcomes. However, researches have
also shown that staff-to-child ratios may have little-to-no effect on how the child turns out, and
that it is more important to focus on continually improving staff training and quality of services
(Perlman, et al., 2017). Moreover, the recent meta-analyses by Perlaman, et al (2017) reviewing

44
over 29 studies (31 samples) on staff-child ratios showed the current “permissible by licensing
regulations” range from 5 to 14.5 preschool-aged children of 30 to 72 months per adult. They
concluded that within the range, better ratios are not related to better outcomes for children.

However, there is strong evidence showing that lower staff-to-child ratios promote the health and
safety of young children, as the fewer number of children that each staff member is responsible for,
the more attentive the staff can be to each child’s needs, and be aware of the overall environment
thus reducing the child’s exposure to dangerous situations. It also reduces the likelihood that
staff become overstressed or overburdened from having too many children to take care of at the
same time. Additionally, lower staff-to-child ratios during the early-years of child care have been
associated with boosting social, interpersonal communication, and cognitive skills, for the future
development of the child (Miranda, 2017).

Therefore, Hong Kong should strive to lower its staff-to-child ratio, but at the end of the day, the
professionalism and quality of education and care provided by staff is the most significant factor in
the development of the child, and should be prioritised first.

45
Table 2. 7 ECEC staff-to-child ratios

Australia Finland Singapore South Korea Japan Sweden Hong Kong

Infant aged 0 to 1:4 1:4 1:5 (aged 2 to 18 1:3 1:3 (aged 0 to No central 1:8
24 months months) under 12 months) regulations, (aged 0 to under
1:8 (aged 18 to depends on each 24 months)
30 months) 1:6 (aged 12 to municipality and
under 24 months) varies. Ratio is
typically 1 adult
to 5 - 6 children,
Toddler aged 24 1:5 1:4 1:12 (aged 30 to 1:8 1:6 by 2016 average 1:14 (aged 24 to
to 36 months 36 months) at 1: 5.2. under 36 months)

Older than 36 1:11 (no more 1:8 1:15 (aged 36 to N/A 1:20 (aged 36 to Children start
months than 1:12.5) 48 months) under 48 months) entering
kindergarten at
1:30 (aged 48 to the age of 3.
60 months)

Source: Hong Kong SWD; Individual Commissioned Country Reports; International Perspectives on Childhood Education and Care; OECD 2012.

46
Apart from staff-to-child ratios, there is also consensus on the importance of guidelines for
standards of care and training programme for ECEC children aged 0 to 8. South Korea, Australia,
Finland and Sweden have provided good examples for Hong Kong to learn and improve on.

In South Korea, the Nuri or ‘world’ curriculum was formally instituted in 2012. It is a
child-centred play based curriculum written with the guideline that it can be implemented flexibly
between 3 to 5 hours each day, depending on the needs of the students and the institution (KICCE,
2013). It aims to integrate early childhood education and child care systems in Korea, as well as
ensuring a standardised quality regardless of the type of ECEC services. The Nuri curriculum is
designed to promote holistic development of children in five key areas, including physical exercise,
health, communication, social relationship, artistic experience and nature exploration. It was
implemented for all five-year-olds in 2012, and was subsequently expanded to child care centres
for three and four-year-olds in 2013. Further details on the curriculum can be found in the
country summary in Appendix 1.

Australia, however, has developed the Early Years Learning Framework to ensure that their
children receive high-quality child care and education in their early childhood setting. As it
describes, the framework is for their belonging, being, and becoming, so that the children can live
a fulfilling life, have time to play and try new things and have fun, and form their sense of identity
from an early age. This framework is not a “curriculum”, rather, it provides parents, carers and
educators with an overarching guide to learning and development in the years from birth to the
age of five. Early childhood education and child care providers also use this framework to design
and deliver their early learning programmes. Application of Belonging, Being, and Becoming
concepts in child care services for the aged 0 to 3 focuses on encouragement, involvement and
support learning in babies and toddlers. For the concept of Belonging for example, teachers
stress the importance of greeting and saying goodbye to children and families by name, and
involving children in daily routines and allowing children to help such as moving a mat. The
concept of Being is about valuing children as human beings in the present rather than who they
will become in the future. Providing children with space and time to dream, to relax, have fun
and just enjoy themselves under safe condition but still under supervision. For the concept of
Becoming, the focus is on learning in the environment and interaction, being tidied, organised and
setting up the environment again when it becomes messy after play. 28

In Finland, a key task of the ECEC is to support the children's holistic growth, development,
well-being and health from the age of 0-6 before primary education. ECEC also has an important
role in promoting lifelong learning as well as equity and equality. The curriculum guidelines
emphasise language development and the joy of learning. Thus, playing, physical activities,
artistic experiences, self-expressions, and explorations should be taken into account in planning
and implementing activities and be used as guiding principles in the interactions with children.
For the well-being of children, it also emphasises the importance of cooperation and partnership
between the staffs and parents. Specifically for children below the age of 5, performance
requirement is not expected, rather children’s own interests and needs serve as indicators to guide
the content of education. An individual ECEC plan is drawn up for each child, done together with
the staff and parents, taking into account of the child’s experiences, interests and strengths, as well
as needs and guidance. The ECEC staff is expected to observe and document the child’s

28
http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/nqsplp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/NQS_PLP_E-Newsletter_No63.pdf

47
development. Implementation of the plan is monitored and assessed regularly both among staff
and parents through regular meetings and questionnaires. 29

In Japan, the curriculum frameworks for the aged 0-5 are separate, kindergartens for the aged 3-5
focus on pre-primary education, day nurseries for the aged 0-5 focus on child care and child
welfare and the integrated ECEC centres for the aged 0-5 focus on both education and child care.
While the government develops regulations and disseminates the roadmap of education policy on
basic curriculum, teachers are given the freedom on what, how and when to teach the materials.
Parents are also involved in ensuring the goal of care and education is carried out and supported in
child care.

An important part of the pre-school curriculum in Sweden involves the fundamental democratic
value which are care and consideration towards others, solidarity, equality and responsibility.
Since 1998, the national curriculum lists five goals: 1) norms and values, 2) development and
learning 3) children’s own influence 4) cooperation between pre-school and home, and 5)
interaction with the pre-school class, compulsory school and the leisure-time centre. The central
government sets the standards and guidelines and the 289 municipalities are responsible for the
implementation of these goals. The day to day activities and programmes are designed and
collaborated between the ECEC centres and parents. The central goal is to build the foundation
for lifelong learning, and in the pre-school setting the main theme is to learn through play. For
example, pre-schoolers learn the concept of math and science through play which involves
different shapes, colours and patterns in a game of matching and building different sizes of blocks
with an aim to developing the notions of order, size and quantity.

Implications for Hong Kong on qualified staff-to-child ratio - While there are mixed reviews on the
exact universal staff-to-child ratio, the trends in other jurisdictions suggest that Hong Kong ought
to improve its manning ratio to be closer to the jurisdictions reviewed. At a first step, Hong Kong
should consider improving the qualified staff-to-child ratio especially for the youngest children
aged 0 to under 2 which is a critical period of child development, and especially for those in child
care centres. The current ratio of 1:8 should be adjusted to, at least 1:6 by reviewing the ratios of
other jurisdictions. By drawing reference to the teacher-to-pupil ratio in kindergartens, the
staff-to-child ratio for age 2 to under 3 in CCCs should be changed to 1:11. For the longer term,
the manning ratio should be further improved.

Nonetheless, in order to implement change successfully in terms of improving staff to-child ratio
and, the provision of infrastructure support in terms of providing and sustaining qualified child
care staff need to be considered. For example, the change of staff-to-child ratio might abruptly
need more child care workers who might not be available in the community. Hong Kong should
take note of the challenges experienced in South Korea, Finland and Sweden. In South Korea,
specifically, due to sudden demand for child care services manpower, obtaining the minimum
qualification requirement as Grade 3 child care instructor was compromised. The normal 1-year
training programme became a 2-week online course and passing an easy exam (Emery, 2017).
This led to poor quality in child care staff that was detrimental on child development and the
well-being of children. Despite Finland having the most favourable manning ratio among the
jurisdictions reviewed, however in some ECEC centres, there is still lack of workers with
29
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/assessment-early-childhood-education-and-care-oth
er-pre-primary-education_en

48
qualification of a pre-school teacher. In Sweden, while the staff-to-child ratio is not regulated, the
practiced ratio by each municipality is about 1 staff to every 5 to 6 children. When staff take sick
leave, sometimes more than 17 children under the age of 3 are left with just 2 or even 1 staff
member for several hours (Himmelstrand, 2015). One solution the Swedish have taken to resolve
this problem is merging smaller groups of 40 children and six to seven staff together and then
separate them again into smaller groups during certain times of the day. These larger groupings
mean that the teams of staff can be more flexible and children are less vulnerable if one of the
staffs takes sick leave.

Implications for Hong Kong on programme quality - Compared to the six jurisdictions where the
education and care (i.e. ECEC) has been adopted, the philosophy of Hong Kong’s child care services
as stipulated in the 1991 White Paper is mainly care-oriented. However, as evolved, currently in
practice elements of ECEC are regulated in the aided CCCs addressing the need for a holistic
development programme. However, these are restricted to aided CCCs and programme
implementation in non-aided CCCs is not informative. Thus, the training programme in all CCCs
(aided and non-aided) should be reviewed and standardised, drawing references from global
practices, and make amendments, if warranted.

However, the consultant team recognises that a basket of factors, such as cultural background, for
instance in terms of cultural differences, the Hong Kong society are more competitive and keen
towards “winning at the starting line” as discussed previously, whereas Finnish society focuses on
the children’s own interest as the core driver of the education content and performance are not
assessed for children below the age of 5. Another cultural distinction lies within the
responsibility of child-rearing. In Finland and Sweden, both father and mother share the parental
leave to take care of the infant and they are equally responsible on this matter; but in general
mothers in Hong Kong have been given a higher expectation to stay at home to take care of their
children. The change of paternity leave and allowing flexibility of parents to taking leave might
work well in Finland and Sweden but it might take time to widely be practised in Hong Kong.

It is however important to emphasise that the learning programme for children below the age of 3
is not about academic training in writing and learning. The programme guidelines are about to
create an environment and/or programme activities for children through play and exploration.
For example, in Australia, all the activities and programmes are being orientated into the 3Bs,
namely, “belonging”, “being” and “becoming”. It is how these philosophies can be crystallised
into activities by paying more attention to child development and constructing a tailor-made
programme for each child, allowing the participation of parents in child care services. Thus,
different stages of development ought to be taken, and also the implications of other quality
factors, for example, the staff-to-child ratios. It is therefore recommended that developmental
elements can be incorporated into the training programme of all CCCs, not only as a general
guideline as stated in the Operation Manual or FSA but with more detailed references to each age
group, for example activities for age 0 to 1 specific to sensory power etc.

In summary, Hong Kong should have regards to the drawbacks in the service quality of other
researched jurisdictions. This includes South Korea, where their Universal Child Care Scheme has
low public opinion, as the people have questioned the quality of services in those facilities. There
is an overreliance on the private sector to provide child care services in South Korea, and this has
led to trifold issues, namely 1) poor teaching quality, 2) sometimes children are treated poorly, and
3) poor food quality. In Australia, based on the service used, the quality of services however can
49
differ and there is criticism that teachers have a lot of administrative and clerical duties that taking
away their time in teaching. Therefore, Hong Kong should take these lessons learnt from the
experience of other jurisdictions into account as guidelines to how many child care workers and
support staff be hired, and what specific duties they should have. For service performance
monitoring and financial control, the Government should review if there are processes and
procedures that could be streamlined.

2.3.4 Training and working conditions for staff

Whether in child care centres or at home, the qualification and training of child carers have great
influence on the quality of care. Quality inputs support good quality learning environments that
foster children’s development and well-being. Structural factors such as manning ratios and
qualifications of staff, as well as process factors, including relationships and interactions between
child carers and children are both important contributors to high-quality ECEC (OECD, 2015).

Table 2.8 compares the requirement of child carers in the seven jurisdictions. As shown, Australia,
Finland, South Korea and Sweden have quite high requirements for staff working directly with
children as well as for other staff. In Finland, one in three of the staff in ECEC centre must have a
higher education degree composed of at least either a Bachelor’s degree from a university or a
degree from polytechnical school and in South Korea, as of 2013, about 25% of the child care
workers have completed 4-year university education and the percentage could be higher at
present. In some elite centres in South Korea, more than half of the teachers are even required
to have master’s degrees and doctoral degree but these could be privately run and cost would be
higher. In Sweden, all qualified day care attendants are restricted to work only as an auxiliary
worker in all ECEC workplaces, where their main role is to support the pre-school teachers, who
have completed 3 1/2 year specific pedagogical trainings in a university. Further, it is noticed that
parents in Australia, Finland, Singapore, and Hong Kong often resort to child carers and foreign
domestic helpers for child care. Apart from Hong Kong, the other three jurisdictions also have set
some education and training requirements for child carers and foreign domestic helpers.

Implications for Hong Kong - The Government can incentivise child care services operators to raise
the bar for professionalisation of child care services and incorporate some child developmental
elements into the training programmes of child care centres. This includes employing staff with
more knowledge on the contemporary knowledge of child development and learning, raising an
awareness of the impact of their behaviours on brain development, equipping home child carers
with more specialist knowledge of infants and toddlers, and providing opportunities for further
training for child care staff as well as child carers. The quality improvement of child care staff
should also be accompanied by the improvement of the salary structure and career development.
To date, indeed the Government has tried to achieve the above objectives through implementing
In-service Staff Training Subsidy to all CCCs from the 2007/08 school year to the 2010/11 school
year and further extended from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2015, as well as providing
additional resources i.e. Subsidy for Manpower Enhancement (“SME”) which are recurrent
allocations for all CCCs for a better remuneration for qualified CCWs in order to attract and retain
them in light of the new KG education scheme implemented by EDB with effect from the 2017/18
school year. It is hoped that through these initiatives in place that the quality of child care staff
can be retained. At the same time, a sense of professionalism should also be nurtured and

50
developed in the whole sector for future development. Further, the provision of education
opportunities among the tertiary institutes should be made available to ensure that enough supply
of high-quality personnel is in the service. At the same time, the career prospect, the
remuneration, and the working conditions are important for attracting and retaining CCWs in the
service. A stable supply of CCWs in CCCs is critical to the development of the young generation.

Hong Kong should exercise caution so not to face the same issues that other jurisdictions have
experienced. In Finland, in some areas, qualifications of child care staff are still generally low,
with some workers do not hold a teacher’s certification. Their salaries and associated low
working class status together with unclear career prospect, affecting the morale, service quality
and the number of new recruits. Hence, reasonable pay, benefits, and promotion opportunities
should be provided to ensure the provision of child care services. Singapore has similar issues
with high staff turnover, due to widely varying salaries and benefits between different centres.
Some NGO-run centres lack the necessary funds, it is hard for them to hire good teachers and offer
them with competitive employment packages. There is also a public image of child care workers
being unprofessional, and are sometimes seen as being “babysitters”, thus leading to less people
choosing this field as their career.

51
 Table 2. 8 Requirements of child care givers in the seven jurisdictions

Requirement of staff in service centres Requirements of home child carers

At least 50% of the educators in a service hold or are working toward their
diploma; at least one qualified early childhood teacher; majority of the paid Approved and registered in Australia's Home Education
Australia
primary contract staff have the relevant formal qualifications either with a association.
diploma or an advanced diploma or a Certification III or IV.
One third of the staff must have a higher education degree; a KG teacher must Family child minders working in family day care should have
Finland have a bachelor’s degree in education or social science; other staff have at least suitable education and competence-based qualifications for family
a vocational upper-secondary qualification in social welfare and health care. child minders.
In many day-care facilities, the child care workers have minimal (Grade 3)
certifications, 58% have Grade 1 certification and 25% have 4-year university
South Korea N/A
education. In other more elite facilities, more than half of the child care workers
have master’s degrees and doctoral degrees in child studies.
Foreign domestic workers must have a minimum of 8 years of
5 “O” level credits including a pass in English language and a Diploma in
Singapore formal education and possess the necessary educational
Pre-school Education – Teaching.
certificates as documentary proof of their education.

Kindergarten teachers or nursery teachers receive two years of training

Japan programme (tertiary level), followed by an induction programme (all public N/A
kindergartens and most private ones).
Pre-school teachers undergo three and a half years of pedagogical training at
Sweden university. Day-care attendants require upper-secondary qualifications (a 3-year N/A
programme).
Home-based child carers under NSCCP must complete a training
Higher Diploma in Early Childhood Education qualification. Registered in course provided by respective service operator. The training
Hong Kong
accordance with the Child Care Services Ordinance, Cap. 243. components include child care skills and knowledge, home safety,
etc.

52
2.3.5 Systematic monitoring and regulation

How child care services are monitored, regulated, integrated by different departments are other
important aspects to be considered. In this section, how monitoring and regulations are handled
in other six selected jurisdictions are reviewed.

In Finland, the Ministry of Education and Culture has the overall responsibility for early childhood
education and care, including pre-primary education. The Finnish National Agency for Education,
operating under the Ministry of Education and Culture, is the national expert agency responsible
for the development of ECEC and pre-primary education. It issues the national core curricula
based on municipalities and other providers (please refer to Finland Country Report in Appendix
1.1).

In Australia, there are several departments responsible for different dimensions of child care
services. Responsibility for ECEC in Australia is split between the commonwealth (national) and
the state and territory (regional) governments. At the federal level, the Department of Education
and Training is responsible for overseeing training and regulatory arrangements, and the
Department of Human Services is responsible for funding mainstream ECEC services for children
below school age. However, it should be noted that a large proportion of the costs of ECEC are
paid by parents (OECD, 2016). The Department of Education works with the state and territory
governments usually under their respective departments of Education to regulate and monitor
approved services. The Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (“ACECQA”)
oversees the implementation of the National Quality Framework and is responsible for assessing
the quality of services (please refer to Australia Country Report in Appendix 1.2)

In Singapore, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (“MSF”) and the Ministry of Education
(“MoE”) together managed the CCCs and KGs, respectively. But in 2013, a unitary Early Childhood
Development Agency (“ECDA”) was established to “serve as the regulatory and developmental
authority for the early childhood sector in Singapore, overseeing key aspects of children’s
development below the age of 7, across both kindergartens and child care centres”. The ECDA is
jointly overseen by the MoE and the MSF, and it is hosted under the MSF. 30 All the public
kindergartens are under the regulation of MoE (please refer to Singapore Country Report in
Appendix 1.3).

In South Korea, two different departments oversee the care for the younger children and the
education for older children. The Ministry of Health and Welfare oversees day care facilities that
serve children aged 0 to 3 while the Ministry of Education overseas KG care and education for
children aged 3 to 5. This gives rise to differences in budgets, teacher qualification and working
environments. Kindergarten teachers are generally considered to be more qualified than day
care teachers (please refer to South Korea Country Report in Appendix 1.4).

In Japan, the Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare (“MHLW”) regulates day nurseries, while the
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology (“MEXT”) oversees kindergartens.
Both agencies, under the supervision of the Cabinet Office, share oversight over the integrated
centres for ECEC. Despite having three offices overseeing the care and education system in Japan,
30
https://www.ecda.gov.sg/pages/aboutus.aspx

53
there are no specific plans for the Japanese Government to merge the regulatory powers of the
separated ministries and office, one possible reason is due to the rapid expansion of 220 000 new
day care places, which made it extremely difficult for the government to further restructure the
regulatory offices as this would require long-term adjustments and implementations, pioneer
against the long-historical offices which could further hinder achieving the short-term goal. The
possibility of unifying regulatory offices into one could only be made possible if deficient child care
centres were being resolved (please refer to Japan Country Report in Appendix 1.5).

In Sweden, in 1996, the Ministry of Education and Science took over the early childhood education
and care responsibility from the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs. It was a direct response to
their prime minister’s vision for the country to “become a nation of knowledge” 31. The transition
was to ensure that there is consistency and holistic child care and education, well-educated and
professional staff, thoroughly designed and well-resourced centres, and in valuing children highly
as individuals. The personnel change at the ministerial level had simply moved the team working
on pre-school from the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs to the Ministry of Education and
Science, which to date, did not seem to improve the overall educational quality or well-being of
children (please refer to Sweden Country Report in Appendix 1.6).

Figure 2. 10 The governance of child care services in Hong Kong

Figure 2.10 shows the regulatory structure in Hong Kong in which SWD oversees standalone CCCs;
while EDB oversees KGs. Under the harmonisation policy of pre-primary services, the JOKC was
set up in 2005 to monitor the operation of KG-cum-CCCs.

Separate systems of care and education can create a hierarchy of unequal resource distribution
that fails to consider the critical nature of early childhood development and prioritises ‘education’
over care, in terms of the required levels of skill for the staff and the prestige of the profession.
Thus, Finland has a unitary systems amongst the regions, while Singapore, South Korea, Australia,
Hong Kong have different regulatory systems where CCCs for the younger children (usually 0 to 36
months) are overseen by social welfare/health departments, and KGs overseen by government
education departments.

31
Taguchi & Munkammer, 2003

54
Implications for Hong Kong - Hong Kong should consider taking further action to streamline,
coordinate, if not unify, the regulations among the two monitoring bureaux/departments. As
evident in Finland and Sweden that taking a whole child approach involving a more unitary type
arrangement is useful for developing a child-centred approach. With reference to Appendix 1,
the responsibility of overlooking ECEC in Finland was moved from Ministry of Social Affairs and
Health to the Ministry of Education and Culture in 2013, and in Sweden from the Ministry of
Health and Social Affairs to the Ministry of Education and Science in 1996. Although Finland had
been taking a more layback approach in terms of pre-primary education, and in Sweden’s case
driven by a vision of the Prime Minister to “become a nation of knowledge” 32, however, they have
recognised the need to change it to a more education oriented goals to ensure their children
receive the appropriate guidance to develop healthily. As observed in Hong Kong, some parents
see the training programme of CCCs as very important as it can affect the chance of getting into
certain KGs which in turn can affect the chance of getting into certain strategic, well-positioned
primary schools. As each step is a lot more competitive compared to Finland and Sweden, thus
through a unitary system in governance of ECEC, parents can ensure their children do not just
receive mere care in centres but through interactions with educators, children’s physical, social,
emotional and cognitive developments will also be shaped. In other words, the “starting line”
towards a fully developed individual is being moved forward but through a play and self-initiated
learning setting. The current division of labour between EDB and SWD will need to ensure that
there is appropriate training programmes in place not just for children to develop holistically but
also help the children to transition from a child care setting to kindergarten setting. The
experiences in other jurisdictions, such as practices in Finland and Sweden, could serve as
reference for Hong Kong.

Hong Kong should also take into account areas of improvement found in other jurisdictions
regarding better cooperation and coordination between government departments which are
responsible for different aspects of child care and education, to avoid confusion over policies such
as the dual staff-to-child ratio (such as kindergarten aged children having a lower teacher-to-pupil
ratio at 1:11 and younger children in CCCs having a higher staff-to-child ratio of 1:14) as
implemented by the two different governing bodies for better clarification. In Australia, the
regulation and overseeing of pre-primary, primary and secondary schools are disjointed, with the
Department of Human Services in charge of the former, while the Department of Education and
Training monitors the latter. Therefore, this affects the transition of children from pre-primary to
primary school, specifically around curricula and expectations, i.e. the challenges in adapting to
new environment. Moreover, there is not much research to evaluate the effectiveness of the
curriculum for 3-year-old. This is similar to Singapore and Japan, where there is no fixed
government curriculum and it is up to the centres to develop their own curriculum, meaning that it
varies greatly from centre to centre, and affects the consistency of quality. In South Korea, there
is a gap in ECEC provision for children between the age of 6 to 8, as there is child care from age 0 to
5, while primary school starts at age 8. It is thus important to ensure that not only services do
not overlap, but they are also not missing or inadequate as well.

32
Taguchi & Munkammer, 2003

55
2.4 Summary

Along with each of the six selected jurisdictions, namely Australia, Finland, Singapore, South Korea,
Japan and Sweden, the philosophy and objectives of child care services in Hong Kong were
reviewed. First, it has been revealed that facing the rising demand for child care services, the six
jurisdictions have taken different approaches, and such differences are closely related to their
welfare regimes. Second, the comparisons have identified some areas which can be improved in
Hong Kong’s child care system: 1) lowering of the staff-to-child ratio; 2) increasing the level of
professionalism of child carers; and 3) making appropriate improvements to the coordination in
governance and monitoring between different departments which does not necessarily mean the
implementation of a unitary system, but better clarification especially in new staff trainings to
avoid any confusion.

56
Chapter 3 The current modes of operation and positioning of child

care services

This chapter summarises the current modes and positioning of child care services in Hong Kong.
To fully demonstrate the existing provision of child care services, the consultant team analysed
multiple latest data obtained from the Government, service operators/providers of day child care
services and websites.

The consultant team reviewed six types of child care services, including standalone CCC, CCCs
attached to KGs, OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs and NSCCP. For each type of service, four major types of
information are examined: 1) its overall profile in Hong Kong and across 18 districts; 2) its
availability in Hong Kong and across 18 districts; 3) its accessibility in Hong Kong and across small
areas Large Street Blocks (“LSBs”); and 4) its affordability in Hong Kong and across small areas LSBs.

The consultant team further addressed the following proposed research questions in this chapter:
1) What are the general profile and the three key indicators (accessibility, availability and
affordability) of child care services in Hong Kong?
2) Are there differences between the general profile and the three key indicators of aided child
care services versus non-aided child care services?
3) Are there any spatial differences in the profile of child care services in Hong Kong?

3.1 The overall profile of child care services

In this section, the consultant team presents the overall profile of the six types of child care
services in Hong Kong as of June 2017 as summarised in Table 3.1. For each type, the current
modes for both government-subsidised or aided and non-government-subsidised or non-aided
services are shown, in five dimensions namely 1) the number of centres by service, 2) the number
of places, 3) the staff-to-child ratio, 4) the service fee, and 5) the operating hours. All figures
referred to in this chapter are in Appendix 4.

57
 Table 3. 1 Overview of the six types of child care services in Hong Kong as of June 2017 33
Nature of Day Child Care Number of Service Target Age Group and Number Service Nature/ Operating Hours Service Fee and Financial Assistance
Services Units of places
Standalone CCCs Aided: 12 Target Age: 0 to under 3 Provide long full-day child care Aided:
Non-aided: 15 Aided Places: service by aided standalone CCCs. (0 to under 2): HK$4,385 - HK$6,300/month
Total: 27  0 to under 2: 724 8 am - 6 pm (Monday to Friday) (2 to under 3): HK$4,564/month
 2 to under 3: 14 8 am - 1 pm (Saturday) Non-aided:
Non-aided places: (0 to under 2): HK$6,250 - HK$8,250/month
 0 to under 2: 78 (2 to under 3): HK$1,680 -HK$9,580/month
 2 to under 3: 2 247
Full or partial fee waived for children from low income
families with social needs and receiving full-day child
care service
CCCs attached to KGs Aided: 246 Target Age: 0 to under 3 Provide long full-day care services by Aided full-day: HK$2,023 - HK$6,498/month
Non-aided: 271 Aided Places: aided CCCs attached to KGs. Half day: HK$1,100 - HK$4,100/month
Total: 517  0 to under 2: 255 8 am - 6 pm (Monday to Friday) Non-aided full-day: HK$ 2,474 - HK$14,431/month
 2 to under 3: 5 985 8 am - 1 pm (Saturday) Half day: HK$1,559 - HK$10,400/month
Non-aided places:
 0 to under 2: 774 Full or partial fee waived for children from low income
 0 to under 3: 20 596 families with social needs and receiving full-day child
care service
OCCS 214* Target Age: Under 3 (in aided Provides occasional child care Full-day session: HK$64/session
standalone CCCs); assistance on full-day, half-day or Half-day session: HK$32/session
Under 6 (in aided KG-cum-CCCs) two-hour sessional services at aided Two-hour session: HK$16/session
Places: 434 standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs Meal charged at: HK$6.4 (HK$6.5 with effective from
for parents or carers with sudden 1 July 2018)
engagements or various
commitments. Fee subsidy for low income families with social needs
Same operating hours as the services
attached to.

33
Source: SWD, 2018

58
EHS 165* Target Age: Under 3 Provides longer hours of child care HK$13/hour
(in aided standalone CCC); assistance at aided standalone CCCs
Under 6 (in aided KG-cum-CCC) and KG-cum-CCCs to meet the social Fee subsidy for low income families with social needs
Places: 2 254 needs of families and working
parents.
6 pm – 8 pm (Monday to Friday)
1 pm – 3 pm (Saturday)
Individual centre may vary their
operating hours depending on the
service demand.
MHCCCs 20 Target Age: Under 3 Promote mutual help on child care HK$8 – HK$26/hour (one of MHCCCs provides
(Aged 3 to 6 subject to centre within the neighbourhood. free-of-charge service)
operation) Activities mainly carried out by
Places: 275 volunteers, neighbours, parents in Full or half fee waived for low income families (only
the form of mutual help child care applicable to those MHCCCs that have joined the
group Subsidy Scheme) via the Subsidy Scheme for Mutual
Flexible operating hours Help Child Care Centre
NSCCP 18 Target Age: Under 9 Provides needy parents with flexible Home-based : HK$18 to HK$24/hour
(home-based child care service) form of day child care service at the Centre-based : HK$10 to HK$24/hour
3 to under 9 (centre-based care neighbourhood level and, at the
group) same time, foster mutual help and Full or half fee waiving for low income families via Fee
care in the community. Reduction/ Waiving Scheme
Places: 954 Two service components:
(Service operators have the home-based child care service
flexibility to increase the (“home-based”) and centre-based
number of places provided by care group (“centre-based”)
the child carers on top of the Home-based: 7am to 11pm (all year
minimum requirement set by round);
SWD to meet the actual service Centre-based: covers the evenings,
demand). some weekends and some public
holidays.
* Subvented ancillary services attached in the aided standalone CCCs/ KG-cum-CCCs

59
3.1.1 Standalone child care centres (“CCCs”)

Number of centres - There are in total 27 standalone CCCs in Hong Kong, including 12 aided and 15
non-aided. All the 12 aided standalone CCCs provide long full-day child care services for children
under 2 with only two which also provide services for children 2 to under 3 (one provides aided
CCC places while the other provides self-financing CCC places). On the contrary, most of the
non-aided standalone CCCs (14/15) focus on children aged 2 to under 3 and only three centres
which also provide services for children under 2.

Number of places - There are in total 3 063 places, with 738 aided and 2 325 non-aided. All aided
standalone CCCs provide long full-day service for children under 2 (724 places) with one centre
providing 14 CCC places for children 2 to under 3. The places of aided and non-aided standalone
CCCs are summarised in Table 3.1 as well as in Table 3.2.

Table 3. 2 Number of centres and places of aided and non-aided standalone CCCs

Types No. of Places for children Places for children 2 to Total

centres under 2 under 3
Full-day Half-day Full-day Half-day
AM PM AM PM
Aided 12 724 0 0 14 738
standalone
CCCs
Non-aided 15 22 28 28 65 1 114 1 068 2 325
standalone
CCCs
Total 27 746 28 28 79 1 114 1 068 3 063

Staff-to-child ratio - The minimum qualified staff-to-child ratio for children under 2 and 2 or above
is mandated at 1:8 and 1:14, respectively, by CCSO (幼兒服務條例) and CCSR (幼兒服務規例).
The 12 aided standalone CCCs and 15 non-aided CCCs are meeting this mandatory requirement.

Service fee - The fee charged for children under 2 is higher than those for 2 to under 3, with a
monthly fee of HK$4,385 to HK$8,250 and HK$1,680 to HK$9,580, respectively.

Operating hours - Aided centres open from 8am to 6pm from Monday to Friday and the morning
session (8am to 1pm) on Saturday, with a few non-aided centres varying their service hours
depending on the service demand (e.g. start or end a little bit earlier or later).

Pattern across districts - When looking at the district level, the spatial distribution of CCCs is
uneven across 18 districts. In 6 districts i.e. Islands, Tai Po, Sai Kung, Wong Tai Sin, Kwun Tong and
Southern, there are no aided standalone CCCs. When taking into account the non-aided
standalone CCCs, there are still 3 districts i.e. Tai Po, Sai Kung and Southern, with no standalone
CCCs (Figure 4.1 of Appendix 4). The non-aided standalone CCCs are mainly located in Kowloon
and Hong Kong Island with 1 370 places and 545 places, respectively. Among the 1 370 places in
60
Kowloon, around 80% of them are in Kowloon City (i.e. 1 080 places). There are only 364 non-aided
places in the New Territories as depicted in the heat map (Figure 4.2 of Appendix 4).

3.1.2 CCCs attached to kindergartens (“KGs”)

Number of centres - There are in total 517 CCCs attached to KGs in Hong Kong, including 246 aided
and 271 non-aided. Most of the CCCs attached to KGs target children 2 to under 3 with nine
aided and 19 non-aided are also providing places for children under 2. Aided CCCs attached to
KGs mainly provide long full-day service while non-aided CCCs attached to KGs are designed to
focus more on providing half-day service.

Number of CCC places - All aided and about half of the non-aided CCCs attached to KGs provide
full-day child care service for children 2 to under 3, with a total of 26 581 places with 5 985 aided
and 20 596 non-aided. For children aged 0 to under 2, aided places are 255, and non-aided
places are 774, making a total of 1 029 places (see Table 3.2). In terms of half-day child care
service for children 2 to under 3, 43 aided centres have morning sessions and only 12 aided
centres have afternoon sessions, while more than 90% non-aided centres (247/272) provide
morning sessions and around 85% non-aided centres (231/272) provide afternoon sessions.

Staff-to-child ratio - The staff-to-child ratio of aided centres ranges from 1:5 to 1:14. The
variation in non-aided centres is larger than the aided centres.

Service fee - The fee charged for children under 2 is significantly higher than that for children 2 to
under 3, with the mean monthly fee of HK$6,198 and HK$4,577 respectively. The fee of aided CCCs
attached to KGs is around HK$1,500 - HK$2,000 lower than the non-aided, for either whole day or
half-day sessions.

Operating hours - The operating hours of all aided CCCs attached to KGs are from 8am to 6pm on
weekdays and from 8am to 1pm on Saturdays. By comparison, the operating hours of aided CCCs
are much longer than those non-aided.

Pattern across districts - Figure 4.3 of Appendix 4 shows the geographical locations of aided and
non-aided CCCs attached to KGs. The spatial distribution of CCCs attached to KGs is also uneven
across 18 districts. The uneven pattern is more apparent in the heat map by district, age group
and service targets and service nature (i.e. whether aided or non-aided) (Figure 4.4 of Appendix 4).
The heat map shows that Eastern and Kowloon City districts have significantly higher provision of
CCCs attached to KGs with 3 276 and 3 843 places, respectively. The Eastern district occupies
more than half of the CCC services attached to KGs on the Hong Kong Island, and Kowloon City
district accounts for almost half of the CCCs attached to KGs in Kowloon. Those places in the
Eastern district and Kowloon are mainly accounted by the non-aided ones. The number of aided
places is, however found to be significantly higher in Kwun Tong and Sai Kung districts, with 644
and 543 aided places, respectively.

61
3.1.3 Occasional child care service (“OCCS”)

Number of centres and places - OCCS is designed for parents or carers with sudden engagements
or various commitments. Only aided standalone CCCs/KG-cum-CCCs provide subvented OCCS
services. Almost all aided standalone CCCs (11/12) provide OCCS, despite the places being very
limited (i.e. a total of 15 places). In Hong Kong, there are 214 OCCS centres with a total of 434
subvented places.

Service fee - Service fee is the same for all OCCS centres, fixed by the Government at HK$64,
HK$32, HK$16 for full-day, half-day and two-hour sessions, respectively, and, with effect from 1
July 2018, the meal charge is HK$6.5.

Operating hours - The service can be in the form of full-day, half-day or two-hour sessions.
Consistent with FSA, most of the OCCS places operate within the operating hours of the aided
standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs.

Pattern across districts - The distribution of OCCS places is mapped in Figure 4.5 of Appendix 4.
This service is lacking in most areas of Hong Kong. On average, each district only has 25
subvented places, varying from 8 (Islands) to 45 (Kwai Tsing).

3.1.4 Extended hours service (“EHS”)

Number of centres and places - To meet the social needs of families and working parents, EHS
provides longer hours of child care assistance at some aided standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs.
Almost all aided standalone CCCs (10/12) provide EHS service, and 155 of the 246 KG-cum-CCCs
offer EHS service with a combined total of 2 254 subvented places.

Service fee - Service fee is charged on an hourly basis, and determined as HK$13 per hour by the
Government for subvented EHS.

Operating hours - In most centres, the operating hours have been extended from 6pm to 7pm or
8pm on weekdays and from 1pm to 2pm or 3pm on Saturdays. Individual centres may vary their
service hours depending on the service demand.

Pattern across districts - The spatial distribution of EHS is mapped in Figure 4.6 of Appendix 4.
The average places of all districts are 147, varying from 78 (Islands) to 363 (Kwun Tong) (Figure 4.7
of Appendix).

3.1.5 Mutual help child care centres (“MHCCCs”)

Number of centres and places - As at June 2017, there are 20 MHCCCs in Hong Kong. Most of the
centres provide 14 places at any one time during their operating hours of service, with only one
exception providing 9 places.

Service fee - Service fee is charged on an hourly basis, varying from free to HK$26 per hour, the
average fee is HK$13 per hour.
62
Operating hours - Service hours are flexible and usually cover the evenings, some weekends and
some public holidays. Some centres also offer service by appointment in late evenings, on the
weekends and during public holidays.

Pattern across districts - The distribution of MHCCCs is greatly uneven across districts (Figure 4.8
of Appendix 4). The number of MHCCC places in Kwun Tong, Kwai Tsing and Yuen Long districts
are significantly higher than other districts, while 7 districts do not even have any MHCCCs, which
include Islands, Tuen Mun, Sha Tin, Sai Kung, Kowloon City, Wan Chai and Eastern districts.

3.1.6 Neighbourhood support child care project (“NSCCP”)

Number of projects - There are 18 NSCCPs in Hong Kong with each district having one project.
Each project has two types of services, including home-based child care service and centre-based
care group. Home-based child care service is mainly designed for children aged under 9 at the
home-based child carer’s own residence or at a suitable place approved by the service operator,
while centre-based care group is only available for children aged 3 to under 9. Activities in the
late evenings, such as after 8:00pm, are basic care.

Service fee - Service fee is charged on an hourly basis, and is determined by the service operators
and approved by SWD, varying from HK$18 to HK$24. The average fee is HK$20 per hour.

Operating hours - The home-based child care service is available from 7am to 11pm. In case of
very exceptional circumstances, such as sudden/urgent change of family circumstances and
without immediate support available from personal network, overnight stay is also provided by the
home-based child carers. The centre-based care group however covers the evenings, some
weekends and some public holidays.

Pattern across districts - The number of home-based child carers is significantly higher in Kowloon
City and Eastern districts; the average is 264 home-based child carers in each district. The total
number of home-based child carers as of June 2017 is 1 911. It ranges from 20 (Islands) to 437
(Kowloon City) as of June 2017 (Figure 4.9 of Appendix 4).

3.2 Government financial assistance to services

All the day child care services are fee-charging. Subject to the level of financial support provided
by the Government which are in different forms, the service fee of different child care services
varies. The types of financial support given by the Government to the service operators of the
day child care services are as follows:

 Aided CCCs (including standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs): The service operators
receive actual reimbursement of rents, rates, and government rents as well as subsidies
under the Child Care Centre Subsidy Scheme (“CCCSS”), Subsidy for Operation Enhancement
(“SOE”, excluding CCCs attached to KGs) and SME, which are recurrent allocations. Besides,

63
 there are also Lotteries Fund Grants for the fitting-out works, renovation and purchase of
furniture and equipment, if they are eligible.

 OCCS and EHS: Annual subventions are allocated under the Lump Sum Grant to the service
operators to deliver the services. These lump sums have taken into account the personal
emoluments and other charges applicable to the operation of the project together with the
recognised fee income, if any. The service operators have autonomy and flexibility in the
deployment of the subvention resources to meet their service needs in accordance with the
Lump Sum Grant Manual.

 NSCCP: NSCCP is funded as subsidy under the Central Items. Each service operator is
allocated an annual contract sum, covering Personal Emolument (“PE”) and Other Costs
(“OC”). The service operator is also given the option to apply for higher allocation for the
contract sum to meet proven higher service utilisation of its serving district. The service
operators receive actual reimbursement of rents, rates, and government rents.

 MHCCCs: MHCCCs are run by bona fide non-profit making organisations on a non-profit
making and self-financing basis. The service operators receive actual reimbursement of rents,
rates, and government rents.

The 12 aided standalone CCCs and 246 CCCs attached to KGs, receive the above-mentioned
subsidies from the Government. The parents pay about 80% of the costs while the Government
subsidises the remaining 20%. The EHS and OCCS are subvented services. NSCCP receives
subsidies from the Government while the MHCCCs are self-financed. Table 3.1 summarises the
service fees of different types of child care services.

Non-aided CCCs are mainly run by non-profit making organisations or private agencies. They are
only allowed to build up a profit margin of 5% and 15% respectively, to improve the quality of
services and sustain the service operations.

Low income families with children attending KGs or full-day child care centres are entitled to apply
for the Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission Scheme (“KCFRS”) from the Student
Finance Office (“SFO”) of the Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency. The
KCFRS is applicable to children receiving full-day services in CCCs. Details are tabled below in
Table 3.3.

The Student Finance Office adopts the Adjusted Family Income (“AFI”) method and “social needs
assessment” (please see Appendix 2 and Appendix 3) to determine the eligibility of a family for
full-day child care services and the level of fee remission. Children attending half-day child care
services are not eligible.

64
Table 3. 3 Financial assistance scheme –Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission
Scheme

Services Scheme
Standalone CCCs and - Means-tests and social need assessment
CCCs attached to KGs - Provide fee subsidy to children of low income families receiving
(Group age 0 to under whole-day care services in child care centres.
2)/ (Group age 2 to - Three levels of fee remission: 50%, 75%, and 100% of the actual
under 3) fee charged by the child care centres or the fee remission
ceiling, whichever is less.

3.3 Availability of child care services

Availability refers simply to the number of child care places available for all children in each district
with the assumption that all children need child care services. It is calculated as the number of
children divided by the number of places. The indicator of availability can reveal whether the
provision of services is sufficient in a specific area. Availability is one aspect of accessibility, which
is a broader concept that captures how easy or difficult for families to find and use regulated child
care services. Detailed compilation of the availability index, as well as explanations of the
calculations is shown in Appendix 5.

3.3.1 Availability of CCCs service (including standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs)

Overall availability (under 2) - Based on the most updated 2016 census data, there are 111 240
children aged under 2 in Hong Kong. There are 1 831 places for children aged under 2.
Therefore, the overall availability (aged under 2) is 1: 61, which means that with every 61 children
aged under 2, only one place is available.

Aided places (under 2) - The overall aided CCC places for children aged under 2 are 979. The
availability is 1:114, which means that with every 114 children, only one place is available.

Pattern across districts (aided under 2) - There is significant difference in availability across 18
districts. There are no aided places for children aged under 2 in Southern, Kwun Tong, Wong Tai
Sin, Sai Kung, Tai Po and Islands districts. In Sai Kung and Kwai Tsing districts, the competition is
also keen, with 390 and 361 children respectively, competing for one place. The district which
has the highest availability of aided places (under 2) is Wan Chai, with every 50 children having one
place available (Figure 4.10 of Appendix 4).

Non-aided places (under 2) - The general situation in Hong Kong is that the availability for
non-aided places among children aged under 2 services is relatively less compared to aided places,
with the availability of 1:131. This means that with each 131 children aged under 2, there is only
one non-aided place.

65
Pattern across districts (non-aided places under 2) - The availability of non-aided places for
children aged 0 to under 2 varies vastly across districts. Most of the non-aided places are in the
Eastern district with the availability of 1 place to 15 children. While in Kwun Tong, North and Sha
Tin districts, respectively, 1 193, 958 and 879 children have only one non-aided place (Figure 4.11
of Appendix 4).

Overall availability (2 to under 3) -There are 52 780 children aged 2 to under 3 in Hong Kong.
The number of places provided for these children is 28 842 with 5 999 aided and 22 843 non-aided
places. Therefore, the overall availability is 1:2, which means that for every 2 children in this age
group there is one place.

Aided places (2 to under 3) -The overall number of aided CCC places for both standalone CCCs and
CCCs attached to KGs for children aged 2 to under 3 are 5 999. The availability is 1: 9, which
means that for each 9 children there is one aided place.

Non-aided places (2 to under 3) - The availability of non-aided CCCs for children aged 2 to under 3
is significantly higher than aided CCCs, with 22 843 places, which means that for each 2 children
there is one non-aided place.

3.3.2 Availability of OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs and NSCCP

The nature of OCCS, EHS and MHCCCs services is more of occasional services to meet the demand
for sudden or ad hoc child care needs, and the utilisation rate provided by SWD was at 68%, 55%
and 9%, respectively (as at June 2017). NSCCP service operators have the flexibility to increase
the number of places of home-based child care services on top of the minimum requirement set
by SWD to meet the actual service demand. In other words, places of OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs and
NSCCP are not fully utilised and available for service users, hence it is not meaningful to measure
the availability of these services by comparing the number of places to the total population of the
age group. As such, availability for these services is not discussed.

3.4 Accessibility of child care services

Accessibility captures some important aspects of child care provision that are not included in
availability which focuses more on the relative ease of finding child care services. Availability is
relatively more suitable for larger geographical areas such as the district level in Hong Kong, to
explore whether the services are sufficient in some specific districts. Accessibility however, is
more suitable for exploring the variation in the ease of accessing to child care services across
smaller area levels such as large street blocks in Hong Kong. A higher accessibility indicator value
refers to a better accessibility. Detailed compilation of the accessibility index and explanations of
the calculations are shown in Appendix 5.

66
3.4.1 Accessibility of CCC services (including standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to
KGs)

Aided places (0 to under 2) - There are apparent spatial disparities in the accessibility of aided
places for children aged under 2 across large street blocks. Those areas with higher accessibility
of aided places for children aged under 2 are located mainly in Kowloon, while most of the areas in
the New Territories are short of aided places for children aged under 2, except areas such as the
Yuen Long and North districts (Figure 4.12 of Appendix 4).

Non-aided places (0 to under 2) - Regarding the non-aided places for children aged under 2, the
spatial disparity is more apparent than the aided. There is a high accessibility cluster hotspot
located near Kowloon City and Wong Tai Sin districts. Areas such as Eastern and Southern
districts on the Hong Kong Island also have higher accessibility, while, in the New Territories, the
non-aided places for children aged under 2 are limited (Figure 4.13 of Appendix 4).

Aided/non-aided places (2 to under 3) - In terms of both aided (Figure 4.14 of Appendix 4) and
non-aided (Figure 4.15 of Appendix 4), the situation for aged 2 to under 3 places are better,
compared to those for aged 0 to under 2. The spatial distribution across large street blocks is not
very apparent, although some “hotspots” and “coldspots” can still be identified. The aided and
non-aided places for children aged 2 also manifest a small difference in terms of spatial pattern.

Accessibility by income level - Aided places (both standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KG) are
generally better supplied in areas with lower incomes. Similarly, as expected, non-aided places
(both standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KG) are generally easier to be accessed in areas with
higher income, although the pattern is not as apparent as in the aided places.

3.4.2 Accessibility of OCCS and EHS

Overall pattern - The accessibilities of OCCS and EHS services are similar to standalone CCCs/CCCs
attached to KGs as they are provided by the standalone CCCs /KG-cum-CCCs.

Spatial pattern - In some New Territories areas, such as Yuen Long and North districts, the
accessibility of OCCS is relatively lower than other areas. Some hotspots of OCCS can be
identified in Kowloon City district and some large street blocks on Islands district of Hong Kong
(Figure 4. 16 of Appendix 4). There is no apparent hotspot or coldspot identified for the
accessibility of EHS (Figure 4.17 of Appendix 4).

Accessibility by income level - OCCS and EHS have different patterns across the areas with
different income levels. OCCS is easier accessible in areas with lower income, while EHS is easier
accessible in areas with higher income. It should be noted that the accessibility indicator measures
the potential ease/difficulty to access to the services, rather than the actual ease/difficulty to
access to the services. For example, in some areas, the utilisation of services might be lower,
while the indicator just simply measures whether in that area, the potential access to service is
easy or not, instead of considering its actual utilisation.

67
3.4.3 Accessibility of MHCCC and NSCCP services

Similarity - Some MHCCCs are co-located with NSCCP, and not all districts have MHCCCs (Figures
4.18 and 4.19 of Appendix 4).

Difference - NSCCPs are more evenly distributed than the MHCCCs, with each district having at
least one project and the number of home-based child carers vary among districts from 20 (Islands)
to 437 (Kowloon).

Accessibility by income level - MHCCCs and NSCCPs have different patterns across areas with
different income levels. MHCCCs are more accessible in areas with lower income, while NSCCPs
are more accessible in areas with higher income.

3.5 Affordability of child care services

The affordability of child care is a key aspect of child care policy regimes. Affordability is a sign of
how individual families can afford the financial burden of child care services. Whether or not the
service fee can be paid for is the major problem especially for those low-income households. The
affordability indicator is calculated as the median monthly service fee divided by the median
monthly household income. Affordablity is expressed in percentage (%), the higher the % the
lower the affordability of child care services relative to household income, and the lower the % the
higher the affordability of child care services relative to household income. Detailed compilation
of the affordability index and explanations of the calculations are shown in Appendix 5.

Aided standalone CCCs/CCCs attached to KGs - The overall affordability of aided CCCs and aided
CCCs attached to KGs is 21.4% and 15.7%, respectively. This means that on average, people need
to spend 21.4% and 15.7% of their household income on aided CCCs and aided CCCs attached to
KGs, respectively.

Non-aided standalone CCCs/CCCs attached to KGs - The overall affordability of non-aided

standalone CCCs and non-aided CCCs attached to KGs is 46.3% and 28.1%, respectively, which
significantly utilises a larger proportion of the residents’ monthly income than aided services.

Spatial pattern (lower affordability) - The spatial variations in affordability of aided standalone
CCCs, aided CCCs attached to KGs, non-aided standalone CCCs and non-aided CCCs attached to KGs
are very similar. In most districts in the New Territories and in some old inner-city districts such
as Sham Shui Po, Yau Tsim Mong, Kwun Tong and Wong Tai Sin, people need to spend significantly
higher proportion of their income on child care services. Most families need to spend more than
half of their income on child care services. (Figures 4.20 to 4.23 of Appendix 4)

Spatial pattern (higher affordability) - While in most areas of Hong Kong Island and Kowloon,
people have higher affordability for the services, on average, they only need to spend less than
10% of their income on child care services.

68
Difference between aided and non-aided services - The variation of affordability across areas is
more apparent for non-aided CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs, especially for the non-aided
standalone CCCs. Regarding aided CCCs and CCCs attached KGs, the affordability range is from
3% to 39% while the average gap between the lowest affordability group and the highest
affordability group is around 30% 34. The affordability gap for non-aided services are even larger
compared to aided services (Figures 4.20 to 4.23 of Appendix 4).

Service fee by income level - Service fee of aided standalone CCCs is on average lower in areas
with lower median monthly income. CCCs attached to KGs (both aided and non-aided) also share
a similar general trend.

Other types - The overall affordability of EHS is 3.07% based on the assumption that they use the
service for a whole month. Technically, each day only an hour service is provided, therefore the
monthly affordability gap between the highest and the lowest group is only around 4%. The
affordability for the other three types of services, i.e. OCCS, MHCCCs and NSCCP was not
calculated considering that these services rarely operate on a long term and monthly basis, and
thus the affordability is not indicative.

3.6 The current positioning of child care services

Currently in Hong Kong, the positioning of child care services is to provide support and assistance
to serve the needy families especially to those who have difficulty in providing proper care at
home. There are two broad categories of care with six types of child care services available. To
be more comprehensive, Figure 3.1 shows the three major child care providers in Hong Kong,
namely home-based care provided by parents, centre-based care and volunteer-based care
services subsidised by the Government.

The primary care givers are at home-based; i.e. parents and/or those with support from
grandparents, relatives and foreign domestic helpers. This form of care-parental care, depending
on their skills and behavior is fundamental to children’s esteem, school achievement, and cognitive
development behaviour in their early childhood (Landry, 2014), as well as children’s physical, social
and emotional development. Thus parent-child bonding is crucial for a child’s holistic
development and because parental qualities will also shape children’s psychological profile (Kagan,
1999), it is of utmost importance to ensure the value of home-based care is being emphasised and
perceived correctly by the public. In Hong Kong, one in eight families has a foreign domestic
helper assisting with house chores and child care 35. Though these child caregivers may be less
trained and professional compared to centre-based services, i.e. CCCs, they provide support to
parents enabling them to pursue their careers or other development. Some parents prefer this
option as it allows the child to stay home and not having the child travel in and out every day.
Others choose this option due to unavailable places at centre-based services.

34
For aided CCCs, the median affordability of the lowest affordable group is 39% and that of the highest affordable
group is 4%, thus there is a difference of 35% (39%-4%=35%). For aided CCCs attached to KGs, the median
affordability of the lowest affordable group is 32% and of the highest affordable group is 3%, hence there is a
difference of 29% (32%-3%=29%). The average difference is therefore 32% or “around 30%” ((35% + 29%)/2).
35
https://www.helperplace.com/domestic-workers-play-essential-role

69
Apart from home-based care, centre-based child care services, i.e. standalone CCCs and CCCs
attached to KGs, as well as the ancillary services attached in the CCCs and KGs-cum-CCCs, namely
OCCS and EHS are also very important services. With the increasing number of working parents,
the demand for centre-based child care services has increased rapidly. Even in families where
mothers are not working, they still apply for centre-based child care services due to the perceived
impression that CCCs with more professionally designed programmes are more beneficial for their
children.

The third one is the volunteer-based care services and the NSCCP and MHCCCs belong to this
category. These services are usually inexpensive and more affordable to parents. NSCCP targets
children from aged 0 to under 9 to avoid them being left unattended in the community with
parents working for long, unstable, or unconventional hours, informal or with family in emergency
needs. Parents with limited support network or financial hardship would often resort to this
service. They can choose either the centre-based care group or home-based child care service.
The MHCCCs are provided by local organisations, women’s associations, church groups on a
non-profit-making and self-financing basis for children aged up to 6. Child carers are volunteers,
neighbours or parents who are the members of the mutual help group, and they address more
short-term, occasional and temporary needs of parents. These volunteer-based child care
services are somewhat supplementary to the home-based care and centre-based child care
services.

Figure 3. 1 The three major child care providers in Hong Kong

Taking into consideration the three major child care providers in Hong Kong, to promote
high-quality child care would call for improvement in the quality of all, which ultimately lies upon
improving the trainings for carers and staff. A standardised or more equalised service quality
would mean proper training has to apply to different types of child care appropriate to the roles
each provider plays. In the volunteer-based care service or home-based care, this would require
70
more training effort for non-professionals such as volunteers, foreign domestic helpers and parents
to gain new insight and knowledge in child development, and raising parental awareness in the
importance of parental care for children under the age of 2. (For more detail recommendation
please refer to the recommendation section in Chapter 6.) Applying AAP’s statement in Hong
Kong, most of the time, the arrangement of early childhood care for children is a combination of all
settings. In fact, as discussed previously, according to literature, it would be best for children
aged under 2 to be cared at a home-setting environment, which further supports the objective
above in equalising the service quality in all services. And through upgrading and standardising
the service across all three sectors would provide parents a choice to select the best arrangement
for children’s development, streamlining the transition into kindergarten and mitigate the
discrepancy that might occur across the groups, and at the same time, address family needs and
support parents’ employment. However, it is important to note that there is NO optimal solution
for everyone, one size doesn’t fit all. Parental preference and availability of support will definitely
vary according to each individual case, thus at the end, parents need to make a choice on their
child care arrangement based on the provision of child care services.

The above section has highlighted one of the key policy objectives in child care service positioning
and achieving high-quality child care in Hong Kong, that is, optimisation of child development and
well-being.

3.7 Summary

This chapter focused on the first level of estimation and provides a general profile of the provision
of six types of child care services in Hong Kong. The gaps between demand and supply explored
are simply assuming all children need child care services regardless of family composition or other
socio-demographic factors. The higher levels of demand estimation based on family composition
and other socio-demographic factors are being further explored in the next chapter.

To fully demonstrate the existing provision of child care services in Hong Kong, the consultant team
analysed multiple latest data obtained from the Government, service providers of day child care
services and websites. For each type of services, four major types of information were explored,
namely 1) their overall profile and across 18 districts; 2) their availability and across 18 districts; 3)
their accessibility and across large street blocks; and 4) their affordability and across large street
blocks. The findings suggested that there are differences between the general profile and the
three key indicators of government-subsidised and non-government-subsidised services.
Moreover, there are also some spatial differences in the profile of child care services which have
been identified from maps with relatively higher and lower provisions.

The chapter also reviewed the current positioning of child care services, focusing on the current
state of the three types of child care providers, namely home-based, volunteer-based and
centre-based care. The consultant team also identified the central need for equalisation of
service across all three sectors mainly through improved trainings especially for non-professionals
and raising parental awareness to the importance of home-based care in order to make the best
possible decision for their children’s development.

71
Chapter 4 Identifying service gaps and assessing the existing supply

and demand of child care services

In previous chapters, a basic profile of Hong Kong child care services provision is examined, as well
as the availability, accessibility and affordability of child care services across space and different
socio-demographic background. The consultant team focuses on the following two research
questions in this chapter:

1) What factors affect the demand for child care services (e.g. family composition, quality of
services, cost) and how do those factors affect the choice?
2) Based on the identified factors influencing the demand, what is the expected demand of the
child care services in Hong Kong, in terms of the number of places, no matter the service types?

In this study, the consultant team collected data on child care services and the related information
through questionnaires targeting (1) current users, i.e. households with at least one child using
child care services at the time of data collection; and (2) non-current users including previous users,
i.e. households with at least one child who had used child care services previously but no longer
using the services at the time of data collection, potential users, i.e. households with at least one
child who was eligible to use and on the waiting list of the child care services at the time of data
collection OR households without any children but the mother was pregnant/the pregnancy was
under planning at the time of data collection) and non-users, i.e. households with at least one child
but not using and not on the waiting list of any child care services at the time of data collection.
Overall, the consultant team received 2 104 responses. Details of the questionnaire design,
sampling and promotion methods are provided in Appendix 6.

4.1 Reasons (factors) for using (not using) child care services

The data indicated the reasons for using (not using) child care services are quite consistent across
the six types of child care services and details are provided in Appendix 7. In particular, the
consultant team observed what commonly stands out from the results on why using the child care
services are apparently related to parental working status, i.e. parents have to work and whether
the child is taken care of by family (or household) members. It is fairly consistent with the
observation that those who chose not to use the child care services as their families (household)
members could help to take care of their children. These results clearly indicate that parental
working status and household composition (e.g. having grandparents and/or foreign domestic
helper) affects a family’s decision on whether to use (or not to use) child care services.

Apart from parental working status and household composition, two other factors that appear to
be influential on the decision of using child care services are related to service centre location
(convenience of the service locations) and the quality of services provided, in particular relating to
whether the services are able to facilitate child’ development. On the other hand, it is worth
noting that a commonly cited reason among those reported who never used child care services
was related to the lack of information on the availability of the services, i.e. do not know that there
are child care services.
72
4.2 Estimating the demands for the child care services

In addition to the abovementioned descriptive analysis, the consultant team also took advantage
of the data collected from the questionnaires to rigorously examine what factors affecting the
sampled households’ decision for using/not using child care services, and relatedly, estimating the
demands of the child care services in the population. A logistic regression model was used
(please see Appendix 8 for the detailed methodology and Appendix 9 for the components and
results of demand estimation). Selection of the factors was referenced to HKPSG (2017) 36, which
suggests that the provision of child care centres depends on the estimated demand, which would
be affected by socio-economic factors, district characteristics and the provision of other child care
support services within the district.

Results derived from the logistic regression models consistently indicated that both parental
working status and household composition are the two key factors affecting the decision for using
/or not using child care services. For instance, according to Table 9.17 to Table 9.19 of Appendix 9,
across all models, it is observed that children in households with non-working parents were less
likely to use child care services. In addition, across all models, it is also clear that children in
households with either grandparents or foreign domestic helpers (or both) were less likely to use
child care services. Based on the estimated model, the expected likelihood of certain types of
households in using/not using child care service was derived. These probabilistic estimations are
informative and used for projecting the demands of service, i.e. number of places for child care
services. The estimated and projected demand for child care services for years 2016 to 2031 for
children (1) aged under 2, (2) aged under 3, and (3) aged under 6 are shown in Table 9.23 of
Appendix 9 while the breakdown of the demand in year 2016 can be referred to Table 9.20 to Table
9.22 of Appendix 9. Deducing from Table 9.23, the general demand for child care services for
group aged under 2 and 2 to under 3 are summarised in Table 4.1.

Table 4. 1 Estimated and projected demand of the child care services for children population
aged under 3 in year 2016 to 2031 37

Aged under 2 Aged 2 to under 3

2016 32 736 36 568
2021 32 818 36 660
2026 30 874 34 488
2031 27 711 30 955

For the year 2016, the estimated demand for child care services for the population groups under 2,
and aged 2 to under 3 were 32 736 and 36 568, respectively. It is highlighted that the estimated
figures represent the demand for child care services as a whole. In other words, it includes the
demand irrespective of the types of service (i.e. centre-based child care services and
voluntary-based child care services), service nature, (i.e. full-day and half-day services), as well as
financing modes, (i.e. aided and non-aided services). Using the population projection from the

36
The summary of Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (March 2017) published by HKSAR Planning
Department is available at: https://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_en/tech_doc/hkpsg/sum/pdf/sum.pdf
37
All figures are rounded to nearest integer.

73
Census and Statistics Department, the expected demand for child care services for the year 2021
for the population group under age 2, and aged 2 to under 3 will be 32 818 and 36 660,
respectively (projected demand for child care services in the year 2026 and 2031 is provided in
Table 4.1). With these calculations, it is conceived that the existing demand for child care
services, as of 2018, for the respective children population groups will range between the expected
demand for child care services in 2016 and 2021.

It is important to note that there is an implicit assumption that the “expected demand” is
geographically invariant (demand for child care services are uniform across all spatial units, e.g.
districts). However, this assumption does not take into account the geographical characteristics,
for instance, some local geographical areas may have greater proportion of low socio-economic
status families, and hence such regions may have greater demand for child care services, or some
regions may have a greater proportion of older adult population and therefore, such regions may
have less demand for child care services. Given the spatial heterogeneity of child care services
demand, it is advised not to use the “planning ratio” as the sole mechanism for child care services
planning. It would be more appropriate to take the range as a general guideline, and use it in
conjunction with spatial-specific characteristics in service planning.

The consultant team has attempted to estimate the demand for aided centre-based services to
facilitate the future and long-term planning of aided standalone CCCs. However, after reviewing
the data collected from the questionnaires, it was found that there is insufficient information for
such demand estimation, as the questionnaires contained no specific questions for identifying the
respondents’ preference between aided or non-aided services. Moreover, the questionnaires did
not specifically asked non-users to indicate their preference on centre-based or voluntary-based
services. Given these constraints imposed by the data collected, the consultant team considers
that it would not be feasible to estimate the demand for aided centre-based services based on the
principles described in Appendix 8.

However, the consultant team believes that some existing administration data from SWD can be
utilised to provide some indication of the demand for aided centre-based services. The existing
administration data refers to the number of places of aided and non-aided child care services as at
June 2017. Although these figures do not represent the true population demand for the
centre-based services, they nevertheless provide some basis for estimating the number of places
the Government should cover for centre-based and voluntary-based child care services.
According to the information provided by SWD, the current ratio of centre-based services for the
population groups aged under 2 and aged 2 to under 3, are approximately 87% and 99%
respectively 38,39,40. These two figures could be indicative of the “expected” number of places for

38
For the total places of child care services, the number only includes the places of CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs and NSCCP.
Places of MHCCCs are excluded because it is of a low utilisation rate and will be re-engineered by phases from 2019-20
onwards as mentioned in The Chief Executive’s 2018 Policy Address (available at:
https://www.policyaddress.gov.hk/2018/eng/pdf/PA2018.pdf).
39
There are totally 2 114 places (i.e. the sum of places of CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs and NSCCP) for children aged below 2.
Among all, there are 1 831 places for centre-based services and 283 places for voluntary-based services. Thus, the
current ratio of places for centre-based services to all services is approximately 87% (i.e. 1 831/2 114). Source:
SWD, 2018
40
There are totally 29 027 places (i.e. the sum of places of CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs and NSCCP) for children aged 2 to
below 3. Among all, there are 28 842 places for centre-based services and 185 places for voluntary-based services.

74
the centre-based services provided by the Government. However, from stakeholder
engagements, the consultant team is aware that the lack of supply of centre-based services in the
current setting may have contributed to the use of voluntary-based services, i.e. a number of
existing users of the voluntary-based services actually prefer to use centre-based services, but yet
due to unavailability, they used voluntary-based service as an alternative.

Given this observation, the consultant team expected that the number of places for centre-based
services that should be provided by the Government for children aged under 2 would be greater
than the current 87% although the exact percentage is not known. Considering this, the
consultant team used 95% (although arbitrary) for the projection. The purpose is to
counterbalance the lack of supply observed. The remaining 5% will be supported by child care
services other than CCCs, e.g. the NSCCP, which may provide flexibility outside the service hours of
aided CCCs. As such, the number of places needed for centre-based service for children aged
under 2 and aged 2 to under 3 in 2016 are 31 099 and 36 335 respectively while the number of
places needed for voluntary-based services for children aged under 2 and aged 2 to under 3 in
2016 are 1 637 and 233, respectively. The estimated number of places needed for year 2021 to
2031 can be found in Table 4.2.
Table 4. 2 Estimated number of places for centre-based and voluntary-based child care services
(percentage of specific types of services to child care services as a whole) for children population
aged under 3 in years 2016 to 2031 41

Aged under 2 Aged 2 to under 3

Centre-based Voluntary-based Centre-based Voluntary-based
2016 31 099 (95%) 1 637 (5%) 36 335 (99%) 233 (1%)
2021 31 177 (95%) 1 641 (5%) 36 426 (99%) 234 (1%)
2026 29 330 (95%) 1 544 (5%) 34 268 (99%) 220 (1%)
2031 26 326 (95%) 1 386 (5%) 30 758 (99%) 197 (1%)

To further estimate the demand for aided centre-based services, scenario analysis was conducted.
In the first scenario (1), it is assumed that the number of places will be entirely provided by the
Government. In other words, there is no role from the private sector in the market. It is
expected that the Government needs to provide 31 099 places for group aged under 2 and 36 335
places for children aged 2 to under 3 in 2016. However, given the existing setting, i.e. the
public-private split for group aged under 2 is 53% vs 47% while that for group aged 2 to under 3 is
21% vs 79%, where a sizable proportion of the services were actually covered by the private sector
particularly for the group aged 2 to under 3, thus this assumption that the Government is the
single provider for all centre-based place actually does not hold. The consultant team thus made
another estimate, the second scenario (2), assuming that the existing public-private split of service
provision will hold, the number of places needed for aided centre-based services would be
different from the above scenario. The Government is expected to cover 16 628 places for group
aged under 2 and 7 557 places for group aged 2 to under 3 in 2016. Still, a third scenario (3) is
generated, assuming the current 852 non-aided centre-based places for under 2 and 22 843
non-aided centre-based place for aged 2 to under 3 remain the same, the Government will be the

Thus, the current ratio of places for centre-based services to all services is approximately 99% (i.e. 28842/29027).
Source: SWD, 2018
41
All figures are rounded to nearest integer.

75
 provider of the remaining balance of demanded places for future centre-based services. The
Government is then expected to provide 30 247 place for the group under 2 and 14 492 places for
the group aged 2 to under 3 in 2016. The correspondent figures for years 2021 to 2031 estimated
based on these three scenarios are summarised in Table 4.3.

Table 4. 3 Estimated places of aided centre-based child care services (percentage of places to
age-specific population) for children population aged under 3 in year 2016 to 2031 42,43,44

Aged under 2 Aged 2 to under 3

(1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3)
Number of 852 Number of
Government Government
places for 22 843 places
as the single as the single
Public-private non-aided Public-private for non-aided
provider in the provider in the
split of the centre-based split of the centre-based
centre- based centre- based
market as the services market as the services
child care child care
existing ratio remain existing ratio remain
service market service market
unchanged unchanged
31 099 7 557
2016 16 628 (15%) 30 247 (27%) 36 335 (69%) 13 492 (26%)
(28%) (14%)
31 177 7 576
2021 16 670 (15%) 30 325 (27%) 36 426 (69%) 13 583 (26%)
(28%) (14%)
29 330 7 128
2026 15 682 (15%) 28 478 (27%) 34 268 (69%) 11 425 (26%)
(28%) (14%)
26 326 6 398 7 915
2031 14 076 (15%) 25 474 (27%) 30 758 (69%)
(28%) (14%) (26%)

Based on the estimated places of aided centre-based child care services, the respective planning
ratio for the population groups under the age of 2 and aged 2 to under 3 are estimated. First, if
the Government becomes the single provider (scenario 1) in the child care services market, the
planning ratio should be 85 per 20 000 general population and 99 per 20 000 general population,
respectively. On the other hand, assuming that the public-private split of the market holds
(scenario 2), the planning ratio is expected to be 45 per 20 000 general population and 21 per
20 000 general population, respectively. Still, if the number of current places remain the same
(scenario 3), the planning ratio is expected to be 82 per 20 000 general population and 37 per
20 000 general population. The corresponding figures for years 2021 to 2031 estimated based on
these three scenarios are summarised in Table 4.4 below.

42
All figures are rounded to nearest integer.
43
The general demand of child care services for children aged 2 to under 3 is a simple subtraction of the demand for
children aged under 3 to children aged under 2.
44
% is calculated based on the estimated demand and the population size of the interest age group. For example, the
% in 2016 for children aged under 2 is approximately 28% (i.e. 31,099/111,240).

76
 Table 4. 4 Planning ratio of aided centre-based child care services for children population aged
under 3 in year 2016 to 2031 45,46

Aged under 2, Aged 2 to under 3,

per 20 000 general population per 20 000 general population
(1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3)
Number of 852 Number of
Government Government
Public- places for 22 843 places
as the single as the single Public-private
private split non-aided for non-aided
provider in the provider in the split of the
of the market centre-based centre-based
centre- based centre-based market as the
as the services services
child care child care existing ratio
existing ratio remain remain
service market service market
unchanged unchanged
2016 85 45 82 99 21 37
2021 82 44 80 96 20 36
2026 75 40 73 88 18 29
2031 66 35 64 77 16 20

From stakeholder engagements, the consultant team was aware that with the high operational
costs, the private sector has relatively less interest in providing centre-based child care services for
the children population aged under 2. On the other hand, there is a greater interest among the
private sector to contribute in the market for the age group of 2 to under 3. Given this
information, it is expect that, given that there is no substantial change in the existing institutional
environment, i.e. a substantial increase in incentive, the private market may unlikely to take up a
substantial proportion of the centre-based child care services provision, particularly for the age
group of under 2. Given this circumstance, the consultant team assumes that the current 852
places will remain for the age group under 2, and recommends that the Government should adopt
a planning ratio for children aged under 2 which reflects that it will be the dominant provider in
the market, providing the remaining balance of the number of demanded places required for the
future according to scenario 3. On the other hand, for the group aged 2 to under 3, the estimate,
given the information provided by the informants, is that the private sector may have a greater
interest in participating in the market, the Government should adopt scenario 2.

To conclude, the planning ratio for children aged below 3 would be 103 places per 20 000 general
population (i.e. 82 places per 20 000 general population for children aged under 2, plus 21 places
per 20 000 general population for children aged 2 to 3.

4.3 Summary

This chapter highlighted the factors that may affect the demand for the child care services, and the
findings clearly highlighted that the parents’ working status and family arrangement (and among

45
All figures are rounded to nearest integer.
46
As stated in Appendix 8, the planning ratio can be calculated by formula 8.7. For example, the planning ratio using
the assumption that government is the single provider in the centre-based child care service market for group aged
under 2 is approximately 85 per 20 000 general population, i.e. 31 099/7 336 600*20 000.

77
few others) are the key factors. This chapter also estimated the expected demand for the child
care services in general which indicated that the estimated demand for child care services will
increase in next few years but then shrinks afterwards, it is suggested that the planning ratio for
child care places should be updated accordingly.

78
Chapter 5 Service modes and financing modes of the child care

services

To understand the comments and unmet expectations of the service modes and the financing
modes towards the current child care services, this study collects the stakeholders’ opinions and
data related to the above-mentioned two aspects. Qualitative data were collected from different
stakeholders through one-on-one discussions, focus group interviews as well as the general public
via email and deputation. Also, some information from the questionnaires also provide crucial
information on the financing modes of the services. Overall, this information provides insight of
the future development of the service model/mode and financing mode of the child care services.
Sampling, data collection, questions, and analysis of the qualitative data are shown in Appendix 11.

5.1 Stakeholders’ opinions on the current service modes and financing

modes

In this section, findings from the interviews and comments from the focus group interviews, mainly
on the service modes will be presented. Relevant quantitative data from the questionnaires that
provide insight on these issues are also included in this section. For comments from Government
officials, please see Appendix 12. For comments received from the general public by deputations
and emails, please see Appendix 13.

Theme 1: Discrepancies between parents’ expectation and existing services

The management staff perceived that professional staff is needed to provide “edu-care” and
improve the service. Parents were also expecting education elements in child care services, e.g.
language courses for the children. They expected their children to have better development in
CCCs, such as systematic trainings for their children, services provided by qualified staff or
education professionals, and an interactive environment that cannot be made possible by hiring
individual foreign domestic helpers. Parents were also disappointed that there was not much
available quality child care service in their districts. Furthermore, a non-service user revealed
that CCCs could be more useful if the development of social skills among children with special
developmental needs is being catered for.

Theme 1: Observations
Apparently, a common theme shared among different types of stakeholders is that there are
discrepancies between the parents' expectations on the quality of early childhood care and the
limitations that they experienced or perceived in current child care services. Some key words
related to their ideal type of child care were often used during focus group discussions, such as
child development, education, and interactive environment, etc. In particular, parents who
received higher education in overseas jurisdictions or have had experiences living abroad expected
to find quality child care service in Hong Kong, like those commonly found in other jurisdictions.
Yet, to their disappointment, this sort of service featuring both "care" and "development" for their
children could not easily be found available in Hong Kong, not to mention, in their own

79
neighbourhoods, or to fit-in their long working hours’ schedule. It is a general belief that a
structural programme that is regularly and consistently run by sufficient and professionally trained
human resources would benefit their children's well-being. Besides, parents who need to work
or receive no support from their family members may find child care services particularly critical
because it can provide a stable and safe environment for their young children.

According to EDB, education elements in child care services have to be considered prudently as it
will risk advancing the learning and teaching in kindergartens to CCC. “Language courses for
children in CCC”, for instance, is pre-mature for children aged 0 to 3. Even for kindergarten
students, learning of language should not take the form of “language courses”. Instead, an
integrated approach should be adopted with emphasis on learning through play, free exploration
and interaction with peers and teachers. Parents’ views should be considered with regard to
professional judgement from the perspective of children’s development.

Theme 2: Same qualification, same pay

Management also perceived that the Government positioned child care services as a remedial
service and is inadequate to respond to the changing needs of Hong Kong.

Management further perceived that it is an issue that the salary for CCWs working in KG as
teachers can earn higher salary than those working in CCCs, even though they hold the same
qualifications. For the staff at the frontline level, they suggested that the salary for early
childhood workers for children aged under 2 should be treated as the same as other teachers of
early childhood education. This adjustment would demonstrate the importance in equality of the
services for the age groups of 0 to under 2 and 2 to 6 years old children.

Theme 2: Observations
The most dominant issue that is of the concern of many service providers (12 interviewees) is that
even with the same level of qualification and education, the staff serving children aged under 2 in
CCCs have been receiving a lower level of remuneration than their counter-parts in KGs who are
serving children aged 3-6. Thus, there was a strong request for measuring up to the salary scale
currently applied to the teachers working in KGs. However, the work requirements are totally
different for CCWs in CCCs and KG teachers, their remunerations are not comparable.

However, the above observations may have been ameliorated from some recent developments, in
particular, in light of the implementation of the new KGs education scheme by EDB in the 2017/18
school year, additional resources, namely SME was provided for standalone CCCs and the CCC
portion of aided KG-cum-CCCs for enhancing the remuneration of qualified child care staff to retain
and attract those staff starting from the 2017/18 school year. With the SME, additional subsidy is
given to make the salary level of child care staff, i.e. Child Care Supervisors (“CCS”s) and CCWs in
line with the upward adjustment of the salary range of KG staff as well as maintain quality service
for children and provide support to the aided standalone CCCs and the CCC portion of the aided
KG-cum-CCCs.

Theme 3: Lower staff-to-child ratio and better staff training and development
There are specific views on how to improve human resource planning suggested by the frontline
level staff for different settings. For the service of standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs, the
interviewees suggested that the existing staff-to-child ratio cannot cater for the needs and

80
therefore suggested to improve the staff-to-child ratio to 1:4 for children aged 0 to under 1 or 1:6
for children aged 1 to under 2.

To assure service quality, mentorship programme was also suggested to enable fresh graduates to
provide quality service. A clear career development path with ranks divided into Child Care
Worker I, Child Care Worker II, and Senior Child Care Worker is suggested. This would help to
recognise their professional experience. Besides, social workers are suggested to station at
kindergartens and nurseries to support the families in need 47.

For the service of MHCCCs and the NSCCP, there was ambivalence in arranging the children under
the care of home-based child carers who are paid as volunteers with only a small amount of
incentive payment. NSCCP is a mutual help support child care project rather than an
employment project. Home-based child carers are working as volunteers and receive incentive
payment as a recognition. Higher amounts of incentive payments were considered as a way to
attract more home-based child carers for this service. Management attributes the difficulties in
recruiting volunteer home-based child carers due to the unattractive level of incentive payment.
The incentive payment for the home-based child carers of NSCCP is suggested to be reviewed and
increased. Some interviewees proposed that the incentive payment could be increased to the
same level of the statutory minimum wage.

Furthermore, the existing career path of the staff in CCCs is less favourable because there are
fewer positions in the supervisory ranks.

According to SWD, there is an adequate supply of manpower for child care services as there are
more than 2 000 holders of higher diplomas, as well as degree graduates in early childhood
education joining the market each year. There are also new recognised training programmes
offered by training institutues, which should boost the number of new staff.

Regarding the administrative system, several aspects are worth to be reviewed. The interviewees
complained that there were a lot of administrative works which increase the workload of staff.
For instance, the interviewees (from front-line service provider and management level) revealed
that KG-cum-CCCs need to be compliant with different administrative requirements set by both
SWD and EDB, such as, preparing two different and separate sets of financial reports for SWD and
EDB; to provide detailed reporting about education elements and staff development in the service.
As the format of required documentations was different, it created extra workload because of this
dual-reporting system. This requires staff members to perform additional administrative work in
comparison to their counterparts in KGs. For aided centres, some interviewees complained that
the Government’s subsidy does not cover the cost of clerical staff but there are much clerical
works to be done to satisfy the Government’s micro scrutiny on the tiniest spending.

For MHCCCs and NSCCP, NGOs are suggested to increase the incentive payment for the
home-based child carers (e.g. to the same level of statutory minimum wage) and extend the
service hours of the MHCCCs to meet the needs of parents.

47
As promulgated in the Chief Executive’s 2018 Policy Address, the Government will launch a three-year pilot scheme
in the 2018/19 school year to provide social work services in phases for about 150 000 pre-school children and their
families in more than 700 subsidised/aided CCCs, KGs and KG-cum-CCCs in Hong Kong for early identification and
provision of assistance to pre-school children and their families with welfare needs.

81
Possible solutions to improve the staff-to-child ratio and stabilise the staff's turn-over rate were
also discussed. To reduce and relieve teacher’s 48 workload in CCCs, one of the possible solutions
was to employ non-professional staff at a ratio of 2 professionals and 1 non-professional staff
serving 16 children. To improve the career path by dividing staff into different ranks (e.g. Child
Care Worker I, Child Care Worker II, and Senior Child Care Worker) was a suggestion proposed by
an interviewee. However, the detailed functions and division of labour amongst the proposed
ranks may need to be further explored.

From service users’ perspective, they perceived the reasons for high staff turn-over rate, especially
in the service for children aged under 2, are due to: 1) unattractive salary; and 2) demanding
workload (e.g. low staff-to-child ratio, long working hours, physically demanding work that may
cause occupational injuries). They suggested that it might be helpful to increase the number of
non-professional staff for non-educational tasks.

In general, the service users found it acceptable that the voluntary-based child care service are
provided by trained volunteer carers, but preferably to employ professional staff (e.g. social
workers, child care workers) if resources are allowed.

Theme 3: Observations
In general, different stakeholders look for better quality of child care services in different settings
to improve the overall human resource planning, including higher staff-to-child ratio, lower
turn-over rate with better career prospect, training and development programme. For
volunteer-based child care services, such as MHCCCs and NSCCP, they expected a higher incentive
payment for home-based child carers to attract more volunteer child carers to join the service.
Lack of stable supply of volunteer child carers seemed to be a challenge faced by these types of
service settings.

Theme 4: Location, service targets and accessibility should be considered in service planning
In general, the interviewees suggested that location, estimated number of service targets and
accessibility should be considered as basic criteria in planning the provision for child care services.
Parents expected a location which is easily accessible, e.g. close to MTR stations, within 30
minutes travelling time. Also, they found it acceptable to be placed on the waiting list for child
care services for a duration ranging from 1-2 months and 3-6 months, but the waiting time should
be made known to applicants in a more transparent way. For service hours, longer operating
hours of child care services, e.g. 7-8 hours for toddlers/10-12 hours for infants, was desirable.
Service fee was also suggested to be reviewed. For example, non-service users suggested setting
it at a range from HK$2,500 to HK$3,500 per month for a whole-day programme. The public also
suggested that each district should have at least two standalone CCCs for children aged 0 to under
3 and 50 to 80 places for each, and the service fee should be capped at 10% of the median family
income in Hong Kong.

Theme 4: Observations
Parents expected to have higher accessibility to child care services and wished to be more certain
on how long it would take for their children to be admitted into these services. This information

48
For child care services, should be child care workers though interviewees mentioned “teachers”.

82
seemed to be quite crucial for them to decide on what would be the best option for them to take
care of their children. In general, they found that the transparency of the current child care
service operations, especially in the application procedure, e.g. the waiting time, and service
availability, e.g. available service and quota, are in need of improvement.

Theme 5: Service positioning and operation of MHCCCs/NSCCP need to be enhanced

Quite a few non-service users indicated that they did not know the service of MHCCCs/NSCCP, thus
more promotion on these services is required. On the other hand, the management level
revealed that the reason for the MHCCCs not been highly promoted was due to limited quotas.
The managements also found that the current role of NSCCP unclear. It was more on
home-based babysitting instead of systematic training for children, which was much more
preferred by the parents. Many service users further agreed that they preferred centre-based
child care services rather than arranging their children to home-based child carers’ residence.
From the perspective of service providers (management level and front-line level), the incentive
payment for home-based child carers should be reviewed and increased. Instead of
“professionalisation”, the management proposed that the training for child carers serving in the
MHCCCs could be vocationalised, and also their tasks be more standardised to ensure the quality
of the services. This service could be provided by trained child carers, who would receive salary
according to their training received and experiences on child care.

Theme 5: Observations
The design of MHCCCs and NSCCP was meant to optimise community resources to meet the child
care needs within the neighbourhoods for the families in need and promote mutual help at the
neighbourhood. Due to a number of limitations, these services turned out to be not in demand.
The provision of MHCCCs and NSCCP seems not able to meet parents’ expectation on child care.
The views on how to improve these services in general were quite diverse. Service providers
seemed to share a common view that an upward increase of the incentive payment for
home-based child carers under NSCCP should be put on the top priority of consideration.

Key theme 6: The positioning of OCCS need to be reviewed

In general, there were requests that quotas of occasional and temporary child care services (e.g.
OCCS, MHCCC) should be increased to cater parents’ need in ad hoc situations. These services
target both full-time parents and dual-career parents. Many interviewees indicated that the
occasional child care services could serves as an option of respite care for their children.
Extending the operating hours, e.g. till 9 pm was suggested to meet their child care needs due to
long working hours. For some working parents, this service is very helpful, especially when their
foreign domestic helper(s) go on a 2-weeks home leave in every 2 years.

Key theme 6: Observations

There is a discrepancy between the low utilisation of OCCS and the interviewees’ opinions from
non-service users which suggested increasing the quota of OCCS. There are two possible reasons
for the discrepancy. Firstly, the existing quota of OCCS is too limited (e.g. one interviewee
revealed that there are only 2 quotas available in the child care centre nearby her residence). It
might give parents’ impression that the quotas of OCCS are very limited that discourage them from
using this service eventually. Secondly, according to non-service users’ opinion, OCCS allows
full-time parents to take a short break from taking care of their children and get assistance in any
“just in case” situation.

83
In addition, the existing operating hours of OCCS seem to be falling behind parents’ expectations
who are often left with no choice but have to work long hours. Nowadays, such phenomenon
seems to be quite prevalent in many workplaces in Hong Kong. Both service users and
non-service users shared similar views on how to improve OCCS.

Theme 7: The reasons for being non-service users

Non-service users revealed that there was no service available nearby their residences, or the
locations of CCCs were not convenient at all. Besides, they preferred their children to be bonded
with regular child carers, e.g. foreign domestic helpers or grandparents, who would be more ready
and willing to nurture them intimately and with attachment. Interviewees were also concerned
whether centre-based child care service would lead to poor quality of parent-child relationship, e.g.
weakening the bonding between parents and children. Yet, some of them concurred that if child
care services could be improved, e.g. lower service fee and longer operating hours, they would
consider having at least one more child in the future.49

For a parent who is a non-Cantonese speaker, i.e. Mandarin speaking, expressed that there were
no non-Cantonese speaking child care services available for them.

The non-service users also suggested that the quotas of CCCs should be allocated to children with
both parents wanting to take up full-time employment, and without grandparents or relatives as
carers, or to families that receive no support from their in-laws, e.g. conflicts with their in-laws.
The non-service users also reported that there was a lack of information on the availability of child
care services. However, there were some non-service users, especially those parents with certain
support from others, e.g. from the carers’ parents, parents-in-law or foreign domestic helper, who
felt that it was still the best for their children to stay at home and call on the day-time child carers
to come to their home and care for the children rather than arranging them to attend CCCs. This
was because of the risk of cross-infection and hygiene issues that made them reluctant to arrange
their children to attend CCCs.

Theme 7: Observations
There are also some practical and legitimate reasons why non-service users did not choose child
care services. Interviewees were quite certain that they would consider rearing more children if
their concerns on child care services could be properly addressed.

Theme 8: The role of the Government vis-à-vis private market day child care services
Some service users suggested that the Government should provide more quotas of child care
services, meanwhile, private service providers should be encouraged to provide affordable child
care services similar to that of CCCs that could meet the needs of the parents who were willing to
pay more for the services. However, it was the role of the Government to keep a monitoring
system for quality assurance on privately-run child care centres.

49
If there are more comprehensive child care services which are also cheaper, expenses for the families would be
lower and the provision of child care would be more flexible, meaning that both parents could work full-time, for
example, and a final outcome could be that the parents would be more willing to have another child, having faith that
the child care system can be one of the many social supports for them.

84
Theme 8: Observations
In general, parents, particularly for those who are employed, expected to have more choices,
which could meet their needs, and at the same time, they did not see the Government to be the
sole providers, instead should play the role as quality gatekeeper for child care services.

The Government however, wishes to have a thorough analysis on the demand for CCCs. Indeed,
it takes at least 7 years to set up a CCC, hence, it is unable to meet the service demands in short
term.

5.2 Expected financing modes of child care services

The above section mainly focuses on highlighting the stakeholders’ opinions on the service modes
of child care services. From the interviews, some expressed the need for more affordable child
care services as it creates a barrier for low income family groups. According to the exchanges
with service providers, it is made aware that the services of CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs have
been changing over the years. According to the information collected from the service providers,
it is known that increasingly, more child developmental activities have been included in the
services. These changes have attracted more service users from families of middle class and
their affordability is different from low income families.

Given the observed phenomenon among a very diverse group of users in terms of household
economic status, there is an expectation that the affordability (willingness-to-pay for the service)
among the potential users is also very diverse. So, in this study, the consultant team conducted
an exploratory economic analysis to identify the “preferred” price range of child care services on
CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs. Details of the results are summarised in Appendix 14.
Regarding OCCS and EHS, there were no adverse findings on the service fees from the focus groups
although some users mentioned the Government could provide more subvention to enhance the
staff-to-child ratio. Likewise, there were no negative findings about the service fees of MHCCCs
and NSCCP, but service operators and volunteers expected a higher level of incentive payment for
home-based child carers and provision of allowance for their transportation cost.

There are a number of interesting findings. First, although it was somewhat surprising that the
proportions of respondents expressed willing-to-pay for the services at the “average” price
(HK$5,000) is far higher for CCCs than CCCs attached to KGs, the pattern of the results obtained on
CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs are similar. Second, the results support the notion that there
exists a gradient of “acceptable amount” of service fee. From the results, low-income families
are less willing to pay more for the current services. However, those high-income families are
more willing to pay the existing “average” price, but cannot be seen to be willing to pay “more”
than the existing amount (see Table 14.5 in Appendix 14). This indicates that there may be rooms
to increase the service fees at a scale according to the level of household income for
re-deployment of the resources. A scale with lower service fee for low-income families while
higher service fee for high-income families may be explored.

Given the results, the consultant team believes that there is room to explore the subsidy and
financial system in child care services. While the existing financing mode of CCCs stands mainly
on a 80:20 cost ratio (user: government), the Government can consider having a more diversified
subsiding profile – low-income families to receive a higher amount of subsidy and high-income
85
families to receive a lower amount. Reference can be made to Finland which is an example of
this diversified financing mode (based on household income). To explore in the longer run, the
converting of some non-aided centres or places to semi-aided centres or places might also provide
availability and affordability to families who are in the middle income level and in need of child
care services. In addition, as non-aided centres are already priced at market rate, middle and
high-income families may be more inclined to pay for these services, to satisfy their expectations
of child care in terms of meeting their children’s training and developmental needs.

5.3 Summary

This chapter consolidated and analysed the stakeholders’ views on service modes and financing
modes of child care services (government officials, service providers involving the management
and frontline staffs, service users and non-users and the general public). There were gaps on
overall child care services including manpower planning, service availability, accessibility and
affordability. In addition, this chapter also discussed the financing mode of the services, and the
results highlighted the possibility of a more diversified subsidy system.

86
Chapter 6 Recommendations

Hong Kong is one of the jurisdictions having the lowest fertility rate in the world, with the present
fertility rate of 1.13 per woman (Census and Statistics Department, 2018). Nevertheless, every
year Hong Kong is still blessed with close to 60,000 babies being born (Census and Statistics
Department, 2018). Demographically, in view of a rapidly ageing population, Hong Kong certainly
welcomes these babies who will contribute significantly to slowing down the ageing situation and
sustaining Hong Kong’s long-term development.

The greatest concern of new parents and families, however, is the health and development of their
children. This includes the education and care received by their children. For some parents, this
would mean making a choice between their careers or staying home to look after their child, while
some may choose to seek assistance from foreign domestic helpers, grandparents and relatives,
with others relying on child care services. As discussed in Chapter 2, early formation of
parent-child attachment can have many benefits for the child in the long run, including increased
confidence, independence, and ‘social mobility,’ and having learnt from parental interaction “how
to manage their own feelings and behaviour” (Moullin, Waldfogel, & Washbrook, 2014).

As said in Chapter 2, AAP suggested that “children’s early experiences are all educational” no
matter the child care setting, it is vital that children are exposed to high-quality early education
and care (Donoghue, 2017). Child care provided at home is equally important to child care
service provided in centre setting. Also, based on the experiences of the six jurisdictions in the
provision of child care services and views from stakeholders, service users, and non-users, Hong
Kong may learn from their experiences and further improve the quality of its existing child care
services. In this consultancy study, the consultant team has identified some potential ways to
improve Hong Kong’s current child care services with the aim to nurture the overall well-being of
child development and respond to the unique needs of modern families and parents in Hong Kong.

Current barriers to achieve high-quality child care services in Hong Kong include inadequate space
provision, financial support, staff education, and caregiver training. Recapturing from Chapter 3,
the short term positioning should focus on home-based care and volunteer-based care services,
more training is suggested for improving the parenting skills and volunteer carer’s awareness
towards child care. Also, more financial support should be put in place so that parents could
afford centre-based care services. In terms of long-term positioning, focus would lie on
centre-based care services and a periodic review of the regulation and monitoring system. More
support should be invested to ensure that enough space is provided for child care centres, proper
training and more career development and advancement opportunities for child care workers, to
improve the staff-to-child ratio and the centre environment, and to employ more professionals.
With the increase in resources allocation, more aided child care places should be made available to
address the various needs of parents and to provide them with the option that is most suitable for
them. Review of the regulation and monitoring system can also enhancing the efficiency of
centre-based and volunteer-based care providers.

Based on this study and the current positioning of child care services as reviewed and analysed, a
summary of recommendations in the short-term, long-term and others are proposed in the below
table.
87
Table 6. 1 Recommendations and others for improving child care services in Hong Kong

Recommendations for offering high-quality child care services in Hong Kong

1. Increase resources allocation/investment in child care services.

2. Provide more subsidies and relax the application threshold for fee subsidy.
3. Improve the qualified staff-to-child ratio for children aged 0 to under 3.
4. Upgrade and improve the qualification and training for child care workers as
Short term well as offer training for home child carers.
5. Encourage effective dissemination of information on child care services to
potential users.
6. Improve the service quality of NSCCP.
7. Re-position and re-organise MHCCCs.
8. Review the distribution of OCCS.

1. Enhance the quality of child care services by embracing and incorporating the
elements of child development and care in its future development as in other
jurisdictions.
2. Establish an appropriate planning mechanism and review continuously in
order to have sufficient places for child care provision.
3. Upgrade and enhance the monitoring system, financial management
procedures and guidelines (including administrative support and streamline of
Long term
cost control) to facilitate the development of centre-based child care services.
4. Develop a set of quality indicators for monitoring and assessment based on
child development and referencing from international experiences.
5. Explore the feasibility of developing a more efficient and cost effective
financing model to cater for different types of families to increase its coverage
and enhance cost effectiveness.
6. Conduct evaluation on child care services on a regular interval to measure its
development for continuous improvement.
Others
1. Promote a family-friendly working environment and integrate with other
welfare policies such that more holistic support can be provided to families with
children.

Each short-term item is explained below in section 6.1, long- term in section 6.2 and others in
section 6.3.

6.1 Recommendations in the short-term

1. Increase resources allocation/investment in child care services: In Hong Kong, parents are
currently paying 80% of the costs for aided CCCs and 100% for non-aided CCCs. The
Government is suggested to increase its resources allocation in child care services. Any
enhancement of child care services for promoting the well-being and development of
children can certainly be seen as an investment rather than an expenditure. Nevertheless, a
built-in component of cost effectiveness of any new measures should be put in place. The

88
 commitment of the Government on child care services should not be measured by the
amount of increase in subsidy only, but by its effectiveness as well.

2. Provide more subsidies and relax the application threshold for fee subsidy: More subsidies
should be given to families in need and the subsidy threshold should be relaxed. With the
high cost of child care services in Hong Kong, the Government does provide financial
assistance to parents with low income. But to be eligible, families must demonstrate their
“social needs”. This “social needs” group may already be a group of marginalised people
needing financial assistance. Combining both the low income and the “social needs”
assessment is too stringent for many families who need assistance to qualify for financial aid.
To support more families in need, the Government should lower the conditions required for
receiving subsidies, such as providing subsidies to families whose children do not receive
full-day child care service in CCCs, and relax the adjusted family income level which currently
is deemed ineligible under KCFRS which is administered by SFO. At present, working wage is
relatively low, the opportunity cost of staying at home is relatively low after taking into
account the relatively high child care service fee for low income families. If the coverage of
subsidy could be extended, this would help ease the financial burden of the more needy
families. The provision of child care support to needy families can reduce the poverty rate
of these families based on overseas experiences.

3. Improve the qualified staff-to-child ratio for children aged 0 to under 3: The finding of this
study indicated that there is no international standard on staff-to-child ratio. Currently,
Hong Kong lags behind in the qualified staff-to-child ratio amongst the jurisdiction reviewed.
The present qualified staff-to-child ratio for children aged 2 to under 3 is 1 CCW to 14
children (1:14) and it is proposed that in aided child care centres, the manning ratio be
changed to 1 CCW for every 11 children (1:11) by drawing reference to the qualified
teacher-to-pupil ratio in KGs. For children aged 0 to under 2, it is proposed at least 1 CCW
to 6 children (1:6) instead of the current 1 CCW to 8 children (1:8) to be adopted as a
short-term measure with references to the jurisdictions reviewed. For the longer term, the
staff-to-child ratio is suggested to be gradually improved.

However, deliberation should be taken into account of the sudden need for CCWs who might
not be available in the market for a successful implementation. The Government should
ensure that infrastructure is in place and that there is a continual supply of qualified workforce
in the child care industry. It should also be noted that according to Perlman, et al 2017, for
the assurance of quality of care, that it is more important to focus on continually improving
staff training and quality of services than just the ratio itself. It should be further highlighted
for the Government to draw on learnings from South Korea, Finland and Sweden as
mentioned in Chapter 2.

4. Upgrade and improve the qualification and training for child care workers as well as offer
training for home child carers: The quality of child care services should be further improved
by upgrading the qualification and training for CCWs in CCCs. When compared to the
qualification of staff working in ECEC centres in Finland or Sweden where their entry level is
having completed a longer period training of 3 years either at a university or polytechnic
college whereas Hong Kong is a higher diploma qualification, a 2-year post-secondary school
training programme. The longer time spent in pedagogical training implies the depth of
child care, education and development knowledge and skills acquired by the individual. In
Japan, child care staff are either called “KG teachers” or “nursery teachers”, after completing

89
 2 years of training and following an induction programme, again this shows a higher
qualification and more-equipped of staff. However, compared to the entry level in South
Korea which is a 1-year training course, Hong Kong is better equipped and qualified.
Nonetheless, providing a professional career and an attractive salary are the essential
ingredients to maintain high-quality workforce. Discussion and planning should be held with
tertiary and/or post-secondary institutes to increase the enrolment of training programme of
CCWs. For home-based child carers under NSCCP and volunteer child carers of MHCCCs, the
Government should work with service operators to offer training in attaining the necessary
knowledge and skill to promote every aspect of child development. There should be a
programme in place which would utilise the existing talents and experiences of current
service providers and encourage existing staff (CCWs) to obtain professional qualifications for
further improvement. The Government can incentivise the service providers to raise their
level of professionalisation, by employing staff with more knowledge and skills, e.g.
completion of internship programmes, and by providing further training for the current staff.
Further, qualifications of new staff should gradually be improved, so that over a certain
period of time, a certain target percentage of CCWs in CCCs with degree level qualifications
can be achieved. The degree level holders should be the core practitioners in CCCs while
the less qualified can act as a supporting role. Certainly, the remuneration should be
accordingly reviewed to reflect the improvement of the quality of CCWs.

For parents, grandparents, and foreign domestic helpers and other respite carers, the
Government can provide some support and encourage NGOs to offer training courses to
upgrade their knowledge and skills in child care. Some sorts of certificate recognising the
completion of training course(s) should be provided for foreign domestic helpers to
acknowledge their effort in improving their skill sets. Also, trainings could be strengthened
to incorporate advanced knowledge in early brain development and early childhood
development in prenatal classes and baby clinics for mothers and fathers in various stages.

5. Encourage effective dissemination of information on child care services to potential users: It

is reported in this study that information on availability, accessibility and affordability are not
readily available to current users or prospective users; and some parents even have no idea
or do not even know about the existence of some child care services. Thus, there is a need
for effective dissemination of information and promotion on child care services to the public,
in particular potential service users. This can be achieved through distributing promotional
materials to government departments/NGOs/relevant organisations and ensuring that they
are placed in easily accessible and visible areas.

6. Improve the service quality of the NSCCP: Due to the volunteer-based nature of NSCCP,
service users were not satisfied with the quality of care provided by home-based child carers.
For home-based child care service, the service users are concerned much on home safety and
protection for their children. It is suggested that training to home-based child carers be
enhanced by service operators in order to improve the quality of care provided. At the
same time, more recognition should be given to home-based child carers by increasing their
incentive payment. Also, there should be some support in place to help improve the home
setting of home-based child carers to make it more baby-friendly and with more stimulation.

7. Re-position and re-organise the MHCCCs: The overall utilisation of MHCCCs has been
persistently low in recent years, in part due to the regularisation of the NSCCP in October
2011 and the volunteer-based nature which is considered to be unprofessional and it might

90
 not be well received among parents. Considering the nature of MHCCCs being similar to
centre-based care group of NSCCP, children aged 0 to under 3 could be arranged to receive
home-based service of NSCCP through which more intensive and individualised care will be
provided to them. To optimise the use of public resources, it is suggested that MHCCCs be
converted to after-school care services for pre-primary children. As NSCCP has been
extended to all 18 districts since October 2011, MHCCCs could be gradually phased out.

8. Review the distribution of OCCS: As some parents find OCCS useful in supporting their need
for occasional child care support, it is recommended that re-distribution of existing OCCS
places among the services units be reviewed on a regular basis, having regard to the supply
and demand condition of different districts, should be maintained continuously.

6.2 Recommendations in the long-term

1. Enhance the quality of child care services by embracing and incorporating the elements of
child development and care in its future development as in other jurisdictions: In other
jurisdictions like Finland, Sweden and Australia, the philosophy underlying child care services
is that every child should have the right to enjoy high-quality child care with the incorporation
of discovery via play. Japan has established the integrated ECEC centres incorporating
education and care in child care services for children aged 0 to 5. While the model of “ECEC”
generally refers to services for children aged 0 to 8, Hong Kong could draw reference from the
relevant elements from the model of “ECEC” in the long run in response to the global trend,
while taking into account local contexts and the expectation of parents as appropriate. This
can be done through training the current CCWs to equip them with more knowledge in
development psychology, family sociology and creative activities to achieve the ECEC concept
of educare integration. In order to design activities according to the children’s development
and ability needs, the existing approved training courses for CCWs/CCSs should be
re-examined to ensure the training programmes in CCCs can bring out the best in children.
The focus should be on exploration through play and how to build up relationship with other
children to avoid advancing KG teaching to CCC stage. Activities such as writing, textbook
learning should be discouraged.

2. Establish an appropriate planning mechanism and review continuously in order to have

sufficient places for child care provision: This planning mechanism should consider not only
equity in availability, accessibility and affordability of the services at spatial levels, but also
the temporal demographic changes in demand over time. Currently there is no
population-based planning standard of child care services provision in Hong Kong and this
study tried to estimate the demand and planning ratios for child care services for children
aged 0 to under 2 and 2 to under 3. As suggested in Chapter 4, the Government should
take a greater role in service provision for the group aged 0 to under 2 group, i.e. providing
30 247 places or a planning ratio of 82 per 20 000 general population. But for the service
provision for children aged 2 to under 3, the Government is to take a more balanced
approach, i.e. providing 7 557 places or a planning ratio of 21 per 20 000 general population.
Thus, for the overall planning for children aged 0 to under 3, the Government is
recommended to adopt a planning ratio at 103 places per 20 000 general population. This
should serve as a metrics for further consideration. It is suggested that a timely data-based
dynamic planning mechanism which considers both demands across different groups, would
also adjust the service supply to the changes of the child population in the coming decade.

91
 This planning mechanism needs to be reviewed continuously to reflect the continual change
of household composition in Hong Kong. The Government is suggested to make reference
to the age-specific planning ratios in the estimation of demand for CCC places. Research
findings mentioned in Chapter 2 have substantiated that the greatest cognitive gain from
centre-based child care service is for children who start receiving the service at ages 2 to 3
rather than younger or older ages. Also, as mentioned in Chapter 3, parents who consider
that the training programmes in CCCs are beneficial for their children, still apply for CCC
places even in families where one of the parents are not working. Hence, the Government
may include aided half-day places, in addition to full-day places, in the future planning of
CCCs.

3. Upgrade and enhance the monitoring system, financial management procedures and
guidelines (including administrative support and streamline of cost control) to facilitate the
development of centre-based child care services: While it is clear that child care services,
primarily for children under 3 are regulated by SWD, and KGs for children above 3 to 6 are
under EDB, KG-cum-CCCs which have both CCCs and KGs are provided one-stop service by
JOKC staffed with officers from SWD and EDB, and housed under EDB, collaboration between
the authorities could be enhanced. More coordination and communication between EBD
and SWD are needed to further enhance the administrative procedure so that the
administrative workload of staff of KG-cum-CCCs could be reduced. If not unitary,
clarifications should be made to the current and new staffs regarding the differences in
policies housed under the two authorities.

The Government provides subsidies to aided CCCs via several means and there is general
acknowledgement on the need for performance control on the financial accounts. However,
the administrative workload of CCCs associated with financial management could be quite
demanding and it would be desirable if the Government can simplify the performance
management process to ease the workload on the staff. It is further recommended that for
the purpose of improving the service quality of the centres, the Government is advised to
provide some flexibility to service providers in deciding on expenditure items within a
broader category of spending. The aim, however, is still for the Government to have control
on the expenditure, and at the same time give child care service providers some flexibility to
reduce the amount of inefficiencies that are tied in with the spending.

4. Develop a set of quality indicators for monitoring and assessment based on child
development and referencing from international experiences. A set of quality checklist
should be developed to evaluate child care services with regard to the overall development
and physical and psychosocial well-being of children. This would allow all services to have
the same standard in quality care and attention for children and support for children’s
learning and development, physical and psychosocial health. An example of such a system
is mentioned in Australia which is a national quality standard as part of the National Quality
Framework (please see Appendix 15). It acts as a benchmark for early childhood education
and care and is evaluated according to the following indicators: including educational
programme and practice, children’s health and safety, physical environment, staffing
arrangements, relationships with children, collaborative partnerships with families and
communities and leadership and service management. Currently in Hong Kong, service
operators of CCCs are required to deliver the service in accordance with CCSO and CCSR, as
well as the Operation Manual. For aided standalone CCCs, they are also required to comply
with FSA and SQS so as to ensure service quality and facilitate the development of children.

92
 While it is noted that different ordinances, regulations and standards provide different
guidance on different aspects, since they are all about child care services, it would make it
much easier to readers and people work in the child care industry to have all in one place.
For example the SQS is solely a general standard implicated on any service operators but are
not child care service specific thus operators have to follow multiple standards with various
core values which might lead to inconsistency and difficult monitoring. The National Quality
Standard in Australia presents an all-rounded framework as listed in the above in which a few
of them were not mentioned explicitly in any of the agreements or manuals, for example
relationship with children, partnership with communities and the importance of governance
support and leadership, for a more detailed comparison please see Appendix 16. These are
not necessarily practical guidelines but serve as a framework that would help operators in
their initial stage of programme design and restructuring to be in compliance with the ECEC
practice as well as more efficient monitoring and inspection by the Government.

5. Explore the feasibility of developing a more efficient and cost effective financing model to
cater for different types of families to increase its coverage and enhance cost effectiveness:
From the focus group interviews, data collection exercise and comments from the general
public, it is found that there are some low-income families which could not afford the current
cost of CCCs, while at the same time, some high-income families are willing to pay more for
the same quality of child care services. The coverage of subsidies could be extended to
support more needy families, and meanwhile, user’s income-based co-payment methods
should be explored with the collection of more data and analyses with the aim to achieving a
more efficient and cost effective deployment of resources. The Government should also
explore with the CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs for ways to extend their service for children aged
under 2 as some of the existing non-aided CCCs do not offer services to children under the
age of 2 but focus on children aged 2 to under 3 and most KG-cum-CCCs only target children
aged above 2.

In the short-term, subsidies should be increased for the CCCs and CCC portion of the
KG-cum-CCCs, in order to reduce the financial burden on parents, and to ensure a stable and
consistent provision of CCC places at KG-cum-CCCs.

In the long-term, the Government can try to incentivise those centres to provide places for
children aged 0 to under 2 or through subsidising users for using these places. In terms of
financing these places, there could be different levels of subsidy in a gradient scale according
to families’ income as families of middle level income might be able to afford these places
with a certain level of subsidy. This is similar to Finland’s co-payment system where
families of lower income receive the highest subsidy and higher income families receive the
lowest subsidy, the subsidy can be provided in a gradient scale. It is also recommended the
Government to explore the options of collaboration with the private sector with reference to
South Korea and Japan for the provision of CCC places with the financing mode to be assessed
when more data is collected. There is insufficient data on the users collected from the
questionnaire/focus group interviews from the private sector to enable an informed decision
in this study.

6. Conduct evaluation on child care services on a regular interval to measure its development
for continuous improvement: Although the Government has made some modifications in
child care services since the last policy promulgated in 1991, the principles in place are still
following those set almost 27 years ago which is primarily care-oriented. This study has

93
 responded to the social and economic changes which have changed the way people perceive
child care services. Other jurisdictions have incorporated the concept of “ECEC” in their
child care services for children aged 0 to 8 and offered children with quality child care.
Hence, the Government of Hong Kong is encouraged to apply some best practices from
overseas jurisdictions and adopt them as appropriate to the local context. Although the
economic statuses, government systems, cultures and parental views regarding ECEC across
the globe are all different, it is useful to extract the similarities and differences to gain further
insights in improving child care services. Heavy presumptions were made regarding Hong
Kong parental circle holding a perspective of “winning at the starting line”. However in a
recent survey conducted by the Institute of Asia Pacific Studies at CUHK, more than 59% of
adults disapproved the above idea and 77.1% respondents were inclined to support children’s
right for a spacious and free development. But when respondents were asked about
whether they have enrolled their children in any extracurricular activities, only 17.2% said
they did not. There is significant ambivalence between parental concerns and social reality.
In Singapore, although teachers believe a holistic approach is more important, parents
prefers a more academic curriculum as pre-primary preparation (Costales, 2018). There is
also a rising demand for South Korea parents to spend more in their children’s education in
order to “keep up with the competition” and many do not adhere to the Government’s
guideline of an all-play curriculum. The one jurisdiction that is greatly out of the social norm
compare to Hong Kong is Finland. In Hujala’s study in 2017, Finnish parents perspective on
the three most important goals for early education are ranked as social, emotional and lastly
cognitive. They invest heavily on the children’s well-being and the development of social
habits thus rarely send their children to after-school tutoring or institutions farther afield
than a local one. This play and learning practice did not hinder the children’s development
or affect the Finnish’s society, rather they continue to top one of the international student
assessment across the globe (Barr, 2017), overthrowing Hong Kong society’s concern of
“winning at the starting line”. Therefore, more regular researches and evaluation should be
conducted to keep up-to-date with the universal child care policies and to gain insight from
other jurisdictions.

6.3 Others

1. Promote a family-friendly working environment and integrate with other welfare policies
such that more holistic support can be provided to families with children: The benefits for
mothers and fathers to stay longer at home and provide care for their babies should be
deliberated. There are some other practices, for example, flexible working hours, working
at home and part-time employment have been widely practiced in other jurisdictions
reviewed in this study in order to retain parents in the workforce. More family-friendly
facilities and infrastructure, e.g. for breastfeeding and diaper changing rooms, should also be
increased in the public space. All these efforts contribute to the well-being of the children.

94
Chapter 7 Conclusion

Since 2001, Hong Kong has been internationally promoting as “Asia’s world city.” 50 To truly enjoy
this prestige and status, children, the most basic building blocks of society need to be nurtured for
they are Hong Kong’s future, carrying on the successes of the present. Each year Hong Kong
welcomes 60 000 babies51, who will become the pillars in the future. Although the Government
has programmes and policies in place for child care, the consultant team has identified areas for
improvement in child care services, taken from international good practices and fitted into Hong
Kong’s local context, from which the Government and the community at large can learn from.

All children, regardless of their family composition and who they live with and who their carers are
would benefit greatly if they are provided with high-quality child care. Using GIS analysis,
districts with greater shortage in child care services were highlighted and can be used as a guide
for the Government to distribute additional resources and manpower. From the findings of the
questionnaire and focus group interviews, more child care options can help alleviate the pressure
on parents with long working hours. A goal is to assure parents that a balance can be achieved
between their child care responsibilities and career obligation. This balance would mean that the
quality and opportunities of one is not sacrificed for the other, and that both can be achievable.
At present, some Hong Kong parents, due to insufficient child care services, have to make a
decision to stay at home after giving birth to their child or delay/forgo their aspiration for child
bearing. It is neither good for their mental health nor the wellness of the society.

There are both short-term and long-term recommendations, as well as other remarks for the
Government to look at, which could be implemented at the operational level and the policy
making level respectively. It is recommended that in the longer term, the Government might
explore the possibility of collaborating with the private sector in providing child care services,
particularly in communities that large populations of young couples expecting to have children or
families already with young children with local partners on the private market. In terms of
human resource planning, it is recommended to lower the staff-to-child ratio and that staff receive
more competitive salaries, as well as more opportunities for career advancement, which is a form
of motivation. The current regulatory system of dual government bodies in charge of CCCs, and
CCCs attached to KG-cum-CCCs should be streamlined to ensure that there is good communication
between them, for efficient and effective delivery of services. The financial mode can be
modified, in order to charge parental fees and provide subsidies on a more extensive scale.
Additionally, the Government can incentivise KG-cum-CCCs or leverage on the private sector to
provide more child care places for children, in particular, aged 0 to under 2 group, to be targeted
towards middle-income families. To support more families in need, the current threshold for fee
subsidy should be relaxed so that more children from disadvantaged background can enjoy child
care services.

The Government can consider drawing reference from the good practices of other jurisdictions
and explore the feasibility of implementing them in Hong Kong for continuous long-term
improvement, with the goal of making Hong Kong a liveable and enjoyable city for children to
grow healthily and happily. Certainly, the provision of child care services cannot be done by the

50
https://www.brandhk.gov.hk/html/en/AboutHongKong/AsiaSWorldCity.html
51
Census and Statistics Department, 2018

95
Government only. It requires parents to do their fair share of looking after their children
responsibly. It might require parents to make sacrifices and compromise of their present life
style. Employers’ support by providing a family friendly working environment is also crucial to
make it possible. The consultant team hopes that the community as a whole can have a mind-set
change to share some of the responsibility of looking after the future generation. While parents
play a vital role in the upbringing of their children, it does make it easier for all parents if everyone
in the community can and will make a difference by supporting others and contributing to the
overall well-being of Hong Kong.

96
Appendix 1 Country reports of Finland, Australia, Singapore, South

Korea, Japan and Sweden

This section comprises of summaries from the following commissioned country reports:
 Finland country report: Rotkirch & Meittinan (2017). Finland - Early Childhood Education and
Care.
 Australia country report: Brennan & Adamson (Aug 2017). Australian Early Childhood
Education and Care.
 Singapore country report: Lue, Fang (2017). Singapore Early Childhood Education and Care
 South Korea country report: Kim, A. E. H., (Feb 2017). The Republic of Korea and its Childcare
Policy: Development, Implementation, Effectiveness, and its Limitation. Emery C (2017).
Childcare in South Korea: Competition for Conventional Success and the Policy
Implementation Gap
 Japan country report: Suzuki, Yoshie (2018). Japan Early Childhood Education and Care, May
 Sweden country report: Nyberg, Anita (2018). Sweden – The Development of Early
Childhood Education and Care.

1.1 Finland 52
Finland’s existing philosophy and objective of child care services are for all children under the age
of 7 to have a right to early childhood education and care. Previous focus was on the parents to
entitle a day care service for their children. With the new ECEC Act in 2015, the perspective was
shifted to that of the child, that is, for the child to have a right to education and care for
development and growth. To align with this approach, the governing body of the ECEC services
was moved from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health to the Ministry of Education and Culture
in 2013.

Children can start attending ECEC service from age 10 months, when the parental leave period
ends. There are 3 types of child care services and they are described below.

 Municipal ECEC services: Municipalities have to ensure that all children who are in need of
ECEC have a place within 4 months of the application. Services are provided to children of
legal residents of the municipality. Those without legal residence are not entitled. The fee
in municipal ECEC is set at a minimum €27 /month and maximum €290 /month. If the
family income is lower than the minimum fee, the child will have the service for free.
 Private ECEC services or private child minder: Children using this service are entitled to the
private child care allowance in the range of €63 - €172 / month. Low income families can
apply for additional allowance.
 Parent on home care leave on child home care allowance (“HCA”): Many mothers stay home
until the child is 1.5 to 2 years old. Mothers of higher education normally have shorter
home care leave while longer home leave care are more common with less-educated families.
HCA is a compensation paid to the child’s family who does not use municipal day care at €338
/month. Low-income families can apply for additional allowance.

52
Rotkirch and Miettinan, Finland – Early Childhood Education and Care, 2017

97
The staff-to-child ratio is mandated by law. For day care, the ratio is 1:4 under 3 years old and 1:8
for children aged 3 or above (before 2016 it was 1:7). The maximum number of children in a
group is 12 for 0 to under 2, and 24 for older children. ECEC staff responsible for children must
have appropriate training with vocational upper-secondary qualification in relevant fields, e.g.
social welfare and health care. One in three of the staff in the ECEC centres must have a higher
education degree composed of at least either bachelor’s degree from a university or degree from
polytechnical school (3 years). 53 The minimum qualification for kindergarten teacher is a
bachelor’s degree in Education or in Social Science. Other staff in ECEC is expected to go through
a vocational upper secondary qualification in social welfare or health care. Pre-primary education
is provided by kindergarten teachers with a Bachelor or Master of Education degree or a class
teacher with a Master of Education degree.

It should however be mentioned that there are also some drawbacks in Finland’s child care system.
First, owing to the distribution of day care centres is not sufficient in some rural areas, the right to
day care system and the early education is not equally distributed to children (Onnismaa & Kalliala,
2010). Second, the child care workers still lack qualification, a proportion of education providers
in some centres not having the qualification of a teacher. Third, due to the low wages, low social
status, and lack of developmental path, the sustainability of the ECEC service is questionable.

1.2. Australia 54
The main objective of Australia’s spending on early childhood education and care is to enable
workforce participation. Supporting child development is but a secondary objective. At the
federal level, the Department of Education and Training oversees the training and regulation of
ECEC services, while the Department of Human Services is responsible for the funding. The
Department of Education coordinates with state government, generally the respective department
of Education, to supervise and monitor approved services, and the approved services are those
eligible to receive subsidies from the federal government. The Australian Children’s Education
and Care Authority supervises the implementation of the National Quality Framework. The
National Quality Framework was introduced in 2008 under which ECEC services operate. Features
of The National Quality Framework include four components:
 The governing arrangement of ECEC;
 A benchmark standard system of early childhood programmes by the slogan of Belonging,
Being, and Becoming, where it provides an overarching guide to learning and development
of children aged 0 to 5;
 A five-point rating scale to rate the quality of care; and
 A national system to regulate and enforce the benchmark standard

There are several types of regulated services for children and they are described below:
1. Long day care: a centre-based service providing care and education from birth to school age.
2. Pre-school/kindergarten: provide care and education one before the children attend full-day
school. In some states, pre-schools or kindergartens are provided within the schools.
3. Family day care: a service providing education and care in the homes of the registered carers.
4. Budget Based Funded Programme: a national programme mostly in regional, remote
communities to meet the needs of children and their families.
53
Source: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/early-childhood-education-and-care-25_en
54
Brennan and Adamson, Australian Early Childhood Education and Care, Aug 2017

98
5. In-home care: a flexible form of child care in the child’s home by an approved educator.
6. Non-regulated care: Care by nannies or au pairs (young domestic assistants from a foreign
country who live with and work for the host family). This type of service receives much
debate as to whether the Government should increase financial and regulation support.

Under the National Quality Framework, the staff-to-child ratio for centre-based services is 1:4 for
children aged 0 to 24 months, almost all States have 1:5 for the children age 24 to 36 months, and
1:10 / 1:11 for children aged over 36 months.

The minimum qualification for all staff working at the ECEC services is to have a Certificate III.
Even though not required, at least 50% of the ECEC staff who work directly with children either
already attained a diploma or they are studying to obtain a diploma. Contingent on the size of
the centre, there must be one or more degree-qualified early childhood teacher.

Prior to July 2018, there were 2 types of subsidy systems: Child Care Benefit (“CCB”) and Child Care
Rebate (“CCR”) described below:

 CCB is a means-tested subsidy for children enrolled in approved long day care, family day care
or in-home care centres. The benefit is on an hourly rate available to eligible families
according to family income. Low-income family can apply for a maximum of AU$4.24 per
hour or AU$212 per week and the benefit decreases as income increases. Families using
registered care such as nannies can apply for AU$ 0.7 per hour or about AU$35.95 per week.

 CCR is non-means-tested and is only available if one parent meets the threshold. CCR covers
50% of the out-of-the pocket costs, paid by the parent. Even if the family is not approved for
CCB because income exceeds the test, CCR is paid automatically following a CCB application.

A new system came into effect in July 2018, the Child Care Subsidy which replaced the CCR due to
the automatic payment of CCR to CCB applicants being criticised for not having properly checked
the needs of the families and thus seen as wasting government money.

Nonetheless, it should be mentioned that there are also some drawbacks in Australia’s child care
system. First, the education curricula for the pre-schooler’s teacher do not match the changes in
duty, for example, a teacher’s duty is not only for teaching but also interactions with the parents
and managing the activities of the classroom. These are omitted in the curricula of ECEC.
Second, the cooperation between pre-schools, primary and secondary schools should be further
improved. Currently, the pre-schools are regulated under the Federal Ministry of Family and
Youth, whereas primary and secondary schools are regulated under Federal Ministry of Education.
The teachers there suggested that the challenges of adapting into the new environment do exist in
the transition between pre-schools and formal schools. Third, the ECEC programme in Australia
lacks evaluation on its curricula on the participation for the 3 year-olds and particularly children
from disadvantaged backgrounds and Indigenous Australia children, therefore the effectiveness of
the current curricula is still unclear to these targeted groups (Warren et al, 2016). Fourth,
different ECEC services are of different quality or focuses, and there is no shared value among
different ECEC services.

99
1.3 Singapore 55
While the existing policies in child care position children’s care and education as the family
responsibilities by promoting agendas like “pro family” and “family values”, since 1983, the
Government has made tremendous efforts in uplifting programmes in child care support. The
goal of the Government is to provide every child with “a good start in life and a bright future”, and
to prepare children for the labour market. Therefore, investing in early childhood education and
care (“ECEC”) was made a priority.

There are 2 types of ECEC programmes for children under the age of 7. They are Child Care
Centres and Kindergartens and they are described below:

Child Care Centres offer care services and pre-school programmes for children of 18 months
to 7 years old. There are also centres providing infant programme for children of 2 months
to 18 months old. The services are full-day, half-day, together with flexible programmes to
cater for working parents with different schedules.

Kindergartens are pre-school programmes for children aged 2 to under 7. They consist of
playgroup, pre-nursery, nursery, and kindergarten (K1 for 5 year-olds and K2 for 6 year-olds).

Since the set-up of Early Childhood Development Agency (“ECDA”) in April 2013, they oversee the
licensing and registration of Child Care Centres and Kindergartens which were previously
supervised by the Ministry of Social and Family Development and the Ministry of Education
respectively. The operation of Child Care Centres and Kindergartens are carried out via 2
schemes where the Government provides funding support for operators to provide quality ECEC
services: Anchor Operator Scheme and Partner Operator Scheme. In addition, the Ministry of
Education manages public kindergartens provided to Singaporean citizens.

In terms of staff qualification and staff-to-child ratio at child care centres, the minimum
requirement for the staff is to have 5 “O” level credits including English Language and a Diploma in
Pre-school Education Teaching. The staff-to-child ratio is also stipulated at:
1:5 for children of 2 to 18 months;
1:8 for children above 18 months to 30 months;
1:12 for children above 30 months to 3 years;
1:15 for children above 3 years to 4 years.

Singaporean children enrolled in approved ECDA centres are eligible for a basic and an additional
subsidy. In addition, children of low-income families from age 18 months to 7 years are also
eligible for Start Up Grant and Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme which provides further
financial aid on top of the basic and additional subsidy. Furthermore, Singaporean citizen
children born on or after January 1, 2015 get an automatic Baby Bonus Cash Gift. The new born
is also qualified for Medisave Grant to cover the premium for Medishield Life Coverage from birth,
a mandatory basic health insurance.

Nevertheless, again, it should be mentioned that there are also some drawbacks in Singapore’s
child care system. First, there are no fixed curricula provided by the Government, thus, the

55
Lue, Fang (2017). Singapore Early Childhood Education and Care

100
quality and the content of each centre or school differ. Second, though the Government
subsidises a proportion of the tutor fees, the fees for quality pre-school still remain a challenge for
the underprivileged. Third, apart from the private sector, voluntary organisations would also set
up schools for the younger generation, but since they are targeting the financially non-affordable
families, this leads to their financial resources barely sustainable for operation, and the costs of
employing quality teachers would be of great difficulty. Therefore, the voluntary established
schools might gradually be marginalised. Fourth, the salary of a professional pre-schooler
teacher differs widely from school to schools, as well as other privileges like annual leave. As a
result, the turnover rate of some professional and quality teachers is very high. Fifth, due to the
unclear and diverse duties in pre-school teachers, their image remains unprofessional. Most of
them are regarded as the duty of a babysitter which would hinder people from entering this
occupation.

1.4 South Korea 56

The Government of South Korea did not play an active role in child care support until the early
2000s when the urbanisation of nuclear family and agenda on female empowerment raised the
issue of child care on stage. In 2004, the Government launched a systematic and comprehensive
child care programmes with three original objectives which were criticised to help only certain
parents. However, due to the shift in trend and the advocacy for child rights, it later included a
fourth rationale.
 Incentivise more births
 Reclusion of women with children at the labour force
 Improvement of gender equality by empowering women and promoting their independence
 Growing generation must be provided with the service (add-on)

Another feature of the programme is the Government providing monetary support to parents with
children aged 0 to 5 to help grow the industry. In March 2013, the Universal Child Care scheme
was implemented. Parents with children in the age group of 3 to 5 have completely free service
so long as the children are registered and use a certain credit card which the Government deposits
the fee in. In addition, the Government provides cash for parents with children aged 0 to 5 for
spending on child-raising items such as diapers and milk powder. For the newborns, the cash is
₩200,000 per month; 1 year olds, ₩150,000 per month; 2 to 5 year olds ₩100,000 per month.
Families which do not send children to child care centres also receive cash allowance.

The Nuri curriculum was introduced in 2012 in attempt to integrate the early childhood education
and the child care system to standardise their quality. The curriculum is implemented in five
areas to promote healthy environment for children to grow and develop holistically. For
example, for physical activity, children are lead to do basic exercises that help improve
self-awareness and are taught important family values; for experience in art, children are
encouraged to discover beauty and express themselves through art. In order to ensure staff
quality, the qualification of the day care teachers are monitored. There are three grades of day
care teachers mandated by law, ranging from Grade 3 to Grade 1. Grade 3 certification is
obtained by successful graduation from high school and completion of an education/training
programme at an institute designated by the Ministry of Health and Welfare Affairs. Grade 2 can

56
The Republic of Korea and its Childcare Policy: Development, Implementation, Effectiveness, and its Limitation,
Ehyun Amy KIM, Feb 22, 2017, Childcare in South Korea: Competition for Conventional Success and the Policy
Implementation Gap, Emery, C. 2017

101
be attained either by meeting all of the requirements for Grade 3, along with 2 additional years of
child care experience and additional training, or by a college degree in a child care related major.
Grade 1 can be obtained via 3 years of additional experience full time in child care plus career
training on top of the requirements of Grade 2, or, all of the requirements for Grade 2 plus a
master’s degree plus one year of experience full time in child care or additional training. In many
day care facilities most teachers have Grade 3 certifications. In 2013, 25% of the public child care
centre workers have obtained a 4-year university education.57 On the other hand, there are elite
facilities where more than half of the teachers have masters and doctoral degrees in child studies.
State-run child care tends to be higher in quality but has long waiting lists. There were 98 000
children on day care waitlists in 2015 (Reuters, 2015).

Due to the lack of adequate budget and expertise in child care, the Government decided to
encourage commercialisation and privatisation of the sector. Until 2012, the Government
covered up to 25% of all construction costs of the child care centres. There was also tax
reduction for the private child care business. The Government also reformed the licensing
process by shortening the application lead time where it used to require 6 months for 10
documents, but reduced to 3 months with 5 documents. The process of obtaining the minimum
qualification requirement as a third degree child care instructor (normally with graduation from
secondary school and one year training programme) has also become easy; with only the need to
complete a two-weeks online course and passing an easy exam. The aim was to fulfil the
demands in the child care fields created by the surge of the private child care industry.

For children aged 0 to 5, 68% are in some form of day care or kindergartens. With about 40 000
day care centres in South Korea, 8.9% are public and 84.8% are private centres or in households.
It is generally known that public centres are of higher quality. Day care centres (for children aged
0 to 3) are supervised by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, while kindergartens (for children
aged 3 to 5) are monitored by the Ministry of Education.

Despite all centres being monitored by CCTVs, there are however frequent reports of child abuse.
There are also reports of poor working conditions and over workload at child care centres and
kindergartens, thus resulting in high turnover.

It should further be mentioned that there are also some drawbacks in South Korea’s child care
system. Although the Universal Child Care scheme seems to generate good statistics in terms of
child care centres and job creation, it fails to gain the confidence of the public in quality of child
care and also fails to improve the fertility rate. A major criticism of the policy is the lack of other
policies to support those children aged 6 to 8. Child care is provided for children aged 0 to 5, the
usual age for elementary school is 8, there is a two-year gap in between not covered by any policy
with similar functions. The over reliant on the private sectors further resulted in poor quality of
instructors, poor treatment on the children and poor food quality. Since 2004, the fertility rate is
about the same, suggesting that there are other influencing factors than the child care system.
Gender discrimination is still ever-present in the workplace, attributing to the women considering
twice before giving birth after years of hard-earned achievement.

57
Park and Park, (2015)

102
1.5 Japan 58

The Japanese government has taken the role of providing general curriculum guidelines and
regulations for the health and safety for young children aged 0 to 5 receiving refined and holistic
care and education. However, it has also adopted a ‘hands-off approach’ in these child-centred
programmes, granting individual child care facilities authority and flexibility to design and put into
practice what they see fit with targeted group of children, with a goal of nurturing human relations
and developing children’s ability to perform function.

Traditionally, the Japanese ECEC system has been separated into two distinct institutions,
kindergarten and nursery, with each of them placed under a different government ministry and
follows different legislations:

 Under the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (“MEXT”), the
Japanese kindergarten education focuses on child development and eligible for all children
aged 3-5.
 Day nurseries, under the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (“MHLW”), have expanded
their services for children aged 0-5 to include infant day care, extended hour day care and
night time day care to meet the modern social life and labour force trends. Children are
only eligible to apply if child care is absent at home.
Since 2006, integrated ECEC centres have been developed for children aged 0 to 5. Its goal is to
relieve the stress of working parents by offering more flexible hours and providing both academic
and child care elements. A sharp increase of 272% from having 762 integrated ECEC centres in
2011 to having 2,836 in 2015 was recorded. The Cabinet Office has direct responsibility over the
integrated ECEC centres, as well as authority over MEXT and MHLW, which indirectly regulates
both kindergarten and day nurseries.
In 2016, 71% of 3-year-olds, 86% of 4-year-olds, and 95% of 5-year-olds, were enrolled in
pre-primary care and education. The percentage is lower for younger children aged 0-2, with day
nursery enrolment rates of 26% for this age group. The lower enrolment rate in official nurseries
among younger infants is normally accounted to the maternal leave. Mothers are entitled to 14
weeks of maternity leave: six weeks before birth, and 8 weeks after birth with 67% of salary.
They are also entitled to time off or days off for medical checks during pregnancy within 12 months
of childbirth, and two 30-minute breaks off during a work day to accommodate for child care.
Another option is to take child care leave until the child turns one year old and is paid for 50% of
regular wages.

Japan’s pre-primary services are largely privatised, with 73% of students in private, independently
run kindergarten, day nurseries or integrated ECEC centres. This is because pre-primary
education is not mandatory under the Japanese public education system. Since the Japanese
government has adopted the hands-off approach, the regulated staff-to-child ratio, operating
hours, the range of extra services vary a lot among specific municipalities. The maximum ratio in
kindergarten is 35 students per one teacher. On the other hand, the staff-to-child ratio in day
nurseries depends on the child’s age as shown below:

58
Suzuki, Yoshie (2018). Japan Early Childhood Education and Care, May

103
 Age Staff-to-child ratio
0 to under 1 1:3
1 to under 3 1:6
3 to under 4 1:20
4 to under 5 1:30

Regarding staff qualifications, pre-primary teachers have normally received and passed a two-year
training programme. Kindergartens and day nurseries have separate teacher qualifications,
‘kindergarten teacher license’ and ‘nursery teacher qualifications’. Care givers of children aged 0
to 2 at integrated ECEC are required to obtain ‘nursery teacher qualifications’ whereas teachers
who teach children aged 3 to 5 are required to have both qualifications.

A number of challenges are encountered within the Japanese ECEC system. The integrated ECEC
centres aim to provide flexible hours to fit in with working parents’ schedule. However, it is
concerned that the quality of education may deteriorate if kindergartens operate for more hours,
leaving limited time for teachers to prepare for and review their classes. The longer hours may
also compromise the well-being of children who find it difficult or stressful to be placed away from
home. Besides, Japan relies greatly on private funding for ECEC expenditure. Many children
enrolled in private kindergartens and day nurseries do not receive much government funding,
adding a heavy financial burden on families. Furthermore, child abuse at home in Japan has
become a severe issue in recent years. This can be explained by mothers being pressed into
caring for both young children and older relatives. Together with financial and emotional stress,
it consequently triggers an increase child abuse cases, with over 100 000 cases reported in 2016.
Parents were thus encouraged to place their child in licensed centre-based care to provide support
to the parents and prevent child maltreatments. However, with the poor quality in uncertified
centres and shortage in certified centres, it serves as an overwhelming issue yet to be resolved the
Japanese government.

1.6 Sweden 59

For over 40 years, the Swedish Parliament has given high priority to ECEC that focuses on providing
good conditions for the children in order to support and stimulate their holistic development. It
aims to encourage children’s interaction and expressive skills, as well as assisting them in acquiring
knowledge and responsibility through play and discovery. Under the Ministry of Education and
Science since 1996, ECEC has been run by municipalities and financed by the central government,
municipalities and parental fees to provide full coverage and high-quality child care services to
families.

There is a variety Swedish ECEC services designed for children ranging from 1 to 7 years old, as
described below:

 Public-financed family day care is a standardised and regulated child care service specifically
designed for more traditional urban families and isolated families in the rural areas or small

59
Nyberg, Anita (2018). Sweden – The Development of Early Childhood Education and Care

104
 towns. Municipal child-minders provide care in their own home and are flexible to fit in
with parents’ schedule and their need.
 Day care centres, a more popular option comparing to public-financed family day care,
provide services for all children from 1.5 to 7 years old. Municipalities are also liable to
offer places for children aged between 1 and 5 whose parents are unemployed for at least 3
hours a day. There are 91-97% of children aged 2 to 5 and 50% of children aged 1 in publicly
financed child day care centres.
 Universal pre-school provides free schooling for all children aged between 3 and 5 for 3
hours a day during school terms. It is mandatory by municipality but children can
participate voluntarily. Currently, there are 98% of children aged 6 in pres-chool classes and
government also announced that starting from the fall of 2018, it becomes mandatory for all
children aged 6. The open pre-school is an alternative for children of at-home parents,
where most of them are free of charge.
 Parental co-operatives are a small percentage of pre-schools and day child care centres
privately run by non-profit organisations such as by parents, where they work on rotating
basis, or by corporations or churches. The parental co-operatives are required meet the
standard of public child care and fees are not allowed to deviate from the municipal forms.

The child care programme has expanded to include paid maternity and parental leaves. Sweden’s
parental leave after the birth of child has existed since 1974. Parental insurance paid by
employer taxes covers 480 days of parental leave with 80% of the salary. The parental leave can be
divided between the two parents or are transferred to each other. However, there is specific 30
days of ‘mother’s or father’s month’ that is non-transferable.

There are currently no national standards of staff-to-child ratio, but it is mandatory to monitor it
continuously by each municipality. The average staff-to-child ratio in pre-schools and family day
care has fluctuated over the years and it was 1:5.2 by 2016.

For pre-schools and day care centres, staff are divided into two main groups in terms of their
qualifications: pre-school teachers and day care attendants. Pre-school teachers are required
complete a 3.5-year pedagogical training programme at universities. They work closely with
qualified day care attendants, who are required to obtain an upper-secondary qualification, which
is a 3-year programme including 15 weeks of mandatory practical placement. Day care
attendants’ main role is to support and assist pre-school teachers. Currently, there is no centrally
developed education training programme for family day care providers at home. However, it is
recommended by the National Board of Health and Welfare that they should undergo training
equivalent to that of a day care attendant in pre-schools, i.e. an upper-secondary qualification.
Many municipals offer 50-100 mandatory hours training as an introduction to family day care
occupation and provide guidance through specifically employed supervisors. Family day care
home is also inspected and approved by the local authority.

Despite Sweden’s child care system is often quoted as the “the gold standard” (Ricci, 2015), and
many countries use it as a benchmark, it has its challenges. Due to the high enrolment in
Swedish day care services, parents may be pressured and believe that it is necessary to conform to
the child care system. Over-reliance on these programmes may hinder quality parental abilities,
their choice in how to care for their children and the bonding with their children. Another
drawback in the Swedish ECEC system is the inconsistency of the staff-to-child ratio. As mentioned,
105
there are no national standards of staff-to-child ratio, and further, day care staff are one of the top
three categories of sick leave in Sweden, without replacement staff. This exposes children to
groups of 17 with only one or two staff for several hours (Himmelstrand, 2015). One possible way
to rectify the problem is to merge smaller groups together into larger groups, ensuring flexibility
and quality of care in case of staff taking sudden leave.

106
Appendix 2 The means test and levels of assistance60

• The Student Finance Office (“SFO”) uses the Adjusted Family Income (“AFI”) mechanism as
the means test to assess the applicants’ eligibility and level of assistance. The AFI
mechanism is based on the following formula:

* For single-parent families of two to three members, the “plus one factor” in the
denominator of the AFI formula will be increased to “two”.
• Gross annual income of the family includes the annual income of the applicant and his/her
spouse; 30% of the annual income of unmarried child/children residing with the family if
applicable and the contributions from relatives/friends if applicable.
• Members of a family normally refer to the applicant, his/her spouse, the unmarried child/
children residing with the family and the dependent parent(s) who are supported by the
applicant and/or his/her spouse.
• There are three levels of fee remission, namely 100%, 75% and 50%. The AFI eligibility
benchmarks for 100%, 75% and 50% fee remission are as follows:

Applicable to Financial Assistance Scheme for Pre-primary Students

2018-19 school year - AFI Groups (HK$) Levels of Assistance

0 to 39,182 Full remission (100%)**

39,183 to 47,996 3/4 remission (75%)
47,997 to 75,764 1/2 remission (50%)
Ineligible (applications not
Over 75,764
successful)

** AFI thresholds for full level of assistance for 3-member and 4-member families are $47,434 and
$43,640 respectively in the 2018/19 school year. For 2-member single-parent families and
3-member single-parent families, they are regarded as 3-member families and 4-member families,
respectively, for calculation of the AFI and the level of assistance.

60
https://www.wfsfaa.gov.hk/sfo/en/preprimary/kcfr/general/assessment.htm

107
Appendix 3 Criteria for assessing social needs61

Category (A) Children who cannot receive proper care at home as a result of one parent working
full-time and the other working 104 hours or more in a month

Category (B) Children whose parents are chronically ill, disabled, or in long-term hospital care –
i Children with a parent in hospital who is likely to require long-term
hospitalisation or long period of convalescence after discharge
Ii Children with a parent suffering from ill health such as carcinoma, kidney
disease, tuberculosis, venous cardiac disease, etc
iii Children with a parent who is physically or mentally handicapped or mentally
ill

Category (C) Children of single-parent families or children from broken families –

i Children whose parents are widowed, divorced, separated or deserted
ii Children of unmarried parents, i.e. born out of wedlock, not under the care
of both parents
iii Orphans/semi-orphans under the care of relatives

Category (D) Children themselves having a need for full-day care –

i Mild-grade mentally retarded children and those having a slight physical
handicap admitted under the Integrated Programme (cases usually referred
by medical staff)
ii Children being members of twins and triplets etc. (at least one other child
under 6 must be resident in the family)
iii Children who are victims of child abuse
iv Children with a parent who is a drug abuser or alcoholic or is aged, and is
considered as being unable to exercise proper care of the children
v Children with a parent or guardian in prison or absent from home or other
valid reason for long periods of time

Category (E) Children considered to have the need for care because of special conditions of
other family members –
i Children with parents who have to take care of a family member who is
physically or mentally handicapped, chronically ill, senile, aged (over 70), or
incapable of self-care

Category (F) Children from large families –

i Children with two or more siblings (at least two children aged below 6 must
be resident in the family)
ii Children from families with four or more children aged below 12 (at least
three children must be resident in the family)

Category (G) Other cases recommended by social workers - Any child referred and recommended
by social workers
61
Working Party on Harmonisation of Pre-primary Services, Consultation Document, Education Department, Social
Welfare Department, April 2002

108
Appendix 4 Maps and spatial distributions of child care centres

Maps and figures

Figure 4.1 Spatial distributions of aided and non-aided standalone CCCs, and their places in Hong
Kong

109
Figure 4.2 Heat map of the places of aided and non-aided standalone CCCs for children 0 to
under 2 and 2 to under 3

110
Figure 4. 3 Spatial distributions of aided and non-aided CCCs attached to KGs, and their places in
Hong Kong

111
Figure 4. 4 Heat map of the places of aided and non-aided CCCs attached to KGs

112
Figure 4. 5 Number of OCCS places in standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs

113
Figure 4. 6 Spatial distributions of EHS places in aided standalone CCCs and aided KG-cum-CCCs
in Hong Kong

114
Figure 4. 7 Number of EHS places in standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs

115
Figure 4. 8 Spatial distributions of MHCCCs and fee per hour in Hong Kong

116
Figure 4. 9 Spatial distributions of NSCCP and number of home-based child carers in Hong Kong.

117
Figure 4. 10 Availability of aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children aged 0
to under 2) across 18 districts

118
Figure 4. 11 Availability of non-aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children
aged under 2) across 18 districts

119
Figure 4. 12 Accessibility of aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children aged 0
to under 2) at Large Street Block geographical units

120
Figure 4. 13 Accessibility of non-aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children
aged 0 to under 2) at Large Street Block geographical units

121
Figure 4. 14 Accessibility of aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children aged 2
to under 3) at Large Street Block geographical units

122
Figure 4. 15 Accessibility of non-aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs (for children
aged 2 to under 3) at Large Street Block geographical units

123
Figure 4. 16 Accessibility of OCCS places (for children aged under 6) at Large Street Block
geographical units

124
Figure 4. 17 Accessibility of EHS places (for children aged under 6) at Large Street Block
geographical units

125
Figure 4. 18 Accessibility of MHCCC places (for children aged under 6) at Large Street Block
geographical units

126
Figure 4. 19 Accessibility of NSCCP places (for children aged under 9) at Large Street Block
geographical units

127
Figure 4.20 Affordability of aided standalone CCCs at Large Street Block geographical units

128
Figure 4. 21 Affordability of non-aided standalone CCCs at Large Street Block geographical units

129
Figure 4. 22 Affordability of aided CCC attached to KGs at Large Street Block geographical units

130
Figure 4. 23 Affordability of non-aided CCC attached to KGs at Large Street Block geographical
units

131
 Appendix 5 Estimation procedures of the key metrics: availability,

accessibility and affordability

(1) Availability
The availability of all 6 types of day child care services (CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs, OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs,
NSCCP) is calculated as follows:

𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
Availability𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 = � �
𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

Where:
 i: type of service
 j: Hong Kong distict council districts
 S: Supply of services
 D: Demand of services

(2) Accessibility
Two-step Floating Catchment Area method (“2SFCA”) 62 will be used to calculate the Service
Accessibility Index.

Detailed steps of Calculating the Service Accessibility Index:

Step 1: Get the centroid of each construction land

Step 2: Calculate the population of each plot of construction land:

Population of each plot of construction land
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
= ∗ 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑜𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑

Step 3: Calculate the service capacity of each service in catchment of 1km

(with the assumption that the residents’ daily activities mainly take place in the buffer of 1km):
1
Service capacity = ∗ 1000
∑𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙∈{𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ≤ 1𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘} 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙

Step 4: Calculate the accessibility of each construction land:

Construction land accessiblity = � 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ∈ {𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 ≤1𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘}

Step 5: Calculate the accessibility of each district:

∑ 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
accessibility =
𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
The higher value of Service Accessibility Index indicates the better or easier access to services.

62
Luo, W., & Qi, Y. (2009). An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to
primary care physicians. Health & Place, 15(4), 1100-1107.

132
(3) Affordability
The affordability of all 6 types of day child care services (CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs, OCCS, EHS,
MHCCCs, NSCCP) is calculated as follows:

𝐶𝐶𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
Affordability𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 63 = � �
𝐻𝐻𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
Where:
 i: type of service
 j: Hong Kong distict council districts
 C: median/average monthly cost of service
 H: median/average monthly household income 64

The cost of service needed per month 65

C = unit cost per hour * number of hours used per month

Data used for the estimations

(1) Availability
 Data of the services (by types) from the Social Welfare Department
 Data from the questionnaire designed by the consultant team
 Latest Population Census from the Census and Statistics Department
(2) Accessibility
 Geo-community database from the Lands Department
 Latest Population Census from the Census and Statistics Department
(3) Affordability
 Latest General Household Survey from the Census and Statistics Department
 Data of the services (by types) from the Social Welfare Department

63
Affordablity is expressed in percentage (%). The higher the %, the lower the affordability of child care services
relative to household income; and the lower the %, the higher the affordability of child care services relative to
household income.
64
Data are extracted from the latest General Household Survey data (i.e. 2016 or the latest available data) from the
C&SD
65
Data are extracted from the data provided by the Social Welfare Department and Part II stocktaking

133
Appendix 6 Questionnaire design, sampling and promotion

methods

A. Questionnaire design
There are two types of questionnaire used in this large scale data collection exercise, one
targeting current users and the other targeting at non-current users including previous users,
potential users and non-users.

i. Questionnaire for current users

This questionnaire consists of four parts including (1) information related to the usage of
current services, (2) satisfaction on the current services, (3) current and acceptable spending on
the services, and (4) family profile.

1. Information related to the current usage of the services

The questionnaire asked about the basic information about the current usage of the
services which was stated as below:
 Types of services
 Name of the centre(s) and the location(s)
 Frequency of using the services
 List of the service centres which had been waited for and the waiting time
 Main reason(s) for using the services in terms of 13 items stated below:
 Convenient location  Flexible operating hours
 Affordable price  Appropriate facilities
 Safe environment and hygiene  Child development
 Professional service  Have caregiver to take care
 More social interaction for child  Parents have to work
 Parents have health problem  Grandparents not able to help
 Others

2. Current and acceptable spending on the services

This part focused on cost-related questions. The current spending on the services and the
maximum acceptable cost/fee were asked, compared to the average market cost/fee with
an assumption of keeping the quality of the current services centre in terms of the 11 items
mentioned in Part 2 of the questionnaire remain unchanged.
 It is conveniently located
 It has flexible operating hours
 It charges affordable price
 It has age appropriate facilities and equipment
 It has safe and hygienic environment
 It provides age appropriate development programme
 The caregiver is warm and affectionate toward my child
134
  The caregiver is supportive of me as parent
 My child has adequate social interaction with other children
 My child feels happy in the arrangement
 My child gets enough attention from the caregiver

3. Family profile
The questionnaire asked about the family background of the child using child care services
at individual level and household level. At individual level, information related to their
parents and guardian (if applicable) and their grandparents was asked.

Parents and guardian (if applicable)

 Age
 Education attainment
 Current economic status (in the past 30 days)
 Working district

Grandparents
 Age
 Current living district
 Education attainment

At household level, the collected information is stated below:

 Number of children, their ages and the status of using child care services
 Living district of the child using the child care services currently
 Housing type
 Monthly household income
 Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (“CSSA”) recipient
 Family composition (i.e. the child living with whom)

ii. Questionnaire for non-current users

This questionnaire consists of several parts targeted different non-current users stated as
below.
1. Information related to previous usage of the services
The questionnaire asked for some basic information stated below targeted previous users
of the services.
 Types of services
 Name of the centre(s) and the location(s)
 List of the service centres which had previously been waited for and the waiting time
 Main reason(s) for using the services
 Preference of alternative child care services

2. Information related to the waiting situation of the services

135
 The questionnaire asked for some basic information of the services stated below targeted
potential users with at least one child who was eligible to use the services.
 Type(s) of child care service(s) currently waiting for
 Name of the centre(s)
 Main reason(s) for applying for child care service(s)
 Preference of alternative child care services

3. Main reason(s) for not using child care services

The questionnaire asked non-users for the main reason(s) for not using child care services
(i.e. CCC or NSCCP).
 Main reason(s) for not using child care services
 Main reason(s) for relying on home caregivers (parents/guardian/ grandparents/
domestic helper)
 Willingness to use child care services if expectations met
 Preferred type of child care service, and age of children when enrolling

4. Preference of using/not using the child care services

The questionnaire asked potential users who was pregnant/pregnancy was under
planning for the main reason(s) that preferred using/not using child care services.
 Preference to prefer using child care services
 Type(s) of service(s) preferred to be used and the preferred age of the children to
enroll them in the service
 Main reason(s) to prefer using/not using child care services
 Main reason(s) to prefer relying on home caregivers (parents/guardian/
grandparents/domestic helper)

5. Acceptable spending on the services

This part focused on cost-related questions. The questionnaire asked the previous users
and potential users about the maximum acceptable price compared to the average market
price with an assumption of keeping the quality of the services in terms of the 11
mentioned items unchanged.

6. Family profile
The questionnaire asked for information about the background of the respondents and
their spouse (if applicable) at individual and family profile at household level for all
non-current users. At individual level, the below information was collected:

Respondents
 Sex and age
 Educational attainment
 Current economic status (in the past 30 days)
 Working district
 Marital status
136
  Relationship with the child

Spouse (if applicable)

 Age
 Educational attainment
 Current economic status (in the past 30 days)
 Working district

At household level, the information stated below was collected:

 Living district
 Housing type
 Monthly household income
 Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (“CSSA”) recipient
 Number of children, their ages and the status of using child care services (if there is at
least one child in their household)
 Family composition (i.e. the child living with whom) (if there is at least one child in their
household)

B. Sampling and promotion methods

Different means were adopted to introduce this study to the community and invite them to
participate in this large scale data collection exercise. First, promotion leaflets were sent
directly to the centres of the six types of services (including both aided and non-aided centres)
and all Maternal and Child Health Centres (“MCHC”) in 18 districts in late November 2017. To
facilitate the responses, follow-up measures were made accordingly. Frequent reminders
through emails and phone calls were made to the services centres to ensure the awareness.
In addition, service providers such as executive directors, principals and supervisors were
invited to help to promote this study to the targets actively. Meanwhile, the Department of
Health was worked closely with the consultant team to set up publicity about this study.
Moreover, another wave of distribution of the promotional leaflets were delivered to the
centres in late January and early February 2018. Email reminders were also sent in
mid-February as well as in early March to maintain the awareness of the study. To further
advertise the e-questionnaires, the consultant team set up a special webpage:
https://www.wellbeing.hku.hk/childcare/; a special email address: [email protected]; as
well as a dedicated telephone hotline: 5617 4175 to answer any questions related to the
questionnaires.

Initially, only the online data collection exercise was conducted and launched on 30 November
2017 for this study. After communicating with service providers, it was found that there
were users who wanted to participate in this data collection exercise but that they did not
have computers or they were illiterate in using computers. A total of 92 service centres were
contacted (including 38 centres with the support of SWD) to deliver printed questionnaires.
A total of 2 537 printed questionnaires were delivered to the centres in February and March
2018.
137
Overall, the data were collected through both electronic and printed questionnaires starting
from November 2017 to May 2018 (with 5 months extension from the original planned data
collection period). A total of 2 104 questionnaires (i.e. 1 387 electronic questionnaires and 717
printed questionnaires) were collected.

138
Appendix 7 Identification of the reasons that affect the demand for

child care services

Identifying the main reasons for using or not using child care services was one of the focal points
of this data collection exercise. The reasons included service-related factors (e.g. quality of
services, location, operating hours, service fee and etc.), and non-service-related factors (e.g.
“Parents have to work” and “Grandparents are not able to help”). Among the 1 254 valid
responses received from households categorising as current-users, 158 were found to have
missing information on this section (and thus were excluded for analysis). Therefore, for analysis
below, the sample was from 1 096 valid responses from households indicating they were currently
using child care services (i.e. current users) and 392 households indicating they were not using and
waiting for any child care services (i.e. non-users).

A. Households using child care services (i.e. current users)

Among the 1 096 households, nearly a quarter of them (i.e. n=263) used more than one types of
child care services. Collectively, these households were using a total of 1 384 child care services.
For instance, 241 households indicated that they were using two different services (e.g. CCC and
EHS or KG-cum-CCCs and OCCS). A breakdown of households using child care services stratified
by (1) number of different services used and (2) the service types can be found in Table 7.1 and
Table 7.2 respectively.
Table 7. 1 Breakdown of households using child care services stratified by number of different
services used

No. of different service(s) used No. of households No. of services used

1 833 833
2 241 482
3 19 57
4 3 12
Total 1 096 1 384

Table 7. 2 Breakdown of households using child care services stratified by service types

Service types No. of households

CCC 361 (aided: 351 & non-aided: 10)
KG-cum-CCC 587 (aided: 527 & non-aided: 60)
EHS 254
OCCS 56
MHCCC 29
NSCCP 97
Total number of users 1 384

Regarding Standalone CCCs, Figure 7.1 displays the percentage of different reasons for using this
service. The top three reasons were “Parents have to work” (i.e. 89.5%), followed by “Have
caregivers at the centres” (i.e. 76.5%) and “Convenient locations” (i.e. 70.1%).

139
 Standalone Child Care Centres
Parents have to work 89.5%
Have caregivers at the centres 76.5%
Convenient locations 70.1%
Provision of child development programs 67.0%
More social interactions for child 48.2%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 48.2%
Grandparents are not able to help 47.6%
Safe and hygienic environment 47.6%
Appropriate facilities 46.8%
Affordable price 38.0%
Flexible operating hours 17.2%
Others 4.7%
Parents have health problems 1.7%

Figure 7. 1 Reasons for using Standalone Child Care Centres

Regarding CCCs attached to KGs, Figure 7.2 displays the percentage of different reasons for using
this service. The top three reasons were “Convenient locations” (i.e. 75.8%), followed by
“Parents have to work” (i.e. 62.9%) and “Provision of child development programmes” (i.e. 60.8%).

Child Care Centres attached to Kindergartens

Convenient locations 75.8%
Parents have to work 62.9%
Provision of child development programs 60.8%
Have caregivers at the centres 49.2%
Safe and hygienic environment 49.1%
Affordable price 44.3%
Appropriate facilities 44.1%
More social interactions for child 39.0%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 36.6%
Flexible operating hours 25.4%
Grandparents are not able to help 23.9%
Others 5.6%
Parents have health problems 0.7%

Figure 7. 2 Reasons for using Child Care Centres attached to Kindergartens

Regarding EHS, Figure 7.3 displays the percentage of different reasons for using this service. The
top three reasons were “Parents have to work” (85.0%), followed by “Have caregivers at the
centres” (69.7%), and “Convenient locations” (68.5%). Although EHS aims to provide longer
service hours to meet the needs of families and working parents, “Flexible operating hours” (i.e.
24.0%) was not the major concern for using this service.

140
 Extended Hours Service
Parents have to work 85.0%
Have caregivers at the centres 69.7%
Convenient locations 68.5%
Provision of child development programs 56.7%
Safe and hygienic environment 48.0%
Grandparents are not able to help 46.9%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 46.9%
Appropriate facilities 44.9%
More social interactions for child 42.9%
Affordable price 41.3%
Flexible operating hours 24.0%
Others 3.9%
Parents have health problems 1.2%

Figure 7. 3 Reasons for using Extended Hours Service

Regarding OCCS, Figure 7.4 displays the percentage of different reasons for using OCCS. The top
three reasons were “Parents have to work” (i.e. 80.4%), followed by “Have caregivers at the
centres” (i.e. 71.4%), and “Grandparents are not able to help” (i.e. 62.5%).

Occasional Child Care Service

Parents have to work 80.4%
Have caregivers at the centres 71.4%
Grandparents are not able to help 62.5%
Convenient locations 60.7%
Provision of child development programs 46.4%
More social interactions for child 42.9%
Appropriate facilities 42.9%
Affordable price 42.9%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 41.1%
Safe and hygienic environment 37.5%
Flexible operating hours 23.2%
Parents have health problems 7.1%
Others 3.6%

Figure 7. 4 Reasons for using Occasional Child Care Service

Regarding MHCCCs, Figure 7.5 displays the percentage of different reasons for using MHCCCs.
The top three main reasons were “Convenient locations” (i.e. 79.3%), “Affordable price” (i.e.
62.1%), “Safe and hygienic environment” (i.e. 55.2%). It is important to note that the results
should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size.

141
 Mutual Help Child Care Centres

Convenient locations 79.3%

Affordable price 62.1%
Safe and hygienic environment 55.2%
Have caregivers at the centres 51.7%
Parents have to work 48.3%
Appropriate facilities 48.3%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 41.4%
Provision of child development programs 41.4%
More social interactions for child 37.9%
Flexible operating hours 37.9%
Grandparents are not able to help 24.1%
Parents have health problems 10.3%
Others 0.0%

Figure 7. 5 Reasons for using Mutual Help Child Care Centres

Regarding NSCCP, Figure 7.6 displays the percentage of different reasons for using NSCCP service.
The top three reasons were “Parents have to work” (75.3%), followed by “Convenient locations”
(63.9%), and “Affordable price” (56.7%).

Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project

Parents have to work 75.3%
Convenient locations 63.9%
Affordable price 56.7%
Grandparents are not able to help 49.5%
Have caregivers at the centres 48.5%
Safe and hygienic environment 38.1%
Parental supports from caregivers at the centres 30.9%
More social interactions for child 29.9%
Appropriate facilities 28.9%
Flexible operating hours 28.9%
Provision of child development programs 21.6%
Parents have health problems 11.3%
Others 3.1%

Figure 7. 6 Reasons for using Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project

According to Figure 7.1 to Figure 7.6, it is observed that parental working status and the
quality-related factors of child care centres were the main reasons for using child care services.
Comparing the top three main reasons using child care services across the six types of child care
services, “Parents have to work” was the popular one. This indicates that families will resort to
child care services in order to maintain their participation in the labour market. The result also
shows that some common reasons for using child care services are quality-related (e.g. “Provision
of child development programmes”, “More social interactions for child” and “Have caregivers at

142
the centres”). It means that parents recognised the quality of care provided which played an
important role in early child development, such as promoting cognitive development and allowing
social interaction with other infants.

B. Households not using and not wait listing for any child care services (i.e. non-users)

Besides, the consultant team also studied the reasons why the households which were/had been
eligible to use the child care services but did not use and not on the wait list. Among the 763
households who have completed the questionnaires for non-current users, 402 of them indicated
that they were not using and not wait listed for child care services. Among these 402 households,
only 392 of them are of valid data for analysis.

Figure 7.7 and Figure 7.8 show the reasons why the households did not use CCCs and NSCCP
respectively. The top three main reasons not to use CCCs were “Grandparents can help out” (i.e.
41.3%), “Long waiting time” (i.e. 36.0%) and “Take care of the child by oneself” (i.e. 32.9%). While
that for not using NSCCP were “Do not know that there are child care services” (i.e. 41.6%),
“Grandparents can help out” (i.e. 33.2%) and “Take care of the child by oneself” (i.e. 26.8%). It
indicates that when parents or other family members can look after their child, they are less likely
to use the child care services. Besides, it should be noticed that some parents actually do not
know the existence of child care services.

Reasons for not using Standalone Child Care Centres

Grandparents can help out 41.3%
Long waiting time 36.0%
Take care of the child by oneself 32.9%
Short supply 28.8%
Do not know that there are child care services 28.6%
Have a domestic helper 25.5%
Uneven service quality 19.1%
Inconvenient locations 18.4%
Expensive 16.8%
Unreliable safe and hygienic environment 13.0%
Others 3.8%

Figure 7. 7 Reasons for not using CCCs

143
 Reasons for not using Neighbourhood Support Child
Care Project
Do not know that there are child care services 41.6%
Grandparents can help out 33.2%
Take care of the child by oneself 26.8%
Uneven service quality 22.2%
Have a domestic helper 20.7%
Long waiting time 15.6%
Short supply 15.3%
Inconvenient locations 11.7%
Unreliable safe and hygienic environment 11.2%
Expensive 8.2%
Others 5.1%

Figure 7. 8 Reasons for not using NSCCP

144
Appendix 8 Methodology of demand estimation on child care
services

This section reported the methodology to estimate the demand (number of places) for child care
services. Estimation of the demand for child care service were based on two parameters: (1)
Hong Kong population of children at time t and (2) expected proportion of children population in
certain types of households (stratified by their parental working status and household composition)
using child care services at time t. The general form of the demand estimation can be represented
below,

𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 = ∑ 𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ……………………………….8.1

where:
(1) 𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : Hong Kong children population in age group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 at
year t
(2) 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : Expected proportion of children population using child care services in age
group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 at year t
(3) 𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : Expected demand of child care services (i.e. no. of seats) for Hong Kong children
population in age group 𝑖𝑖 at year t

Estimation of the current demand for child care service

Given the general form of the demand estimation, the current demand for child care services in 𝑡𝑡0
can be written as,

𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 = ∑ 𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 …………………………………….8.2

As seen, to derive the current demand of the child care service, data (𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 ) of the current Hong
Kong children population in age group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 in year of 2016 𝑡𝑡0 is
needed which is available from CENSUS 2016.

Estimation of the future demand of the child care service

The future demand of the child care services in 𝑡𝑡1 can be computed using the following
estimation, which is

𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 = ∑ 𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 …………………………………….8.3

As seen, to derive the future demand, data (𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 ) of the future Hong Kong children population in
age group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 in year 𝑡𝑡1 is needed. However, no such data in the
current settings. To most relevant data currently available in Hong Kong is the projected
population provided by the Census and Statistics Department (“C&SD”). In particular, C&SD
estimated the increase/decrease of Hong Kong population from 2016 to 2031 by a 5-year age-band
(e.g. aged 0-4, aged 5-9 etc.). C&SD did not estimate the projected population by parental
working status and household combination.

Putting back into the demand estimation, given the constraints, the estimation has to be modified
to,
∗
𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 = 𝑁𝑁 𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡 𝑃𝑃 …………………………………….8.4
1 𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1

145
 where:
(1) 𝑁𝑁 ∗𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 : Estimated Hong Kong children population in age group 𝑖𝑖 at year t1
(2) 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 : Expected proportion of children population using child care services in age
group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 at year t1

∗
For 𝑁𝑁 𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1
, given the age-band of the C&SD’s projected population (5-year age band) does not
directly correspond to the interests of this study (aged below 2, aged below 3, aged below 6), a
computation based on the equation below is used to derive the projected Hong Kong children
population in age group 𝑖𝑖 at year t1 (𝑁𝑁 ∗𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 ).

𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0
𝑁𝑁 ∗𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 = 𝑁𝑁𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡1 … … … … . … … .8.5
𝑁𝑁𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡0

where:
(1) 𝑁𝑁𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡 : Projected Hong Kong children population in age group corresponding with C&SD’s
age-band categorization 𝑘𝑘 at year 𝑡𝑡1
(2) 𝑁𝑁𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡0 : Hong Kong children population in age group corresponding with C&SD’s age-band
categorization 𝑘𝑘 at year 𝑡𝑡0
(3) 𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 : Hong Kong children population in age group 𝑖𝑖 at year 𝑡𝑡0

This computation was based on an assumption, which is the proportion of the age group 𝑖𝑖 in the
age-band categorization 𝑘𝑘 is time invariant. It is believed that this assumption will generally
hold true for a short-term projection (e.g. a 5-year projection). However, the error rate is likely to
∗
enlarge given a longer period of projection. The computation of 𝑁𝑁 𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1
is illustrated in Appendix 9.

Apart from 𝑁𝑁 ∗𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 , the expected proportion of children population using child care services in
age group 𝑖𝑖 at year 𝑡𝑡1 (𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 ) is also an unknown parameter. To project it, it has to rely on the
closest approximation from existing available data, which is the current expected proportion of
children population using child care services in age group 𝑖𝑖 at year t0 (𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 ). This can be
derived from,
𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0
P𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡1 ≈ P𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 = ∑𝑗𝑗 𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 … . … … … … … … 8.6
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 0

As one can see, the 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 is essentially the average of 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑡𝑡0 weighted by the children population in
age group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗.

Estimation of planning ratio

Given that the planning ratio is set to the expected places per every 20 000 general population 66,
the team also relies on this logic to derive the planning ratio for this study. Therefore, the general
concept of estimating the planning ratio in here is by the following formula:

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡
Planning Ratio𝑡𝑡 = ∗ 20 000 … . … … … … … … 8.7
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑡𝑡

66
Based on Clause 16 of the 1991 White Paper states that the “planning ratio for day nurseries is 100 aided places for
every 20 000 of the general population.

146
Appendix 9 Components in the demand estimation and projection

and the results

9.1 Hong Kong children population in age group 𝒊𝒊 and household

combination 𝒋𝒋 (𝒏𝒏𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 ), population projection (𝐍𝐍𝐢𝐢𝐭𝐭∗ 𝟏𝟏 ) and total population

Based on Census 2016 data, children population can be segregated by households’ parental
working status and household composition. The rationale of segregating of the children
population by these two parameters is based on the indications from the above sections (i.e.
descriptive analysis of reasons of using/not using the service and results from the logistic
regression models) that the likelihood of these sub-groups of children’s (or households’) using a
child care service are likely to be different.

For the parental working status, there are six categories as below:
 Working parent from single-parent household
 Non-working parent from single-parent household
 Both working parents from two-parent household
 Only one working parent from two-parent household
 Both non-working parents from two-parent household
 No parent household

While for household composition (i.e. the child living with whom), there are five categories as
below:
 Living with parents only
 Living with grandparents (and any other members except domestic helpers)
 Living with domestic helpers (and any other members except grandparents)
 Living both with grandparents and domestic helpers (and any other members)
 Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic helpers (i.e. living with any members except
grandparents and domestic helpers)

Using Census 2016 (the latest available population data), the children population aged below 2,
aged below 3, and aged below 6 at 𝑡𝑡0 were 111 240, 164 020, and 346 600 respectively. Table 9.1
summarises the population of children in age group 𝑖𝑖 and household combination 𝑗𝑗 in time 𝑡𝑡0
(i.e. year 2016).

147
Table 9.1 Hong Kong children population stratified by age group and household combination in year t0

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
Aged below 2 (n = 111 240)
Living with parents only 1 442 3 306 12 002 19 282 2 113 NA
Living with grandparents 2 380 4 200 7 080 8 440 840 1 360
Living with domestic helpers 400 580 22 040 7 640 320 40
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers 220 280 3 340 1 200 180 440
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic helpers 298 434 6 418 4 338 267 360
Aged below 3 (n = 164 020)
Living with parents only 2 069 5 001 18 847 29 321 3 110 NA
Living with grandparents 3 160 5 600 9 740 11 900 1 320 1 960
Living with domestic helpers 680 1 000 32 700 11 600 500 80
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers 500 440 5 000 1 840 180 620
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic helpers 431 659 7 573 6 599 390 1 200
Aged below 6 (n = 346 600)
Living with parents only 5 508 11 186 42 754 64 986 6 883 NA
Living with grandparents 6 300 8 140 18 180 23 340 2 420 4 740
Living with domestic helpers 2 340 2 000 67 860 25 800 1 600 160
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers 1 020 660 10 860 3 780 380 1 240
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic helpers 1 152 1 474 11 586 14 634 857 4 760

148
Derivation of population projection (𝐍𝐍𝐢𝐢𝐭𝐭∗ 𝟏𝟏 )
As C&SD only provides the projected population aged 0 to 4 and 5 to 9; thus, the team had to
re-estimate the projected population of children with age groups interested with an assumption
that the growth rate of each interested age group keeps constant in population growth. The
estimated growth rates for children in different age groups are stated as below:
Population aged below 2 111.2
 Children aged below 2 = � �
Population aged 0 to 4 2016
= 279.5
Population aged below 3 164.0
 Children aged below 3 = � �
Population aged 0 to 4 2016
= 279.5
Population aged below 6 347.0
 Children aged below 6 = � Population aged 0 to 9
� = 571.3
2016

After that, the projected population of children in the interested age groups can be re-estimated
by multiplying its growth rate to the projected population extracted from C&SD which is listed in
Table 9.2. Also, the total Hong Kong population and projections are summarised in the same
table. A breakdown of estimated population projection by interested age group is shown in Table
9.3.

Table 9.2 The mid-year projected population (thousands) by age group

Aged 0 to 4 Aged 5 to 9 Aged 0 to 9 Total population
2016 279.5 291.8 571.3 7336.6
2021 280.2 304.3 584.5 7608.4
2026 263.6 292.5 556.1 7825.2
2031 236.6 276.6 513.2 7996.2

Table 9.3 The estimated population projection (thousands) by age group 67

Aged below 2 Aged below 3 Aged below 6
2016 111.2 164.0 347.0
2021 111.5 164.4 354.6
2026 104.9 154.7 337.4
2031 94.2 138.8 311.4

67
The figures are rounded to 1 decimal place.

149
9.2 Expected proportion of children population using child care services

in age group 𝒊𝒊 and household combination 𝒋𝒋 at year t (𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 )

Logistic regression model is used to derive the expected proportion of children population using
child care services. The general form of the model is set out below-

Dependent variable
The dependent variable of this model was a binary variable indicating whether the respondent
“intended to use” or “not intended to use” a child care service. Responses coded as “intended to
use” were either indicating that they were currently using a child care service or on the waiting list
at the time of data collection. Responses coded as “not intended to use” were those who were
not currently using a child care service and not on the waiting list at the time of data collection.
Child care services here cover all six types of child care services but are not specific to any one
type of the service.

Independent variables
According to HKPSG (2017) 68, it states that the provision of child care centres depends on the
estimated demand, which would be affected by socio-economic factors, district characteristics and
the provision of other child care support services within the district. In this model, variables that
are considered that matched with this category, including household information (whether the
child is living with a domestic helper, whether the child is living with grandparents; whether the
child is living with a domestic helper and grandparents, nor neither of them; whether a child is
living with both parents; whether a child is living with one parent only, or not living with parents;
parents’ age; parents’ highest education attainment, household size; number of children in the
household), households’ socio-economic factors [ parents’ working status, monthly household
income, housing type; recipient under Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (“CSSA”) ]. The
model also considered the living districts of the households.

Analytical approach
Given the dependent variable is a binary outcome, a logistic regression analysis was performed to
investigate the association of factors and the utilisation of child care service. For variable
selection process, multi-collinearity issues among the independent variables were first taken into
account. Then, a backward-selection approach was used for the variable selection. Model
selection was based on change in log-likelihood and Akaike Information Criterion (“AIC”) 69 .
Pseudo-R2 were also checked 70. Based on the identified models, the probabilistic likelihood of

68
The summary of Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (March 2017) published by HKSAR Planning
Department is available at: https://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_en/tech_doc/hkpsg/sum/pdf/sum.pdf
69
AIC is an estimator of the relative quality of statistical models for a given set of data.
70 2 2
The pseduo R (Nagelkerke’s Pseudo R ) can be in general interpreted as a goodness-of-fit measure for regression
model. This statistic indicates the percentage of the variance in the dependent variable that the independent variables
2
explain collectively. R = .00 represents a model that does not explain any of the variation in the dependent variable,
2
whereas R = 1.00 represents a model that explains all of the variation in the dependent variable. Cohen (1988)

150
using child care services for a particular type of families was then estimated. Confidence intervals
at 5% and 10% of the estimates were also reported.

The team performed three separate sets of analyses. One gear towards estimating the demand
for child care services (1) for children aged under 2, (2) another for children aged under 3, and (3)
another for children aged under 6.

Sample
Overall, the consultant team has collected 2 104 questionnaires with 1 387 from the community at
large via online and 717 from the CCCs via printed questionnaires. Responses received from
CCCs were excluded in this analysis to avoid over-representing the event group (i.e. those who are
in use or intended to use child care). From 1 354 responses (households) collected from
community 71, 462 responses are from households with at least one child with the age below 2;
675 responses are from households with at least one child with the age below 3 and 971
responses are from households with at least one child aged under 6. Within each response
(household), the household can have multiple children (e.g. one household can have one child at
the age of 2 and another at the age of 3). The questionnaire collected information about the age
of all children within each household (and their child care service usage) and thus one single
response may contribute to multiple data-points for data analysis (depending on the number of
children within the household and whether they are in the eligible age range). Overall, there are
454 680 and 1 053 children in the age group under 2, under 3 and under 6, respectively. The
sample characteristics by age group are shown Table 9.4 to Table 9.6 below.

2
proposed a general guideline that R small than 0.02 could be interpreted as small value (representing weak
2
explanation of the variation in the dependent model). Correspondingly, R smaller than 0.13 and 0.26 represents
medium and large value respectively (representing moderate or strong explanation of the variation in the dependent
2
model). However, extent research including Cohen’s work stressed R is not an absolute measure of goodness-of-fit
and should be cautiously interpreted in tandem with assumptions made and specific subject matter. The consultant
2
team hence cautiously advices readers not to directly interpret the R of this model as a direct indicator of the
goodness-of-fit measure. The purpose of reporting is of references for potential future work. (Cohen, J. E. (1988).
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.)
71
The team collected 1 387 responses from the community through online survey. Among them, 33 responses were
not the targets of the study so they were excluded and this resulted in 1 354 responses.

151
Table 9.4 Characteristics of the sample aged below 2 72

72
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage are rounded to 1 decimal
place.

152
Table 9.5 Characteristics of the sample aged below 3 73

73
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage are rounded to 1 decimal
place.

153
Table 9.6 Characteristics of the sample aged below 6 74

74
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage are rounded to 1 decimal
place.

154
The resemblance of the sample data to the Hong Kong respective population was also examined.
The variables used to evaluate the resemblance included family composition characteristics, such
as number of parents, living with grandparents, domestic helpers, number of child in household
and household variables (household income, and housing type). Chi-square tests are used to test
if there is a significant difference in terms of the characteristics between the sample population
and the Hong Kong population. The results are shown in Table 9.7 to Table 9.9 below.

155
Table 9.7 Comparison between sample population and Hong Kong population for sample group
aged below 2 75,76

Children aged below 2

Hong Kong
Sample
population
n % % p
Family composition
Number of parent(s)
0 9 2.0% 2.0%
1 22 4.8% 12.2% *
2 423 93.2% 85.8% *
Number of grandparent(s)
0 322 70.9% 73.1%
1 or above 132 29.1% 26.9%
Number of domestic helper(s)
0 344 75.8% 67.0% *
1 or above 110 24.2% 33.0% *
Number of children
1 282 62.1% 50.2% *
2 155 34.1% 41.5% *
3 or above 17 3.7% 8.3% *
Monthly household income, HK$
Less than $25,000 109 24.0% 28.9% *
$25,000 to less than $80,000 278 61.2% 51.3% *
$80,000 or above 67 14.8% 19.8% *
Housing types
Subdivided units / Temporary housing 6 1.3% 3.7% *
Owner – Public housing 19 4.2% 3.5%
Owner – Private housing 186 41.0% 33.3% *
Owner – Home Ownership Scheme 62 13.7% 10.4% *
Rental – Public housing 66 14.5% 17.5%
Rental – Private housing 101 22.2% 29.4% *
Rental – Home Ownership Scheme 14 3.1% 2.2%

75
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage rounded to 1 decimal
place.
76
Significance: * p-value < 0.05.

156
Table 9.8 Comparison between sample population and Hong Kong population for sample group
aged below 3 77,78

Children aged below 3

Hong Kong
Sample
population
n % % p
Family composition
Number of parent(s)
0 14 2.1% 2.4%
1 30 4.4% 11.9% *
2 636 93.5% 85.7% *
Number of grandparent(s)
0 494 72.6% 74.2%
1 or above 186 27.4% 25.8%
Number of domestic helper(s)
0 508 74.7% 66.4% *
1 or above 172 25.3% 33.6% *
Number of children
1 397 58.4% 47.6% *
2 255 37.5% 43.7% *
3 or above 28 4.1% 8.7% *
Monthly household income, HK$
Less than $25,000 173 25.3% 28.9% *
$25,000 to less than $80,000 408 60.0% 51.2% *
$80,000 or above 99 14.6% 19.9% *
Housing types
Subdivided units / Temporary housing 6 0.9% 3.8% *
Owner – Public housing 32 4.7% 3.4%
Owner – Private housing 260 38.2% 33.1% *
Owner – Home Ownership Scheme 96 14.1% 10.5% *
Rental – Public housing 114 16.8% 17.9%
Rental – Private housing 147 21.6% 29.2% *
Rental – Home Ownership Scheme 25 3.7% 2.1% *

77
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage are rounded to 1 decimal
place.
78
Significance: * p-value < 0.05.

157
Table 9.9 Comparison between sample population and Hong Kong population for sample group
aged below 6 79,80

Children aged below 6

Hong Kong
Sample
population
n % % p
Family composition
Number of parent(s)
0 20 1.9% 3.1% *
1 45 4.3% 11.5% *
2 988 93.8% 85.4% *
Number of grandparent(s)
0 783 74.4% 76.6%
1 or above 270 25.6% 23.4%
Number of domestic helper(s)
0 779 74.0% 66.0% *
1 or above 274 25.6% 34.0% *
Number of children
1 530 50.3% 41.3% *
2 465 44.2% 49.1% *
3 or above 58 5.5% 9.6% *
Monthly household income, HK$
Less than $25,000 627 59.5% 32.8% *
$25,000 to less than $80,000 283 26.9% 48.1% *
$80,000 or above 143 13.6% 19.1% *
Housing types
Subdivided units / Temporary housing 15 1.4% 4.0% *
Owner – Public housing 41 3.9% 3.1%
Owner – Private housing 399 37.9% 32.7% *
Owner – Home Ownership Scheme 150 14.2% 10.8% *
Rental – Public housing 179 17.0% 18.8%
Rental – Private housing 224 21.3% 28.6% *
Rental – Home Ownership Scheme 45 4.3% 2.0% *

79
The figures of sample size are rounded to nearest integer while the figures of percentage are rounded to 1 decimal
place.
80
Significance: * p-value < 0.05.

158
Based on visual inspection, the distribution of the variables from the sample were generally
comparable to the Hong Kong respective population, with the exception that the sample appear to
have a higher concentration of households without domestic helpers and comparatively well-off
households (household with monthly household income >HK$80,000). When performing
statistical examination, there were however notable differences on the distributions across
multiple variables. This indicates that the sample collected from the questionnaire may not be
fully comparable with the Hong Kong general population (at the respective age range). This may
have introduced biases to the probabilistic estimates. The consultant team used the cell
weighting technique to adjust for the potential issue but admittedly to what extent does the issue
introduce bias to the estimates are unknown. Therefore, caution should be exercised when
interpreting the results. Nevertheless, data collected from the questionnaires provide crucial
information informing the demand projection of the child care services in Hong Kong. To the best
of the consultant team’s knowledge, currently there is no similar dataset available in Hong Kong
that can facilitate a thorough projection.

Logistic regression analysis predicting service utilisation

The analysis attempted to correct the bias with the employment of cell weighting 81. Particularly,
the sample by the monthly household income and parents’ working status was segmented, and
the sample and population proportions for each of the segmented category were obtained. A
weighting variable, which adjusts each sample proportion to its corresponding population
proportion, was created and included in the model estimation, such that inferences from the
results can be more closely resemble with the population. Specifically, in a model for children in
age group 𝑖𝑖 the weights by household income (𝑚𝑚) and parents’ working statuses (𝑛𝑛) for each
child in the sample were calculated as follows:

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
𝑤𝑤𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖,𝑟𝑟 =
𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
where
(1) 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : the proportion of children in category (𝑚𝑚, 𝑛𝑛) among all children in age group 𝑖𝑖
in Hong Kong (i.e. at population level)
(2) 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : the proportion of children in category (𝑚𝑚, 𝑛𝑛) among all children in age group 𝑖𝑖
captured in the sample

Weighting parameters used in the model estimations are shown in Table 9.10 below.

81
Kalton, G., & Flores-Cervantes, I. (2003). Weighting methods. Journal of Official Statistics, 19(2), 81.

159
Table 9.10 Weighting parameters (i.e. monthly household income X parental working status)
used in the model estimation 83

Aged below 2 Aged below 3 Aged below 6

HK$ N n w N n w N n w
Less than $25,000
Both parents working 2.3% 10.0% 0.2 2.3% 10.9% 0.2 2.8% 10.6% 0.3
One parent working 17.9% 13.0% 1.4 18.4% 12.3% 1.5 20.0% 14.3% 1.4
Both non-working 7.1% 1.1% 6.5 6.9% 3.0% 2.3 7.2% 2.8% 2.5
No parents 1.0% 0.9% 1.2 1.0% 0.9% 1.2 1.3% 1.1% 1.2
$25,000 to less than
$80,000
Both parents working 28.1% 46.1% 0.6 27.9% 44.1% 0.6 26.6% 43.5% 0.6
One parent working 18.9% 12.4% 1.5 18.8% 12.9% 1.5 18.6% 12.7% 1.5
Both non-working 3.8% 0.9% 4.4 3.7% 0.6% 6.5 2.5% 0.5% 4.5
No parents 0.7% 1.1% 0.6 0.7% 1.3% 0.5 0.7% 1.1% 0.6
$80,000 or above
Both parents working 15.3% 13.3% 1.2 14.7% 12.9% 1.1 14.2% 11.8% 1.2
One parent working 4.2% 1.3% 3.2 4.3% 1.1% 3.8 4.5% 1.2% 3.8
Both non-working 0.4% - - 0.5% 0.1% 3.5 0.5% 0.1% 5.5
No parents 0.3% - - 0.7% - - 1.2% 0.1% 13.1

83
The figures are rounded to 1 decimal place.

160
Results of the logistic regression model
Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify how the independents may affect the
intention to child care services. Table 9.11 to Table 9.13 summarise the results. Based on these
results, the likelihood that a child in particular age group and certain type of household intends to
use child care services was derived and shown in Table 9.14 to Table 9.16 below. A higher value
indicates a child in particular age group and certain type of household is more likely to use the
services (1 indicates all children in particular age group and certain type of household intend to
use child care services; 0 indicates children in a particular age group and certain type of household
intend to use child care services). This information formed the basis for the demand estimation.

161
Table 9.11 Odd ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) estimated from logistic regression analysis
(sample: children aged below 2) 84,85,86,87

84
All figures are rounded to 4 decimal places.
85
Significance: . p-value < 0.1; * p-value < 0.05; ** p-value < 0.01; *** p-value < 0.001
86
Weighting parameter is included in the model.
87 2
Cohen (1988) proposed a general guideline that R small than 0.02 could be interpreted as small value
2
(representing weak explanation of the variation in the dependent model). Correspondingly, R smaller than 0.13 and
0.26 represents medium and large value respectively (representing moderate or strong explanation of the variation in
2
the dependent model). However, extent research including Cohen’s work stressed R is not an absolute measure of
goodness-of-fit and should be cautiously interpreted in tandem with assumptions made and specific subject matter.
2
The consultant team hence cautiously advises readers not to directly interpret the R of this model as a direct
indicator of the goodness-of-fit measure. The purpose of reporting is of references for potential future work. (Cohen,
J. E. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.)

162
Table 9.12 Odd ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) estimated from logistic regression analysis
(sample: children aged below 3) 88,89,90,91

88
All figures are rounded to 4 decimal places.
89
Significance: . p-value < 0.1; * p-value < 0.05; ** p-value < 0.01; *** p-value < 0.001
90
Weighting parameter is included in the model.
91 2
Cohen (1988) proposed a general guideline that R small than 0.02 could be interpreted as small value
2
(representing weak explanation of the variation in the dependent model). Correspondingly, R smaller than 0.13 and
0.26 represents medium and large value respectively (representing moderate or strong explanation of the variation in
2
the dependent model). However, extent research including Cohen’s work stressed R is not an absolute measure of
goodness-of-fit and should be cautiously interpreted in tandem with assumptions made and specific subject matter.
2
The consultant team hence cautiously advises readers not to directly interpret the R of this model as a direct
indicator of the goodness-of-fit measure. The purpose of reporting is of references for potential future work. (Cohen, J.
E. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.)

163
Table 9.13 Odd ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) estimated from logistic regression analysis
(sample: children aged below 6) 92,93,94,95

92
All figures are rounded to 4 decimal places.
93
Significance: . p-value < 0.1; * p-value < 0.05; ** p-value < 0.01; *** p-value < 0.001
94
Weighting parameter is included in the model.
95 2
Cohen (1988) proposed a general guideline that R small than 0.02 could be interpreted as small value
2
(representing weak explanation of the variation in the dependent model). Correspondingly, R smaller than 0.13 and
0.26 represents medium and large value respectively (representing moderate or strong explanation of the variation in
2
the dependent model). However, extent research including Cohen’s work stressed R is not an absolute measure of
goodness-of-fit and should be cautiously interpreted in tandem with assumptions made and specific subject matter.
2
The consultant team hence cautiously advises readers not to directly interpret the R of this model as a direct
indicator of the goodness-of-fit measure. The purpose of reporting is of references for potential future work. (Cohen, J.
E. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.)

164
Table 9.14 Expected proportion of child care services utilisation for children aged under 2 stratified by parental working status and the household
composition 96,97,98

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
0.36 0.30 0.69 0.20
Living with parents only (0.36 - 0.37) (0.29 - 0.31) (0.62 - 0.75) (0.02 - 0.73) - NA
[0.35 - 0.38] [0.28 - 0.32] [0.55 - 0.80] [0.00 - 0.97]
0.20 0.03 0.48 0.08 0.07
Living with grandparents (0.19 - 0.20) (0.03 - 0.03) (0.47 - 0.48) (0.02 - 0.29) - (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.19 - 0.21] [0.03 - 0.04] [0.47 - 0.49] [0.00 - 0.66] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.07 0.01 0.28 0.08
Living with domestic helpers (0.07 - 0.07) (0.01 - 0.01) (0.28 - 0.29) (0.07 - 0.08) - -
[0.06 - 0.08] [0.01 - 0.01] [0.28 - 0.29] [0.07 - 0.08]
0.01 0.04
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers - - (0.00 - 0.99) (0.04 - 0.05) - -
[0.00 – 1.00] [0.04 - 0.05]
0.72 0.37
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
- - (0.71 - 0.74) (0.35 - 0.39) -
helpers
[0.69 - 0.75] [0.33 - 0.40]

96
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
97
As the survey did not include samples from all combinations based on parental working status and household composition; thus, the model cannot estimate the expected
likelihood of the child cares services utilization for some groups (i.e. with a “-“mark as indication).
98
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

165
Table 9.15 Expected proportion of child care services utilisation for children aged under 3 stratified by parental working status and the household
composition 99,100,101

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

household
Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work
0.38 0.35 0.73 0.43 0.13
Living with parents only (0.37 - 0.39) (0.34 - 0.35) (0.73 - 0.73) (0.42 - 0.43) (0.13 - 0.14) NA
[0.36 - 0.39] [0.34 - 0.36] [0.73 - 0.74] [0.42 - 0.43] [0.12 - 0.15]
0.27 0.12 0.52 0.21 0.04 0.07
Living with grandparents (0.26 - 0.27) (0.12 - 0.13) (0.52 - 0.53) (0.21 - 0.21) (0.04 - 0.04) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.26 - 0.28] [0.12 - 0.13] [0.52 - 0.53] [0.21 - 0.22] [0.04 - 0.04] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.11 0.09 0.41 0.19
Living with domestic helpers (0.11 - 0.11) (0.08 - 0.09) (0.41 - 0.42) (0.19 - 0.19) - -
[0.10 - 0.12] [0.08 - 0.10] [0.41 - 0.42] [0.18 - 0.20]
0.17 0.23 0.07
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers (0.16 - 0.17) - (0.22 - 0.23) (0.07 - 0.07) - -
[0.15 - 0.18] [0.21 - 0.24] [0.07 - 0.08]
0.93 0.75
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
- - (0.93 - 0.94) (0.74 - 0.76) - -
helpers
[0.93 - 0.94] [0.73 - 0.77]

99
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
100
As the survey did not include samples from all combinations based on parental working status and household composition; thus, the model cannot estimate the expected
likelihood of the child cares services utilization for some groups (i.e. with a “-“ mark as indication).
101
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

166
Table 9.16 Expected proportion of child care services utilisation for children aged under 6 stratified by parental working status and the household
composition 102,103,104

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
0.33 0.35 0.74 0.50 0.20
Living with parents only (0.32 - 0.33) (0.34 - 0.35) (0.74 - 0.74) (0.49 - 0.50) (0.20 - 0.21) NA
[0.32 - 0.34] [0.34 - 0.36] [0.74 - 0.74] [0.49 - 0.50] [0.19 - 0.21]
0.21 0.18 0.59 0.31 0.09 0.26
Living with grandparents (0.21 - 0.22) (0.17 - 0.18) (0.59 - 0.59) (0.31 - 0.31) (0.09 - 0.09) (0.26 - 0.27)
[0.20 - 0.22] [0.17 - 0.18] [0.58 - 0.60] [0.30 - 0.31] [0.09 - 0.10] [0.25 - 0.28]
0.17 0.17 0.47 0.28
Living with domestic helpers (0.17 - 0.18) (0.16 - 0.17) (0.47 - 0.47) (0.27 - 0.28) - -
[0.16 - 0.18] [0.16 - 0.18] [0.47 - 0.48] [0.27 - 0.28]
0.19 0.32 0.21
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers (0.18 - 0.19) - (0.31 - 0.32) (0.21 - 0.21) - -
[0.18 - 0.20] [0.30 - 0.33] [0.20 - 0.22]
0.75 0.92 0.75
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
- (0.74 - 0.76) (0.92 - 0.92) (0.74 - 0.76) - -
helpers
[0.73 - 0.77] [0.91 - 0.93] [0.73 - 0.76]

102
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
103
As the survey did not include samples from all combinations based on parental working status and household composition; thus, the model cannot estimate the expected
likelihood of the child cares services utilization for some groups (i.e. with a “-“ mark as indication).
104
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

167
Based on the logistic regression analysis on the data drawing from the questionnaires, the
consultant team derived the probabilistic likelihoods of using child care services of a child from a
specific household combination. In this context, it can be interpreted as the expected proportion
of sub-groups in specific household combination to children population’s likelihood to use the child
care services (those who were identified as intended to use will be interpreted as they are likely to
use a child care service).

However, due to small sample size and hence the lack of sample of certain subgroups, one can see
that there is missing information on expected proportions (p) for some sub-groups of children as
shown above (e.g. there are no estimates for the sub-group of single working parent living with
grandparents and domestic helpers of children aged below 2). Given this issue, the consultant
team used several informed estimations to derive these figures. Specifically, these informed
estimations were largely derived by following the two logics described below.

Logic 1: if the missing p for a particular age group (e.g. aged below 2) is available
from another age group (e.g. aged below 3), the available p from will be adopted and
to fill up the missing p

Logic 2: The second logics will be used only if the missing p cannot be fulfilled by (1).
For this logical deduction, the estimations are informed by its neighboring cell
(neighboring sub-group of children from a particular household configuration). In
particular, for the missing p among the categories of (1) single-parent household and
(2) two-parent household, the missing p are all under the “non-work” group.
Under the information (from results from the regression models) that households
with non-working parents are unlikely to have a higher likelihood of using a child
care service, the consultant team simply borrow the p from households with working
parents and the same category of household composition to fill in the missing p.
This approximation more likely overestimates the expected proportion, as the
consultant team was expecting the p form a “non-working” household should be
smaller than a “working” household. However, given that there is no logical
deduction to derive the magnitude of the reduction, the consultant team takes a
more conservative way to estimate the p. For the “no-parent household”, given
that there is no differentiation by working status, the consultant team uses the
household composition to inform the estimation. Given the missing p for all the
three age groups are all at the “living with domestic helpers” and “living with
grandparents and domestic helpers”, which should be more closely resembled by
the group of “living with grandparents” than the “Living with non-grandparents and
non-domestic helpers”, the consultant team therefore adopts the p from the former
group for the estimations.

Given these deliberations, the p used for the demand estimation is filled and shown from Table
9.17 to Table 9.19 below.

168
Table 9.17 Expected proportion of children population aged under 2 and in household combination 𝒋𝒋 using child care services at year t (𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 ) 105,106

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
0.36 0.30 0.69 0.20 0.13#
Living with parents only (0.36 - 0.37) (0.29 - 0.31) (0.62 - 0.75) (0.02 - 0.73) (0.13-0.14) NA
[0.35 - 0.38] [0.28 - 0.32] [0.55 - 0.80] [0.00 - 0.97] [0.12-0.15]
0.20 0.03 0.48 0.08 0.04# 0.07
Living with grandparents (0.19 - 0.20) (0.03 - 0.03) (0.47 - 0.48) (0.02 - 0.29) (0.04-0.04) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.19 - 0.21] [0.03 - 0.04] [0.47 - 0.49] [0.00 - 0.66] [0.04-0.04] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.07 0.01 0.28 0.08 0.08* 0.07*
Living with domestic helpers (0.07 - 0.07) (0.01 - 0.01) (0.28 - 0.29) (0.07 - 0.08) (0.07-0.08) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.06 - 0.08] [0.01 - 0.01] [0.28 - 0.29] [0.07 - 0.08] [0.07-0.08] [0.06 - 0.08]
#
0.17 0.17* 0.01 0.04 0.04* 0.07*
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers (0.16 - 0.17) (0.16 - 0.17) (0.00 - 0.99) (0.04 - 0.05) (0.04-0.05) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.15 - 0.18] [0.15 - 0.18] [0.00 - 1.00] [0.04 - 0.05] [0.04-0.05] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.75* 0.75# 0.72 0.37 0.37* 0.07*
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
(0.74 - 0.76) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.71 - 0.74) (0.35 - 0.39) (0.35-0.39) (0.07 - 0.08)
helpers
[0.73 - 0.77] [0.73 - 0.77] [0.69 - 0.75] [0.33 - 0.40] [0.33-0.4] [0.06 - 0.08]
#
Figures are derived based on Logic 1.
* Figures are derived based on Logic 2.

105
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
106
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

169
Table 9.18 Expected proportion of children population aged under 3 and in household combination 𝒋𝒋 using child care services at year t (𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 ) 107,108

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
0.38 0.35 0.73 0.43 0.13
Living with parents only (0.37 - 0.39) (0.34 - 0.35) (0.73 - 0.73) (0.42 - 0.43) (0.13 - 0.14) NA
[0.36 - 0.39] [0.34 - 0.36] [0.73 - 0.74] [0.42 - 0.43] [0.12 - 0.15]
0.27 0.12 0.52 0.21 0.04 0.07
Living with grandparents (0.26 - 0.27) (0.12 - 0.13) (0.52 - 0.53) (0.21 - 0.21) (0.04 - 0.04) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.26 - 0.28] [0.12 - 0.13] [0.52 - 0.53] [0.21 - 0.22] [0.04 - 0.04] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.11 0.09 0.41 0.19 0.19* 0.07*
Living with domestic helpers (0.11 - 0.11) (0.08 - 0.09) (0.41 - 0.42) (0.19 - 0.19) (0.19 - 0.19) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.10 - 0.12] [0.08 - 0.10] [0.41 - 0.42] [0.18 - 0.20] [0.18 - 0.20] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.17 0.17* 0.23 0.07 0.07* 0.07*
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers (0.16 - 0.17) (0.16 - 0.17) (0.22 - 0.23) (0.07 - 0.07) (0.07 - 0.07) (0.07 - 0.08)
[0.15 - 0.18] [0.15 - 0.18] [0.21 - 0.24] [0.07 - 0.08] [0.07 - 0.08] [0.06 - 0.08]
0.75* 0.75# 0.93 0.75 0.75* 0.07*
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
(0.74 - 0.76) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.93 - 0.94) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.07 - 0.08)
helpers
[0.73 - 0.77] [0.73 - 0.77] [0.93 - 0.94] [0.73 - 0.77] [0.73 - 0.77] [0.06 - 0.08]
#
Figures are derived based on Logic 1.
* Figures are derived based on Logic 2.

107
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
108
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

170
Table 9.19 Expected proportion of children population aged under 6 and in household combination 𝒋𝒋 using child care services at year t (𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 ) 109,110

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
0.33 0.35 0.74 0.50 0.20
Living with parents only (0.32 - 0.33) (0.34 - 0.35) (0.74 - 0.74) (0.49 - 0.50) (0.20 - 0.21) NA
[0.32 - 0.34] [0.34 - 0.36] [0.74 - 0.74] [0.49 - 0.50] [0.19 - 0.21]
0.21 0.18 0.59 0.31 0.09 0.26
Living with grandparents (0.21 - 0.22) (0.17 - 0.18) (0.59 - 0.59) (0.31 - 0.31) (0.09 - 0.09) (0.26 - 0.27)
[0.20 - 0.22] [0.17 - 0.18] [0.58 - 0.60] [0.30 - 0.31] [0.09 - 0.10] [0.25 - 0.28]
0.17 0.17 0.47 0.28 0.28* 0.26*
Living with domestic helpers (0.17 - 0.18) (0.16 - 0.17) (0.47 - 0.47) (0.27 - 0.28) (0.27 - 0.28) (0.26 - 0.27)
[0.16 - 0.18] [0.16 - 0.18] [0.47 - 0.48] [0.27 - 0.28] [0.27 - 0.28] [0.25 - 0.28]
0.19 0.19* 0.32 0.21 0.21* 0.26*
Living with grandparents and domestic helpers (0.18 - 0.19) (0.18 - 0.19) (0.31 - 0.32) (0.21 - 0.21) (0.21 - 0.21) (0.26 - 0.27)
[0.18 - 0.20] [0.18 - 0.20] [0.30 - 0.33] [0.20 - 0.22] [0.20 - 0.22] [0.25 - 0.28]
0.75* 0.75 0.92 0.75 0.75* 0.26*
Living with non-grandparents and non-domestic
(0.74 - 0.76) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.92 - 0.92) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.74 - 0.76) (0.26 - 0.27)
helpers
[0.73 - 0.77] [0.73 - 0.77] [0.91 - 0.93] [0.73 - 0.76] [0.73 - 0.76] [0.25 - 0.28]
*Figures are derived based on Logic 2.

109
All figures are rounded to 2 decimal places and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.
110
The magnitude of some figures is too small and may not be displayed accurately due to the rounding issue.

171
9.3 Results on demand estimation

By using the components above and formula stated in Appendix 8, the demand for child care
services for children population aged under 2, under 3 and under 6 are summarised in Table 9.20
to Table 9.22 below. While the projected demand and the relative planning ratio in the year of
2016, 2021, 2026, and 2031 are summarised in Table 9.23 and Table 9.24.

172
Table 9.20 Expected demand of child care services utilisation for children aged under 2 by household combination in the year of 2016 111

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
526 992 8 274 3 847 284
Living with parents only (514 - 539) (964 – 1 020) (7 461 – 9 001) (439 – 14 023) (273 - 295) NA
[502 - 551] [937 – 1 048] [6 582 – 9 629] [42 – 18 635] [262 - 307]
466 136 3 379 681 33 97
Living with grandparents (454 - 479) (129 - 143) (3 344 – 3 414) (154 – 2 476) (31 - 34) (90 - 105)
[441 - 493] [122 - 150] [3 309 – 3 449] [33 – 5 604] [30 - 36] [83 - 114]
28 5 6 269 586 25 3
Living with domestic helpers (26 - 29) (4 - 5) (61 82 – 6 357) (571 - 601) (24 - 25) (3 - 3)
[25 - 30] [4 - 6] [6 095 – 6 445] [556 - 617] [23 - 26] [2 - 3]
37 47 29 52 8 32
Living with grandparents and
(35 - 38) (45 - 49) (0 – 3 323) (49 - 55) (7 - 8) (29 - 34)
domestic helpers
[34 - 40] [43 - 51] [0 – 3 340] [46 - 59] [7 - 9] [27 - 37]
222 324 4 636 1 596 98 26
Living with non-grandparents
(220 - 225) (320 - 328) (4 528 – 4 740) (1 521 – 1 672) (94 - 103) (24 - 28)
and non-domestic helpers
[217 - 228] [315 - 332] [4 415 – 4 841] [1 447 – 1 751] [89 - 108] [22 - 30]

111
All figures are rounded to nearest integer and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.

173
Table 9.21 Expected demand of child care services utilisation for children aged under 3 by household combination in the year of 2016 112

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
785 1743 13 775 12 535 418
Living with parents only (770 - 800) (1 714 – 1 772) (13 734 – 13 816) (12 459 – 12 611) (402 - 435) NA
[755 - 815] [1 685 – 1 802] [13 692 – 13 857] [12 382 – 12 688] [386 - 452]
848 693 5107 2 517 51 141
Living with grandparents (830 - 866) (672 - 715) (5 070 – 5 145) (2 486 – 2 548) (49 - 54) (133 - 150)
[812 - 884] [652 - 737] [5 032 – 5 182] [2 455 – 2 580] [47 - 57] [125 - 160]
75 88 13 539 2 208 95 6
Living with domestic helpers (73 - 78) (84 - 92) (13 432 – 13 647) (2 175 – 2 242) (94 - 97) (5 - 6)
[71 - 80] [81 - 95] [13 324 – 13 756] [2 142 – 2 276] [92 - 98] [5 - 7]
84 74 1 139 130 13 45
Living with grandparents and
(81 - 87) (71 - 77) (1 106 – 1 173) (125 - 135) (12 - 13) (42 - 47)
domestic helpers
[77 - 91] [68 - 80] [1 074 – 1 207] [120 - 141] [12 - 14] [39 - 50]
322 492 7 071 4 933 292 86
Living with non-grandparents
(318 - 326) (486 - 498) (7 041 – 7 099) (4 867 – 4 997) (288 - 295) (81 - 92)
and non-domestic helpers
[313 - 330] [479 - 504] [7 010 – 7 125] [4 799 – 5 060] [284 - 299] [76 - 98]

112
All figures are rounded to nearest integer and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.

174
Table 9.22 Expected demand of child care services utilisation for children aged under 6 by household combination in the year of 2016 113

Single-parent household Two-parent household No-parent

Work Non-work Both work One-work Non-work household
1 796 3 904 31 584 32 213 1 395
Living with parents only (1 766 – 1 826) (3 846 – 3 962) (31 510 – 31 658) (32 077 – 32 350) (1 360 – 1 431) NA
[1 737 – 1 856] [3 789 – 40 20] [31 436 – 31 732] [31 940 – 32 487] [1 325 – 1 468]
1 331 1 434 10 711 7 196 221 1 248
Living with grandparents (1 305 – 1 357) (1 400 – 1 468) (10 658 – 10 764) (7 138 – 7 254) (214 - 228) (1 216 – 1 280)
[1 279 – 1 384] [1 367 – 1 504] [10 604 – 10 817] [7 079 – 7 313] [207 - 235] [1 185 – 1 313]
404 338 31 965 7 113 441 42
Living with domestic helpers (395 - 413) (329 - 347) (31 788 – 32 143) (7 042 – 7 184) (437 - 446) (41 - 43)
[386 - 423] [320 - 356] [31 610 – 32 321] [6 971 – 7 256] [432 - 450] [40 - 44]
192 125 3 423 793 80 327
Living with grandparents and
(187 - 198) (121 - 128) (3 363 – 3 484) (777 - 811) (78 - 81) (318 - 335)
domestic helpers
[182 - 204] [118 - 132] [3 303 – 3 546] [760 - 828] [76 - 83] [310 - 344]
860 1 100 10 671 10 946 641 1 253
Living with non-grandparents
(849 - 871) (1 086 – 1 114) (10 635 – 10 706) (10 833 – 11 057) (634 - 648) (1 221 – 1 286)
and non-domestic helpers
[837 - 881] [1 071 – 1 128] [10 597 – 10 740] [10 717 – 11 166] [628 - 654] [1 190 – 1 319]

113
All figures are rounded to nearest integer and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10% confidence intervals.

175
Table 9.23 Estimated and projected demand for the child care services by age group in the year
of 2016, 2021, 2026, and 2031 114

Aged under 2 Aged under 3 Aged under 6

32 736 69 304 163 747
2016 (27 533 – 49 153) (68 697 – 69 912) (162 622 – 164 872)
[25 711 – 57 966] [68 089 – 70 524] [161 495 – 166 004]
32 818 69 478 167 530
2021 (27 602 – 49 276) (68 869 – 70 087) (166 379 – 168 681)
[25 775 – 58 111] [68 260 – 70 701] [165 226 – 169 840]
30 874 65 361 159 390
2026 (25 967 – 46 357) (64 789 – 65 935) (158 295 – 160 485)
[24 248 – 54 668] [64 216 – 66 512] [157 198 – 161 587]
27 711 58 667 147 094
2031 (23 307 – 41 609) (58 153 – 59 181) (146 084 – 148 105)
[21 765 – 49 069] [57 638 – 59 699] [145 071 – 149 122]

Table 9.24 Planning ratio for child care services by age group in the year of 2016, 2021, 2026, and
2031 115

Aged under 2 Aged under 3 Aged under 6

89 189 446
2016 (75 - 134) (187 - 191) (443 - 449)
[116 - 175] [209 - 287] [533 - 652]
86 183 440
2021 (73 - 130) (181 - 184) (437 - 443)
[112 - 169] [202 - 277] [526 - 643]
79 167 407
2026 (66 - 118) (166 - 169) (405 - 410)
[102 - 155] [184 - 254] [487 - 595]
69 147 368
2031 (58 - 104) (145 - 148) (365 - 370)
[90 - 136] [162 - 223] [440 - 537]

114
All figures are rounded to nearest integer and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10%
confidence intervals.
115
All figures are rounded to nearest integer and figures in () are 5% confidence intervals while figures in [] are 10%
confidence intervals.

176
Appendix 10 Number of children in 2016 stratified by the parents’ working status and family types

Figure 10.1 Number and percentage of children stratified by parents’ working status and family types 116

116
Source: 2016 census data from Statistics and Census Department.

177
Appendix 11 Focus Group interview methodology and data analyses

Qualitative methodology

To understand the experiences of the stakeholders and compile their opinions on the service
provision of child care services, design experience-informed recommendations on the service
modes and the financing modes for child care services. Qualitative data were collected from
different stakeholders through one-on-one discussions, focus group interviews as well as from the
general public. These qualitative data would also be used to explain some of the findings
generated through quantitative research methods, e.g. questionnaires, census data and other
sources.

Sampling for interviews and focus group

Four groups of stakeholders (N=103) were recruited through different ways. They are listed as
below:
i. Service providers (staff at management level): management level staff of child care services,
such as principals, supervisors of child care services;
ii. Service providers (staff at front-line level): the front-line staff involved in the daily operation,
such as child care workers 117 and child carers who provide child care services at NSCCP or
MHCCCs;
iii. Service Users: parents and carers have used and/or are using child care services subvented by
SWD; and
iv. Non-service users: parents and carers who have never used and/or are not currently using
child care services subvented by SWD.

Recruitment

Service providers (Management level) (Table 11.1)

A total of 53 respondents from management level working in standalone CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs,
MHCCCs, NSCCP, women’s groups and the Hong Kong Council of Social Service registered and 44 of
them actually showed up in the focus group interviews.

Service providers (Front-line level) (Table 11.1)

A total of 36 respondents of front-line staff e.g. child care workers, social workers or home-based
child carers, working in standalone CCCs, KG-cum-CCCs, MHCCCs, NSCCP and women’s groups,
registered to focus group interviews, and 27 of them actually showed up and participated in the
focus group interviews.

Service users (Table 11.2)

A total of 24 service users participated in the focus group interviews. These interviewees were
randomly selected among those respondents of the online questionnaires who indicated their
interest to participate in the focus group interviews. Stratified Random Sampling was employed

117
The functional title of those interviewee is Teacher.

178
to select the potential interviewees. The demographic characteristics and socio-economics
factors such as districts, monthly household income, child care services the interviewees were
using, number of children, etc were considered for stratification.

Non-service users (Table 11.2)

A total of 8 participants of this focus group were also recruited from the online questionnaires for
the non-service users.

Core Questions for the focus group

The focus group interviews were conducted in semi-structural format. Different sets of questions
for different types of stakeholders were designed by the research team. Those questions covered
the following nine areas:

i. the service objectives, service contents, target user groups and planning parameters of aided
standalone CCCs which are under the planning and regulatory control of SWD, including a
review of the planning for centre-based day child care services which are substantially
provided in KG-cum-CCCs;
ii. the relationship of CCC service, including standalone CCCs and KG-cum-CCCs, with
kindergarten education;
iii. the manpower planning and training for child care staff, including child care workers and
child care supervisors;
iv. the appropriate planning mechanism for centre-based day child care services;
v. the functions of NSCCP and MHCCCs and proposed changes to enhance the service quality
and optimise the use of public resources;
vi. the appropriate service model(s)/mode(s) and financing mode(s) for different types of day
child care services;
vii. the projection of the demand and supply of day child care services including
government-subsidised and non-government-subsidised services, as well as the ancillary
services, i.e. EHS and OCCS in the territory;
viii. the need for re-engineering and integration of different types of day child care services; and
ix. the role of Government vis-à-vis the private market in the provision of day child care services

The procedures of one-on-one and focus group interviews

The investigators and two group interviewers led the semi-structured focus group interviews.
The interviewers hold a Master’s Degree in Public Health and a Master’s Degree in Social work,
respectively and they are experienced in facilitating focus group discussion. Each of the group
sessions was led by an investigator of the study, i.e. by Professor Paul Yip, Dr. Frances Law and Dr.
Chee Hon Chan to ensure the quality of the interviews.

Ethics approvals were sought from The University of Hong Kong (Reference Number: EA1706015)
and The Department of Health (Reference Number: LM 287/2017). The interviews and focus
groups lasted for about 60-90 minutes. Written consent was obtained before conducting each
focus group and interviews. All interviewees were clearly informed about the research objectives,
purposes of the data collection and understood that the interviews were audio-recorded
(audio-recording was not consented for all one-on-one interviews) for research purposes.
Confidentiality of the interviewees’ personal identity was also iterated. The venue for all focus
179
groups was the meeting rooms in the Centennial Campus, The University of Hong Kong. The audio
records and transcripts were stored in The Hong Kong Jockey Club Centre for Suicide Research and
Prevention (“CSRP”) system and can only be accessed by authorized researchers.

For the participants of service users’ focus groups and non-service users’ focus groups, HK$200
vouchers were provided when they completed the focus group interviews.

Data analyses on focus group

Verbatim transcripts were typed by trained assistants. The research team further checked the
transcripts to ensure their quality and accuracy.

Thematic analysis approach was then used to conduct the data analyses. Based on the nine areas
of concern, meaningful quotes were highlighted and extracted as the first level coding by the
trained research staff. Those concerns include the participants' beliefs, values, perceptions,
comments and suggestions in the 9 areas stated previously.

Codes were then categorised into one or more of the nine areas by two research members.
Another two members then identified commonalities and differences among the codes under each
of those areas and assigned them with themes and sub-themes. An inter-rater reliability check
for data coding was later conducted by a member from each of the two teams.

180
Table 11. 1 Demographic data summary of service providers—management level & front-line level

Service Providers (management level) Service Providers (front-line level)

Number of focus groups conducted: 6 Number of focus groups conducted: 3

NGO Supervisor, Social Home-based Child Care Social Others

Director, Manager, Worker, Child Carers Worker Worker (Officer,
Principal and Officer and Advocacy under NSCCP Centre-in-
Service Service Officer charge)
Director coordinator
Total
CCCs (included EHS
& OCCS) 7 6 0 0 12 0 3 28

KG-cum-CCCs
(included EHS & 12 3 0 0 1 0 2 18
OCCS)
MHCCCs 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3
NSCCP 0 7 1 2 1 5 0 16
Others (e.g.
women’s group, 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 6
HKCSS)
Total 24 17 3 2 14 5 6 71

181
Table 11. 2 Demographic data summary of service users and non-service users

Services using Gender Number of Children

(Male vs. Female)

1 2 3 Total
Service users CCCs (included EHS & OCCS)
8:12 12 7 1 20
Number of focus groups
conducted: 3 KG-cum-CCCs
(included EHS & OCCS) 0:2 1 1 0 2

MHCCCs 0:0 0 0 0 0
NSCCP 1:1 1 1 0 2
Non-service users N/A
Number of focus groups 0:8 5 3 0 8
conducted: 2
Total 9:23 19 12 1 32

182
Appendix 12 Views from Government representatives

Objective and Procedure of Data Collection

The one-on-one interviews with Government representatives were conducted with the aim to
understand their duties and how they perceive child care services in Hong Kong. A total of three
representatives were interviewed and they were from relevant bureau/department. The Project
Leader of the consultant team attended all the one-on-one interviews at the Government
representative’s offices.

Some relevant views are set out below.

Rational of Child Care Services: The current policy in place has cultural context which is
care-oriented. If the policy is changed to “education and care”, the Government may need to
have a clear definition of “child development” to enable the change and be consistent with the
objectives of child care services.

Expenditure of Child Care Services: The increase in public expenditure on child care services is
subject to the policy objectives and service positioning of child care services.

Planning of Child Care Services: Before the harmonisation of pre-primary services in September
2005, the planning standard for the provision of day nurseries for children aged 2 to under 6 was
100 aided places for every 20 000 of the general population.118 The planning ratio for day
nurseries became obsolete after the harmonisation of pre-primary services and was removed from
the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. To increase the provision of CCC places, the
Government tried to identify suitable places/premises in the community for setting up aided
standalone CCCs. Nevertheless, despite the claimed shortage in CCC places for children aged
under 3, there is lack of private CCCs as seen in the market.

Monitoring and Compliance: After the harmonisation of pre-primary services in September 2005,
the former day nurseries were registered under the CCSO and the EO to operate both CCCs and
KGs serving children aged 2 to under 6 which are called KG-cum-CCCs since then. Though it is
clear that CCCs, primarily for children under 3, are regulated by SWD while KGs for children aged 3
to 6 are under EDB’s regulatory control, some frontline workers still have confusion about the
one-stop service provided by JOKC. Meanwhile, service providers of KG-cum-CCCs have the
autonomy to distribute the number of KG and CCC places, which might result in the increase of KG
places at the expense of CCC places.

The Position of MHCCCs and NSCCP: MHCCCs provide child care service for promoting mutual help
at neighbourhood level, and the child carers are volunteers. Of a similar nature, NSCCP aims to
provide needy parents with a flexible form of child care service at the neighbourhood level and, at
the same time, to foster mutual help and care in the community. Some parents might have the
impression that MHCCCs are not as popular as they were in the past, as demonstrated in the low
utilization rates of MHCCCs upon the implementation of NSCCP.

118
White Paper : Social Welfare into the 1990s and Beyond, March 1991.

183
Appendix 13 Summary and analyses of the comments from the
general public by deputations and emails

Introduction
The consultant team reviewed the 17 papers prepared by deputations which were submitted to
“LegCo Subcommittee on Children’s Rights’ meeting” on January 13, 2018. In addition, the
consultant team also reviewed the written opinions from the general public which were received
via email. These opinions are summarised as follows:

About the position and rationales of child care service

 Some deputations advocated the Government to invest more resources on child care services
to support families in need.
 The function/training programme of child care centres should be enhanced, such as providing
parenting/child care skills training to parents.
 Revisit and redefine the positioning of child care services.
 Review and update the “Child Care Services Ordinance” and the “Child Care Services
Regulations” in order to cater the current needs of Hong Kong development and child
development.
 Formulate policy of child care and education with a clear planning system.
 Reactivate the planning of child care services and provide more options of child care services
with affordable cost.
 Child Care Centres should play a key role in child care services with support from
flexible/volunteered-based child care services
 Enhance family-friendly policy, for example, extending the maternity leave from 10 weeks119
to 14 weeks, paternity leave from 3 days to 7 days, and providing incentives for employers to
create more jobs on part-time based so that the parents can take care of children even when
they are engaged by work.
 Child care services which focus on developing children’s physical, self-care ability and
creativity should be enhanced.

Enhance service availability

• Increase the provision of child care services, including Occasional Child Care Service and
full-day child care services for children of age 0 to under 3.
• One deputation advised to increase the number of child care places by 4,900 to meet the
service demand.
• Enhance the promotion of child care services and make the information to be more
accessible.
119
Per Policy Address on October 10, 2018, maternity leave is revised from 10 to 14 weeks among civil servants with
immediate effect. For the general public, the maternity leave at 14 weeks bill will be tabled in late 2019 and passed
before July 2020 (SCMP 2018).

184
Enhance service quality
• For children aged 2 to under 3 (nursery class), a respondent suggested adjusting the qualified
staff-to-child ratio from 1:14 to 1:11.
• Review and adjust the staff-to-child ratio as follows:
 Aged 0 to under 1 at 1:4
 Aged 1 to under 2 at 1:6
 Aged 2 to under 3 at 1:8
• Increase the ratio of supervisor to staff ratio to 1:5 in order to enhance the quality.
• For planning and monitoring, early education and care for children aged from 0 to under 6
should be considered as a whole.
• Enhance child protection policy and training to child care staff/workers.
• Renovate the child care centres which are dilapidated.
• For the sake of hygiene, child care centres for children aged 0 to 2 should not accommodate
more than 50 children.

Enhance affordability
• Increase the subsidy level to low income families with children having caring needs so that
they are able to benefit the service
• A deputation suggested that the service fee of child care services should not be above 10% of
the Median Monthly Domestic Household Income.

Enhance community support

• Improve the Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project.
• Sexual Conviction Record Check is needed for recruiting volunteers and staff of child care
services.
• Volunteer-based child care services should be enhanced in order to provide affordable and
flexible child care service.
• Enhance the monitoring of the Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project.
• Increase the incentive payment for home-based child carers of Neighbourhood Support Child
Care Project to the level of $25/hour so as to attract the involvement of the volunteers.

Foreign Domestic helper

• Provide training to foreign domestic helpers to enhance their child care skills.
• Develop a “licensing system” to ensure foreign domestic helpers’ ability in child care.

Expend the child-care service to the children with special needs

• Provide service to children with special needs.
• Employ more Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO) in child care services.
• Extend the Integrated Programme in Kindergarten-cum-Child Care Centre

For management
• Formulate a more flexible financing system so that the child care management can use the
resources more flexibly.

185
Appendix 14 Analyses of the willingness-to-pay for child care

services and its implication on the financing mode

Introduction
In Hong Kong, child care services, particularly aided standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs, are
subsidised by the Government. In accordance with CCSO, the inclusive monthly fee 120 (regarded
as “service fee” in the following paragraphs) of CCCs should be approved by the Director of Social
Welfare. In considering an application for service fee adjustment submitted by the service
provider of a CCC, regardless of standalone or attached to KGs, the Government will consider the
estimated budget of the concerned CCC in the coming school year. For an aided standalone CCC,
any fee increase should be cost justified, that is, attaining break-even level after taking into
account accumulated surplus/deficit brought forward from previous years. (Please also refer to
Chapter 3 for the current financing mode of child care services).

It is known that the services of standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs have been changing
over the years according to the information collected, it is known that increasingly more education
and child development activities (for example toys in centres are chosen with elements in
education and development) have been included in the services. The changes from
“care-oriented” model of child care services to more inclusive of child developmental elements
model is noticeable to attract more middle-class users to use these aided child care services.
Their affordability may well be different from the previous expected users. Regarding the service
fees of OCCS, EHS, MHCCCs and NSCCP, there were no negative findings from both the focus group
interviews and questionnaire, comments were generally about more places and longer hours (for
OCCS and EHS) and preference for professionalism (MHCCCs and NSCCP). Therefore, the focus of
this chapter is the respondents’ willingness to pay for CCC service.

Given the likely changes of the demographics of the demand side (user population) due to the
change in nature (e.g. changes in service quality such as the reflection from improved staff-to-child
ratio) in child care services, it was expected that the willingness to pay for child care services of
user groups have also changed. To allow the Government to make a more up-to-date assessment
on service fees, this study conducted an exploratory exercise to identify the “expected” amount of
service fees (willingness-to-pay) that service users as a collective group are willing to pay. This
information will be useful for the deliberation for the financing mode of CCCs. It is hypothesised
that:

H1: It is expected that households with high socio-economic status (“SES”) or background (e.g.
monthly household income) are more willing to pay more for CCC service than the low-SES
group.

120
As stipulated in R. 45A of the CCSR, “inclusive monthly fee” means the total sum of money charged per month in
respect of the care and supervision of a child in a centre.

186
Aim of the analyses
The aim of this study is to examine how much the existing service users are willing to pay for CCC
service.

Analytical approach
Based on the data collected from service users of standalone CCCs (1 056 service users, 40% from
aided standalone CCCs and 60% from users of aided CCCs attached to KGs), the expected amount
of service fees they were willing to pay was examined. Assuming the quality of service remained
unchanged, the questionnaires first asked the respondents whether they were willing to pay more
or less for the existing CCC service. This helps to estimate the proportion of respondents satisfied
with the existing service. They were further asked if they were willing to pay more (or less), how
much more (or less) would they be willing to pay (or not willing to pay):
 HK$500 - HK$1,499;
 HK$1,500 - HK$2,499;
 HK$2,500 - HK$3,499;
 HK$3,500 - HK$4,999;
 HK$5,000;
 HK$5,000 - HK$7,499;
 HK$7,500 - HK$9,999;
 HK$10,000 or above.
This question allows estimation of the average mean of willingness to pay for the service among
this group. In addition, whether the respondents’ monthly household income level affected their
willingness to pay for CCC service was also examined.

Descriptive statistics were used to examine the proportion of parents satisfied with the existing
level of service fee. The mean of willingness-to-pay was calculated by averaging the available
choices on service fee from the questionnaire. The data were then further broken down into
different household income groups to examine the effect of household income on willingness to
pay. Table 14.1 outlines the distribution of monthly household income of the respondents.
Table 14. 1 The household income of the respondents

Household income, HK$ N (existing service users) N (non-existing service

users)
$0 - $18,999 344 (26.1%) 130 (18.9%)
$19,000 - $39,999 509 (38.6%) 245 (35.6%)
$40,000 - $79,999 358 (27.1%) 225 (32.7%)
>= $80,000 108 (8.2%) 88 (12.8%)

Results
Comparison of the respondents’ willingness-to-pay on CCC service to the average service fees
The study set the existing average service fee, i.e. HK$5,000 as a cut-off to examine whether
households with higher income would have a higher affordability on CCC service. Tables 14.2 and
14.3 display the results from standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs. It was observed that
households with higher income were more likely to afford the existing average service fee.
Although the respondents from CCCs attached to KGs has a lower percentage on affordability than
the respondents from standalone CCCs, analysis on both groups of respondents obtained a similar
pattern of result. The results thus support the notion that the affordability of service users is
subject to their household income.
187
 Table 14. 2 Percentage of the respondents’ willingness to pay for the average service fees on
standalone CCCs by their monthly household income

Household income, HK$ Can afford more than

$5,000 (the average
service fee)
$0 - $18,999 54.5%
$19,000 - $39,999 56.3%
$40,000 - $79,999 78.8%
>= $80,000 94.4%

Table 14. 3 Percentage of respondents’ willingness to pay for the average service fees on CCCs
attached to KGs by their monthly household income

Household income, HK$ Can afford more than

$5,000 (the average
service fee)
$0 - $18,999 9.2%
$19,000 - $39,999 21.3%
$40,000 - $79,999 36.2%
>= $80,000 56.5%

Comparison of the users’ willingness-to-pay on CCC service to the users’ current service fees
(within-sample comparison)
Having compared the differences in affordability, then comparison was made as to how much the
service users were willing to pay for CCC service. Their willingness to pay for more than they are
paying now was also explored. If the answer was affirmative, the consultant team categorised
them into “willing to pay more than they are paying now”. Conversely, they were categorised as
“not willing to pay more than they are paying now”.

Table 14.4 illustrates respondents’ willingness to pay (in percentage) more than they are paying
now at standalone CCCs or CCCs attached to KGs. The result revealed that there are 60.6% of
respondents from standalone CCCs while 66.2% of respondents from CCCs attached to KGs are
satisfied with the existing service fee, and even show willingness to pay more for the service.

Table 14. 4 Percentage of respondents’ willingness to pay more than the existing service fee of
standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs

Respondents from CCCs Respondents from CCCs

(n = 398) attached to KGs(n = 536)
Counts (n) Percentages Counts (n) Percentages
(%) (%)
Willing to pay 241 60.6% 355 66.2%
Not willing to pay 157 39.4% 181 33.8%
Total 398 100.0% 536 100.0%

188
To examine whether the household income would affect the willingness to pay, the respondents
were broken down into four groups with different household incomes (Table 14.5). The findings
revealed a trend that when household income increased, their willingness to pay for more for
services of standalone CCCs or CCCs attached to KGs also increased. This suggests that household
with higher income tends to willing to pay more for CCC service. This pattern of results (Table
14.5) provides a general idea that the acceptable service fee for CCC service is not a universal
concept; rather, it is affected by the household income. Parents with higher household income
are more willingness to pay more for the service. However, this cannot tell whether household
income would affect the amount of spending on child care services, that is to say, how much more
the parents would spend on CCC service.

Table 14. 5 Respondents’ willingness to pay (in percentage) by household income (HK$)

Service users from CCCs (n=394) Service users from CCCs attached to
KGs (n= 530)
Household % of willing to pay % of willing to pay
N (income group) N (income group)
income, HK$ more more
$0 - 18,999 49 49.0% 119 57.1%
$19,000 –
147 50.3% 206 63.1%
39,999
$40,000 –
147 64.6% 161 72.0%
79,999
>$80,000 51 88.2% 44 84.1%

Overall, it is observed that the results of service average and the within-sample average are very
similar, particularly at the increasing gradient of willingness to pay more for CCC service by the
respondents’ monthly household income.

Distribution of respondents’ willingness to pay for services at standalone CCCs and CCCs
attached to KGs
To further investigate into the willingness to pay, descriptive statistics illustrate the average mean
and the distribution of willingness to pay for standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs.

189
 CCCs
160
Number of respondents

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Willingness to pay in HK$

CCCs attached to KGs

200
180
160
Number of respondents

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Willingness to pay in HK$

Figure 14. 1 Respondents’ willingness to pay for services at standalone CCCs and CCCs attached
to KGs in HK$

Figure 14.1 illustrates the difference between willingness to pay and the actual spending on CCC
service. The mean difference between willingness to pay and the actual spending is HK$258 in
standalone CCCs; HK$590 in CCCs attached to KGs. Both standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to
KGs obtained a positive value, indicating that there is willingness to pay higher than the current
price. However, the result should be interpreted with caution. It is observed that there is a
high standard deviation in the sample.

190
Distribution of willingness to pay for the current service fee at standalone CCCs and CCCs
attached to KGs

To further investigate into whether household income would affect the willingness to pay for the
current service fee at standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs, households were broken down
into four income groups (Table 14.6). The aim of breaking down the household income groups
was to explore into whether this is a linear trend of the willingness to pay for the current service
fee at standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs in relation to the respondents’ monthly
household income. For standalone CCCs, among all four household income groups, only the
group HK$0- HK$18,999 obtained a negative mean difference. The negative mean difference
means that the group wanted to spend less than what they were paying. The other three groups
all obtained a positive value, indicating that they were willing to pay more than the existing service
fee. For CCCs attached to KGs, all four income groups obtained a positive value. The pattern of
results from the standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs seems to imply that there is a positive
gradient trend between willingness to pay and household income. There is also evidence that
respondents with relatively higher monthly household income were willing to pay more than the
current service fee at standalone CCCs or CCCs attached to KGs, but on the other hand, the
evidence shows that those from the low income group (HK$0-HK$18,999) might create a barrier
for them from using the service, as the existing service fee is higher than their “acceptable”
amount.

Table 14. 6 Respondents’ willingness to pay for child care services at standalone CCCs and CCCs
attached to KGs by household income

CCCs (n = 365) CCCs attached to KGs(n = 486)

Household
Mean difference Mean difference
income, n (%) n (%)
(SD) (SD)
HK$
40 113
$0 - 18,999 -101 (1397) 18 (1283)
(11.0%) (23.3%)
$19,000 - 138 193
217 (1251) 358 (1081)
39,999 (37.8%) (39.7%)
$40,000 - 138 142
606 (920) 524 (1316)
79,999 (37.8%) (29.2%)
49 38
>$80,000 1207 (993) 877 (1155)
(13.4%) (7.8%)

Financing mode of the other four child care services

Given the limited data collected from the questionnaire on the willingness to pay concept for the
other four types of services, namely EHS, OCCS, MHCCCs and NSCCP, in this report the team did
not conduct a separate analysis on the willingness to pay concept for these services.

Implications and proposal of a 3rd type of financing mode

The results raise some interesting findings. First, there is a very similar finding between the
service users from standalone CCCs and CCCs attached to KGs, possibly due to the similarity in
their service nature. Second, the results support the notion that there exists a gradient of
“acceptable amount” of services fee for the same quality of service. From the results, low
household income group were less willing to pay more for the service; whereas in contrast, those
191
higher household income groups were more willing to pay the existing “average” service fee, and
even a higher proportion of them were seen willing to pay “more” than the existing level. What it
indicates is that there may be room to increase service fees at a scale according to the level of
household income and thus enabling more efficient deployment of resources, i.e. a scale with
lower fee for families with lower income and higher fee for families with higher income.

Such an approach is similar to the co-payment structure exemplified in Finland, described in

Chapter 2.3.1. Finland’s co-payment method is based on family income where the child care
subsidy is scaled. Lower income families receive the highest amount of subsidy and highest
income families are excluded from the subsidies. The quantitative, statistical findings on the
lower income families which are not willing to pay more are consistent with the findings from
focus group interviews that some users indicated service fee to be too high and would like to see
the fee be reduced from the current average of about HK$5,000/month to HK$3,000-
HK$4,000/month. However, at the same time, it was also noted from parents that they showed
willingness to share the responsibility with the Government to pay for the cost on child care.
Other comments from the public suggested the fee to be lowered to 10% of the family income.
Lowering the service fee would enhance its affordability which will be of benefit to needy families.
Providing co-payment options for families who could afford the service and contribute more to the
existing service level would also benefit those who are in need. This would somewhat
redistribute the resources and satisfy families in need on both spectra without imposing excessive
burden on the respective families.

Summary
This section analysed the gaps in the existing financing mode by way of examining the willingness
of service users to pay for the service fee of standalone CCCs or CCCs attached to KGs. It helps
the consultant team to explore a potential mode of better cost efficiency and sustainability.
There seems to be a pattern on the willingness to pay more for the same quality of service among
higher income families and less willing to pay more among lower income families. Thus applying
such concept to create a subsidy system should be considered, consequently, lower income
families would receive higher amount of subsidy and higher income families would receive lower
amount, making CCCs more affordable and more balanced. To explore in the longer run, the
converting of some non-aided centres or places to semi-aided centres or places might also provide
availability and affordability to families who are in the middle income level in need of CCCs.

192
Appendix 15 Australia’s national quality standard121(“NQS”)

121
Source: https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard

193
194
Appendix 16 Comparison between Australia’s NQS and the Operation Manual for Pre-primary
Institutions
Australia National Quality Standards (NQS) Operation Manual for pre-primary institutions
Educational programme and Integrate education and care elements (Chapter 7)
Programme Enhances each child’s learning and development
practice Contain detail guideline on fees (Chapter 9).
Educators facilitate and extend each child’s
Practice Unitary with curriculum and goals (Chapter 7)
learning and development
Assessment and Educators take a planned and reflective approach
Detail guideline on regulations (Chapter 11)
planning to implementing programme for each child
Each child’s health and physical activity is Detail guideline split between Chapter 4-6: Medical
Children’s health and safety Health
supported (sleep, relaxation) health, sanitation, nutrition and diet
Safety Each child is protected Very detail guidelines in Chapter 3- Safety Measures
The design of facilities is appropriate for
Physical environment Design Detailed, appropriate for child care operation
operation
Environment is inclusive, promotes competence Mentioned briefly under premises design, furniture and
Use
and supports exploration and play-based learning equipment.
Purposes not clearly defined, mostly on staff
Staffing arrangements Staffing arrangements Enhances children’s learning and development
qualifications.
Management, educators and staff are Not explicit on the educators and staff behavior, staff
Professionalism
collaborative, respectful and ethical trainings were mentioned briefly (8.4.1).
Between educators and Respectful and equitable relationships are
Relationships with children Not mentioned
children maintained with each child
Each child is supported to build and maintain
Between children Not mentioned
sensitive and responsive relationships
Collaborative partnerships with Supportive relationships Families are supported in their parenting role and
Supportive relationships mentioned briefly in 10.2.3.
families and communities with families are respectful.
Collaborative Enhances children’s inclusion, learning and Detail in Chapter 10. Collaborative partnership enhanced
partnerships wellbeing through establishing parent-teacher association.
Not mentioned (Role of inspection mentioned in childcare
Governance and Leadership Governance Supports the operation of a quality service
ordinances)
Builds and promotes positive organisational
Leadership Not mentioned
culture and professional learning community
Note: The above Service Quality Standards are general guidelines for all service providers and are not specific to child care operations, hence the comparisons only have to
be made between Australia’s NQS (guidelines for child care systems) and the Operation Manual for Pre-primary Institutions.
195
Glossary

Abbreviations

AAP American Academy of Paediatrics

ACECQA Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority
AFI Adjusted Family Income
AIC Akaike Information Criterion
CCB Child Care Benefit
CCC Child Care Centre
CCC attached to KG Child Care Centre attached to Kindergarten
CCCO Child Care Centres Ordinance
CCCR Child Care Centres Regulations
CCR Child Care Rebate
CCS Child Care Supervisor
CCSO Child Care Services Ordinance
CCSR Child Care Services Regulations
CCCSS Child Care Centre Subsidy Scheme
CCW Child Care Worker
C&SD Census and Statistics Department
CSRP The Hong Kong Jockey Club Centre for Suicide Research and Prevention
CSSA Comprehensive Social Security Assistance
DC Day Creche
DN Day Nursery
EBDv Early Brain Development
ECD Early Childhood Development
ECDA Early Childhood Development Agency
ECEC Early Childhood Education and Care
EDB Education Bureau
EHS Extended Hours Service
EO Education Ordinance
FSA Funding and Service Agreement
GIS Geographical Information System
HCA Home Care Allowance
HCCS Home-based Child Care Service
HKPSG Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines
JOKC Joint Office for Kindergartens and Child Care Centres
KCFRS Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission Scheme
KG Kindergarten
KG-cum-CCC Kindergarten-cum-Child Care Centre
LSB Large Street Block
MCHC Maternal and Child Health Centre
MEXT Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology
MHCCC Mutual Help Child Care Centre
MHLW Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare
MoE Ministry of Education
196
MSF Ministry of Social and Family Development
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NQS National Quality Standard
NSCCP Neighbourhood Support Child Care Project
OC Other Costs
OCCS Occasional Child Care Service
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
PE Personal Emolument
SES Socio-economic Status
SFO Student Finance Office
SME Subsidy for Manpower Enhancement
SOE Subsidy for Operation Enhancement
SQS Service Quality Standards
SWD Social Welfare Department
2SFCA Two-step Floating Catchment Area Method

197
References

2016 Population Census (5% of the full data, purchased from C&SD)
Adams, G., Snyder, K., & Sandfort, J. R. (2002). Getting and Retaining Child Care Assistance: How
Policy and Practice Influence Parents' Experiences. Occasional Paper. Assessing the New
Federalism: An Urban Institute Programme To Assess Changing Social Policies.
Australian Government (2013). Child Care in Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.mychild.gov.au/sites/mychild/files/documents/04-2015/child_care_in_austral
ia.pdf
Australian Government. (2015). Budget 2015-16: Families Package (Rep.). Retrieved August 10,
2018, from
https://www.budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/glossy/families/download/Budget-2015-Fami
lies-Package.pdf
Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority (n.d.). National Quality Standard.
Retrieved from
https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-07/RevisedNQSHandoutA4.pdf.
Babitsch, B., Gohl, D., & von Lengerke, T. (2012). Re-revisiting Andersen’s Behavioral Model of
Health Services Use: a systematic review of studies from 1998–2011. GMS
Psycho-Social-Medicine, 9.
Barr, V.C., Bogatic,K., 2017. Global perspectives of early childhood education and care, Early Child
Development and Care, 187:10, 1461-1470, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2017.1342436.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03004430.2017.1342436
Blau, D. M. (2001). Child Care Problem: An Economic Analysis: Russell Sage Foundation.
Blau, D., & Tekin, E. (2001). The determinants and consequences of child care subsidy receipt by
low-income families. Joint Centre for Poverty Research Working Paper, 213.
Brennan, D. & Adamson, E., A. (2017). Early Education and Child Care Policy in Australia. In Grace R;
Hodge K; McMahon C(ed), Children, Families and Communities, edn. 5, Oxford University
Press, Melbourne, 318-336.
Census and Statistics Department. (July, 2017). Women and Men in Hong Kong, Key Statistics.
Retrieved from https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11303032017AN17B0100.pdf
Census and Statistics Department. (Feb 2018). Hong Kong 2016 Population By-census - Thematic
Report: Single Parents. Retrieved from
https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11201032016XXXXB0100.pdf
Census and Statistics Department (2018, Sept 18). Unemployment rate by sex and age. Retrieved
Oct 15, 2018, from
https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/sp200.jsp?tableID=011&ID=0&productType=8
Census and Statistics Department (2018, Oct 18). Hong Kong Monthly Digest of Statistics. Retrieved
Oct 15, 2018, from https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B10100022018MM10B0100.pdf
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd.
Costales,G.S.,Anderson,R. (2018). Preschool teachers’ and parents’ perspectives on primary school
preparation in Singapore, New Zealand International Research in Early Childhood
Education,21(1),pp.87-99. Domestic Workers Play an Essential Role, (Sept 5 2016),
retrieved from https://www.helperplace.com/domestic-workers-play-essential-role
Donoghue, E. A. (2017). Quality early education and child care from birth to kindergarten.
Pediatrics, 140(2), e20171488.

198
Early Childhood Development Agency, Government of Singapore (2017). Retrieved from
https://www.ecda.gov.sg/pages/aboutus.aspx
Education Department & Social Welfare Department (2002) Working Party on Harmonisation of
Pre-primary Services. Retrieved from
https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu-system/preprimary-kindergarten/harmonisati
on-of-preprimary-services/background/consult_doc_eng.pdf
Emery, C. (2017). Child care in South Korea: Competition for Conventional Success and the Policy
Implementation.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Political Economies of the Welfare State. International
journal of sociology, 20(3), 92-123.
Finland, K.-T. S. I. I. o. (2018). Kela Benefits in Euros 2018. Retrieved from
http://www.kela.fi/documents/12099/6889543/Kela_benefits_in_euros_2018.pdf/23cc688
2-1755-442c-bf5e-5f4595d64fbc
The Foundations of Lifelong Health Are Built in Early Childhood. (2010). Retrieved from
http://developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Foundations-of-Lifelong-
Health.pdf
Gambaro, L., K. Steward and J. Waldfogel (2014), An Equal Start? Providing Quality Early Education
and Care for Disadvantaged Children, Policy Address at the University of Bristol, Bristol,
retrieve from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qgznh
Gerhardt, S. (2014). Why Love Matters: How affection shapes a baby’s brain (2nd ed ed.).
Routledge.
GovHK. (2017, May 2017). Allowances. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.hk/en/residents/taxes/salaries/allowances/allowances/allowances.htm
GovHK. (2017). Tax Rates of Salaries Tax & Personal Assessment. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.hk/en/residents/taxes/taxfiling/taxrates/salariesrates.htm
Gunnarsson, Lars, Barbara Martin Korpi and Ulla Nordenstam, (1999), Early Childhood Education
and Care Policy in Sweden, Regeringskansliet, Dec.
Himmelstrand, Jonas, (September 10, 2015). Swedish day care: International example
or cautionary tale? A fascinating assessment of the highly-vaunted Swedish
day care system. Retrieved from: https://www.imfcanada.org/archive/1107/swedish-day
care-international-example-or-cautionary-tale
Holliday, I., & Wilding, P. (2003). Welfare capitalism in East Asia: Social policy in the tiger
economies: Springer.
Hong Kong Asia’s World City,
https://www.wfsfaa.gov.hk/sfo/en/preprimary/kcfr/general/assessment.htm
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government Planning Department (2017). Hong Kong
Planning Standards and Guidelines. Retrieved from
https://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_en/tech_doc/hkpsg/sum/pdf/sum.pdf
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government (2018). Policy Address 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.policyaddress.gov.hk/2018/eng/pdf/PA2018.pdf
Hujala, E., Vlasov, J. & Szecsi, T. (2017), ‘Parents’ and teachers’ perspectives on changes
in childcare quality in the United States, Russia and Finland’, South African Journal of
Childhood Education 7(1), a538. https:// doi.org/10.4102/sajce. v7i1.538
http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/sajce/v7n1/14.pdf
Institute of Asia Pacific Studies of CUHK (2016). Survey Findings on Views on
Winning at the starting line” in Hong Kong. Retrieved from:
https://www.cpr.cuhk.edu.hk/en/press_detail.php?id=2317&t=survey-findings-on-views-on
-winning-at-the-starting-line-in-hong-kong-released-by-hong-kong-institute-of-asia-pacific-s
199
 tudies-at-cuhk&id=2317&t=survey-findings-on-views-on-winning-at-the-starting-line-in-ho
ng-kong-released-by-hong-kong-institute-of-asia-pacific-studies-at-cuhk
Irwin, L. G., Siddiqi, A., & Hertzman, G. (2007). Early child development: A powerful
equalizer. Vancouver, BC: Human Early Learning Partnership (HELP).
Kagan, J. (1999). The Role of Parents in Children9s Psychological Development. Pediatrics,
104(Supplement 1), 164-167.
Kalton, G., & Flores-Cervantes, I. (2003). Weighting methods. Journal of Official Statistics, 19(2), 81.
KICCE. (2013). KICCE Policy Brief, Issue 2, KICCE. Retrieved from KICCE:
http://kicce.re.kr/eng/newsletter_mail/pdf/201401_brief.pdf
Kim, A. E. H., (2017). The Republic of Korea and its Childcare: Development, implementation,
effectiveness and its Limition.
Kim, C. (2015). In South Korea, childcare burden derails women’s careers. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southkorea-women-childcare/in-south-korea-childcare
-burden-derails-womens-careers-idUSKBN0L00B220150127
Labour and Welfare Bureau, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2012) Third
Report of the HKSAR of the People’s Republic of China under the United Nation Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Retrieved from
http://www.lwb.gov.hk/UNCEDAW/documents/CEDAW_3rd_report_E.pdf
Lam, Jeffie, (2018). Hong Kong maternity leave to increase to 14 weeks under raft of pro-family
measures announced in chief executive’s policy address, SCMP, Oct 10, retrieved from
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/health-environment/article/2167915/hong-kong-
maternity-leave-increased-14-weeks-under
Landry, S. (2014). The role of parents in early childhood learning. Retrieved August 2018, from
http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/parenting-skills/according-experts/role-parents-early-c
hildhood-learningLevy, D. U., & Michel, S. (2002). More can be less: Child care and welfare
reform in the United States. Child care policy at the crossroads: Gender and welfare state
restructuring, 239-266.
Loeb, S., Bridges, M., Bassok, D., Fuller, B., & Rumberger, R. W. (2007). How much is too much? The
influence of preschool centres on children's social and cognitive development. Economics
of Education review, 26(1), 52-66.
Lue, Fang (2017). Singapore country report, Singapore Early Childhood Education and Care
Luo, W., & Qi, Y. (2009). An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for
measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Health & Place, 15(4), 1100-1107.
Meyers, M. K., Heintze, T., & Wolf, D. A. (2002). Child care subsidies and the employment of
welfare recipients. Demography, 39(1), 165-179.
McCain, M., Mustard, F., & Shanker, S. (1999). Early years study. Toronto, ON: Government of
Ontario, 7, 2.
McCain, M., Mustard, F., & McCuaig, K. (2011). Early years study 3: Making decisions, taking action
(098769930X). Retrieved from
http://ecereport.ca/media/uploads/pdfs/early-years-study3-2011.pdf
Ministry of Education and Science in Sweden, (1999). Early Childhood Education and Care Policy in
Sweden, Regeringskansliet. Retrieved from:
http://www.oecd.org/education/school/2479039.pdf
Miranda, B. (2017, June 15). Higher child-to-staff ratios threaten the quality of child
care. Retrieved August 1, 2018, from
https://www.childtrends.org/higher-child-staff-ratios-threaten-quality-child-care
Moullin, S., Waldfogel, J., & Washbrook, E. (2014). Baby Bonds: Parenting, attachment and a secure
base for children.
200
Naudeau, S. et al (2011), “Investing in Young Children An Early Childhood Development Guide for
Policy Dialogue and Project Preparation”, retrieved from:
http://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2525
Nelson, C., Shonkoff, J., & Phillis, D. (2000). From Neurons to Neighborhoods in The science of early
Childhood Development: Edited by Shonkoff J, Phillips DA. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press
Nyberg, Anita (2018). Sweden – The Development of Early Childhood Education and Care.
Onnismaa, E. L., & Kalliala, M. (2010). Finnish ECEC policy: interpretations, implementations and
implications. Early Years, 30(3), 267-277.OECD (2015). Starting Strong IV: Early Childhood
Education and Care. Retrieved from
https://www.sel-gipes.com/uploads/1/2/3/3/12332890/2015_-_ocde__-_starting_strong_i
v_monitoring_quality_in_early_childhood_education_and_care..pdf
OECD (2015), “In it together: why less inequality benefits all”, OECD, Paris
(www.oecd.org/els/social/inequality)
OECD. (2016). Labour Force Participation Rate by Sex and Age Group. Retrieved from:
http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=54741#
OECD. (2012) Quality Matters in Early Childhood Education and Care: Korea.
https://www.oecd.org/education/school/50219964.pdf
OECD (2016). Starting Strong IV: Early Childhood Education and Care Data Country Note. Retrieved
from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/ECECDCN-Finland.pdf
OECD (2018), Engaging Young Children, Lessons from Research About Quality in Early Childhood
Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD, retrieved from:
https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=oDVTDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=isced01
&source=bl&ots=K4XLL_XdiO&sig=Vj2W6zSM_aTVqc_49DhY5W8SEAc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2
ahUKEwjjupyRsIreAhXIgbwKHczFBFMQ6AEwCHoECAIQAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Park, Eunhye and Seenyoung Park, (2015). Issues and Tasks for Early Childhood Education and Care
Workforce in Korea, Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, Vol.9,
No.2, May 2015, pp.23-50
Perlman, M., Fletcher, B., Falenchuk, O., Brunsek, A., Mcmullen, E., & Shah, P. S.
(2017). Child-Staff Ratios in Early Childhood Education and Care Settings and Child
Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plos One,12(1), 1-24.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0170256
Phillips, D. A., & Shonkoff, J. P. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early
childhood development: National Academies Press.
Planning Department (2017) Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. Retrieved from
https://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_en/tech_doc/hkpsg/full/index.htm.
Priscilla, G. (2017). Big Increase in Child care places, MOE Kindergartens. The Straits Times.
Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/big-increase-in-child
care-places-moe-kindergartens.
Rao, N., & Koong, M., 2000, Enhancing Preschool Education in Hong Kong, International Journal of
Early Childhood, 32(2), 1
Ricci, Colleen, (May 18 2015). Looking to Swedish Model of Childcare and Education. The Sydney
Morning Herald. Retrieved from:
https://www.smh.com.au/education/looking-to-swedish-model-of-childcare-and-education
-20150518-gh48hj.html
Rotkirch, A., & Miettinen, A. (2017). Childlessness in Finland. Childlessness in Europe: Contexts,
Causes, and Consequences (pp. 139-158). Springer, Cham.

201
Sandstrom, H., & Chaudry, A. (2012). ‘You have to choose your child care to fit your work’: Child
care decision-making among low-income working families. Journal of Children and Poverty,
18(2), 89-119.
Schulman, K., & Blank, H. (2004). Child care assistance policies 2001-2004: Families struggling to
move forward, states going backward: National Women's Law Centre Washington, DC.
Singapore, G. o. (2018). Live-Births By Birth Weight, Age Group of Mother and Child Gender.
Retrieved from:
https://data.gov.sg/dataset/live-births-by-birth-weight-age-group-of-mother-and-child-gen
der?view_id=1518dc55-6716-436f-8920-37107bcc35d2&resource_id=d45263d4-ca60-4ece
-9666-c23381ad70da
Singapore, G. o. (2018). Mothers by Age Group and Type of Birth. Retrieved from:
https://data.gov.sg/dataset/mothers-by-age-group-and-type-of-birth?view_id=24a08fc6-67
58-4eb1-8930-4ab0eb79d98c&resource_id=8f453a52-6883-47a9-9648-f8be1ca2358b
Singapore, I. R. A. o. (2018). Income Tax Rates. Retrieved from
https://www.iras.gov.sg/irashome/Individuals/Locals/Working-Out-Your-Taxes/Income-Tax-
Rates/
Singapore, I. R. A. o. (2018). Parenthood Tax Rebate. Retrieved from
https://www.iras.gov.sg/irashome/Individuals/Locals/Working-Out-Your-Taxes/Deductions-
for-Individuals/Parenthood-Tax-Rebate--PTR-/
Social Welfare Department. (2018, July 10). Child Care Services. Retrieved July 10,
2018, from
https://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/site_pubsvc/page_family/sub_listofserv/id_child cares/
Social Welfare Department. (2017, Sep 13). Operation Manual for Pre-primary
Institutions. Retrieved Oct 16, 2018, from
https://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/site_pubsvc/page_lr/sub_childcare/
Student Finance Office Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency (2018, June 6).
Method of Assessment. Kindergarten and Child Care Centre Fee Remission Scheme.
Retrieved from
https://www.wfsfaa.gov.hk/sfo/en/preprimary/kcfr/general/assessment.htm
Suzuki, Yoshie (2018). Japan Early Childhood Education and Care, May
Taguchi & Munkammer (2003). Consolidating Governmental Early Childhood Education and Care
Services Under the Ministry of Education and Science: A Swedish Case Study. Unesco
Tang,T.N., Tang,C.S. (2003). Gender Role Internalization, Multiple Roles, and Chinese Women’s
Mental Health. Psychology of Women Quarterly banner, 25(3),pp. 181-196.
Tang,C.S. (2016). Asian Women’s Gender Role, Work-Family Balance, and Mental Health. Lianhe
Zaobao,2 October 2016.
http://www.fas.nus.edu.sg/cfpr/media/images/lhzbcolumn/2016/Oct16E.pdf
Thévenon, O. (2013), Drivers of Female Labour Force Participation in the OECD, OECD Social,
Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 145, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k46cvrgnms6-en
University, C. o. t. D. C. a. H. (2007). A Science-Based Framework for Early Childhood Policy: Using
Evidence to Improve Outcomes in Learning, Behavior, and Health for Vulnerable Children. .
Retrieved from http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu
University, C. o. t. D. C. a. H. (2016). From Best Practices to Breakthrough Impacts: A Science-Based
Approach to Building a More Promising Future for Young Children and Families
Warren, Diana, Meredith O’Connor, Diana Smart, and Ben Edwards (2016), A Critical Review of the
Early Childhood Literature, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
White paper, social welfare into the 1990's and beyond. (1991) Government Printer.
202
Winegarden, C. R., & Bracy, P. M. (1995). Demographic consequences of maternal-leave
programmes in industrial countries: evidence from fixed-effects models. Southern
Economic Journal, 1020-1035.
The World Bank (2010). FAQs: Early Childhood Development. Retrieved from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTAFRREGTOPEDUCATION/Resources/444707-129107
1725351/ECCD-factsheet-final.pdf
Wong, J. M., & Rao, N. (2015). The evolution of early childhood education policy in
Hong Kong. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 9(3), 1-16.
Yamauchi, C., & Leigh, A. (2011). Which children benefit from non-parental care? Economics of
Education Review, 30(6), 1468-1490.

203