Comparatively little research has been done into how ECD services are delivered on the ground and what makes some models work better than others.
A research report produced by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), as part of the Scaling Up ECD Services (0-4 years), offers a rare, close-up view of this reality. Through six illustrated case studies, the research examines how different ECD delivery models operate at formal, community and household levels, and what this reveals about the limits of South Africa’s current approach to scaling early childhood services.
Scaling ECD is not just about numbers
The study starts with a simple but often overlooked premise: scaling up ECD is not only about reaching more children but also about ensuring that services meet children’s holistic developmental needs.
For children aged 0-4, development does not happen in silos. Nutrition, health, caregiving, stimulation, safety and emotional support are deeply interconnected. Effective ECD services, therefore, depend on delivery models that can integrate these elements in practice – not just on paper. The HSRC study focuses precisely on this gap between policy ambition and delivery reality, asking what actually enables or constrains holistic ECD provision at ground level.
Three delivery models, one common challenge
The research examines ECD provision across three broad delivery models: formal ECD services, community-based services, and household-level services.
Rather than treating these models as interchangeable, the study highlights how each operates under different conditions and faces distinct constraints. What unites them is a shared challenge: delivering quality, holistic services in contexts shaped by uneven state support, limited resources and fragmented governance.
What the case studies examined
The six case studies were designed to illustrate day-to-day service delivery rather than ideal programme designs. Each was analysed using a consistent set of lenses, including how children’s holistic needs are addressed, the conditions under which services operate, the relationship with government, access to training and accreditation, job hierarchies, and outcomes for both children and caregivers.
This approach allows the study to move beyond abstract debates and demonstrate how ECD policy is implemented in practice.
Where delivery models succeed
One of the study’s key insights is that effective ECD delivery is possible across different models – but only when certain conditions are in place.
Where services function well, they tend to demonstrate strong links between care, stimulation, and caregiver support; stable, supported ECD workers; clear organisational structures; and some level of engagement with the state. Importantly, success is not confined to formal centres – community-based and household services can also meet children’s needs when they are properly supported.
Where the system breaks down
At the same time, the case studies expose persistent structural weaknesses. These include fragile relationships with the government, limited access to training and accreditation, unstable funding, weak career progression, and a mismatch between regulatory expectations and on-the-ground realities. These are not isolated problems. They are systemic, and they shape whether ECD services can be sustained at scale.
The government challenge
A recurring theme is the uneven and often difficult interface between ECD providers and the state. While policy sets ambitious goals, many providers struggle to navigate regulatory systems or access meaningful support.
In practice, government requirements can act more as barriers to sustainability than as enablers of quality, leaving providers expected to deliver public value without the public investment needed to do so.
ECD work is invisible labour
The study also highlights the working conditions within ECD services. Job roles are often poorly defined, career pathways are limited, and pay is low, despite the complexity and importance of the work involved.
This has direct consequences for children. High turnover, burnout and skills gaps undermine consistency and quality. Scaling ECD, the research suggests, is not possible without addressing the sector’s human infrastructure.
Lessons for scaling up
Rather than offering a single blueprint, the study emphasises learning from what already exists. The case studies are intended to inform demonstration projects by identifying what works, where policy assumptions fail, and how different models can complement one another. Scaling up, in this framing, is not about replication but adaptation – rooted in evidence from lived practice.
Why this matters
South Africa has no shortage of ECD strategies. What it lacks is sufficient attention to delivery systems: the organisational, workforce and governance conditions that determine whether services actually function for children aged 0-4.
As this research makes clear, scaling early childhood development is not just about enrolling more children. It is about building delivery models that can sustain holistic care, support workers and work with – rather than around – the state. Without that, expansion risks reproducing uneven quality and deepening inequality.
