Ms Sarah Haight:

In the US there are five key components of two-generation approaches. They are early childhood services; post-secondary or what we often call college or workforce development services; economic assets which includes what kind of public benefits the family might need; social capital including access to networks, individual and institutional supports; and health and well-being. The Crann Centre's two-generation approach focuses on the health and well-being component but by applying a two-generation lens, it also considers the economic and social needs of the family. As I noted earlier, in the US we have a lot of evidence about those components, such as the return on investment from early childhood programmes and the knowledge that parents' educational attainment has the greatest impact on the child's overall economic mobility. We also have evidence of the concept of mutual motivation, which refers to when a child is learning and developing and the child can motivate the parent. Equally, when a parent is learning and growing, he or she can reinforce subjects and ideas for the child.

We are seeing emerging evidence that children who are part of two-generation approaches are more likely to attend school regularly and read by third grade. Parents who are engaged in their own dreams and aspirations and who are seen not just as parents, but as whole people with economic and educational aspirations, are more likely to have living-wage jobs and more economic stability for their families.

When we think about evidence, we also think about this from a systems standpoint. In states and counties in the US where there is a two-generation lens, we see more co-ordination and alignment among systems that aim to serve families. That results in faster services; services that are more tailored to the unique needs of families; and more dignified treatment of families, recognising their strengths, which we believe will result in better long-term outcomes for those families.