Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities: Closing the gap in health and education outcomes for Indigenous children in Canada

Download the alternative format
(PDF format, 68.6KB)

Organization:
Date published: 2017

Key Messages:

What is Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities?

How was the study done by Statistics Canada?

Figure 1. Three types of past early child development (ECD) participation status

Three types of past early child development (ECD) participation status

In this study there were three types of past early child development participation status. The first was no early child development participation status, the second was non-Indigenous early child development participation status and the third was Indigenous early child development/AHSUNC participation status.

Comparison for socio-demographic risk and comparison of health and education outcomes for two groups of participants from the Aboriginal Peoples Survey was done. The first group was elementary school aged children who were in Grades one to six. The second group was intermediate/high school aged youth in Grades seven to 12.

What did we learn?

1. Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities’ program is reaching children in the greatest need.

Indigenous early childhood development programs are being used by Indigenous children living with the highest level of risk.  Indigenous children and youth who participated in Indigenous-focused programs such as Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities (AHSUNC) program come from families experiencing significantly greater socio-demographic challenges compared to those who attended non-Indigenous focused early childhood development programs.

AHSUNC is reaching its intended target of families in the greatest need for early childhood development intervention programming.

Figure 2.  Significant differences in socio-demographic risk of children and youth who participated in Indigenous-focused early childhood development (ECD) versus non-Indigenous focussed ECD.

 Children and youth who participated in Indigenous-focused ECD (vs. non-Indigenous focussed ECD) were significantly:

  • More likely to live in the north
  • More likely to live with single parents (measured for elementary-aged only)
  • More likely to have parent(s) with low school involvement (significant for elementary-aged only)
  • More likely to have a mother with a low level of education
  • More likely to have a parent and/or grandparent who attended residential school
  • More likely to live in a household with lower income
  • More likely to live in households with greater number of people
  • Less likely to have a chronic health condition

2. Even with greater socio-demographic disadvantages the Indigenous children and youth who participated in the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities’ program have similar education and health outcomes as their peers.

Even with significantly greater socio-demographic challenges there were few differences found in education and health outcomes between elementary school aged children (Grades 1-6) who had participated in Indigenous early childhood development programs such as the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities’ program and other Indigenous children facing less adversity. The same holds true for youth in grades 7-12.

Figure 3.  Elementary school aged outcomes for those that attended AHSUNC/Indigenous early childhood development programs.

After accounting for socio-demographic risk factors the AHSUNC participants were as likely to:

  • Receive mostly A’s on their last report card
  • Receive tutoring
  • Be in excellent or very good health
  • Not miss school in the past two weeks
  • Never repeat a grade

However, they were more likely than non-Indigenous early childhood development participants to have been late for school in the past two weeks.

Figure 4.  Intermediate/high school aged outcomes for those that attended AHSUNC/Indigenous early childhood development programs.

After accounting for socio-demographic risk factors the AHSUNC participants were as likely to:

  • Receive mostly A’s on their last report card
  • Receive tutoring
  • Be happy at school
  • Be in excellent or very good health
  • Be in excellent or very good mental health
  • Not miss school in the past two weeks
  • Never repeat a grade
  • Not be late for school in the past two weeks

However, they were more likely than those who had not participated in early childhood development programs to have skipped school in the past two weeks.

In Summary: After accounting for socio-demographic disadvantages Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities’ participants are doing as well as their peers on most health and education outcomes except for:

What does this mean for the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities’ (AHSUNC) program?

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Leanne Findlay and Dafna Kohen of the Health Analysis Division of Statistics Canada for conducting the study on which this report is based.

References

Footnote 1

Findlay, L. C., & Kohen, D. (2016). Early childhood education programs and associations with Aboriginal children’s outcomes in Canada: Closing the gap? Unpublished report. Statistics Canada.

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Footnote 2

Statistics Canada. (2012). Aboriginal Peoples Survey: Concepts and Methods Guide. Ottawa: Minister of Industry.

Return to footnote 2 referrer

Footnote 3

Duncan, G. J. & Magnuson, K. (2013). Investing in preschool programs. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27, 109–132.

Return to footnote 3 referrer

Footnote 4

Public Health Agency of Canada (2012). The impact of the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities (AHSUNC) on school readiness
skills:  Technical Report.  Ottawa: Author

Return to footnote 4 referrer

Footnote 5

Zolkoski, S.M. & Bullock, L.M. (2012). Resilience in children and youth: A review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 2295-2303.

Return to footnote 5 referrer

Page details

Date modified: