Community SummaryEDI Wave 4 (2009/10 - 2010/11)

SD54 CommunIty ProfIlE

total Population

SD54 B.C.16,447 4,530,960B.C. Stats, 2010 data

% Children under 5

SD54 B.C.6.5% 4.9%B.C. Stats, 2010 data

median family Income

SD54 B.C.$68,787 $65,787Statistics Canada, 2005 data

steep difficulties and others do not. the disparity is significant: on the low end, some neighbourhoods had rates of vulnerability below 5% while others were over 60% in Wave 4. In SD54, the range was from 31% to 39%.

figure 2 shows how overall vulnerability rates in SD54 compare with other school districts in the province.

the B.C. government made a goal of reducing EDI vulnerability to 15% by the year 2015 as part of their overall strategic plan. In Wave 4, only 20 –less than 5% of all neighbourhoods in B.C.– had vulnerability rates below 15%. In SD54 there were no neighbourhoods below the 15% threshold.

EDI PARTICIPATIONthe Bulkley Valley School District has participated in all 4 waves of EDI data collection. Wave 4 results include data collected from 6 schools.

WAvE 4 EDI RESULTSoverall, Bulkley Valley had a vulnerability rate of 37%. the vulnerability rate in the last data collection (Wave 3) was 29%.

District wide, the highest level of vulnerability was on the Emotional maturity scale at 23%. the smallest proportion of children vulnerable was on the language & Cognitive Development scale at 11%.

the Smithers-Walnut Park neighbourhood had the lowest level of vulnerability (31%) compared to 39% in both Houston and Smithers-telkwa.

THE PROvINCIAL CONTEXTthe Wave 4 EDI data shows that province-wide 30.9% of children in kindergarten were vulnerable in at least one aspect of their development. this continues the provincial trend over the last decade of nearly a third of children behind at kindergarten entry. In SD54, the vulnerability rate was well above the provincial average in Wave 4 at 37%.

the vulnerable children in B.C. are not spread evenly throughout the province. EDI research reveals a large “geography of opportunity” where some children face

School District 54Bulkley valley

The Human Early Learning Partnership (HELP) brings together academic, government, school, and community partners to help us understand early child development across British Columbia. Beginning in 1999, HELP has collected and mapped population level child development data province wide using the Early Development Instrument (EDI).An important goal of the project is to assist communities and policy makers in using the information to monitor early child development, and in developing effective local and policy responses that help B.C.’s children and families thrive.

For more information please visit www.earlylearning.ubc.ca

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Powell River South 74 5 12 20 6 7 24Powell River Centre 82 13 17 21 13 6 32Powell River North 97 10 21 26 16 9 37

School District 47 253 10 17 23 12 8 32

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Pemberton 114 7 5 7 3 4 16Whistler 118 8 6 9 2 9 21

Squamish-North 205 7 10 14 13 11 24Squamish-South 158 17 23 22 8 17 39

School District 48 595 10 12 14 8 11 26

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Central Coast (SD49) 89 17 14 7 8 8 27

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Okanagan Falls 35 18 9 17 3 0 26Oliver 62 19 18 21 10 16 37

Keremeos/Cawston 73 10 16 22 18 19 37Osoyoos 124 23 18 20 12 12 38

Tuc-el-Nuit 31School District 53 325 19 17 21 12 15 37

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Smithers-Walnut Park 52 19 14 17 10 15 31Houston 67 21 16 19 15 15 39

Smithers-Telkwa 125 18 24 27 10 18 39School District 54 244 19 20 23 11 17 37

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Heritage 117 3 4 12 6 4 20Shady Valley 156 8 10 8 7 8 23

College Heights 326 11 12 11 9 8 25Hart Highlands 146 12 14 10 5 8 25

North Highlands 67 10 15 6 11 18 25Blackburn 53 17 10 10 6 8 25

Ospika South 89 18 10 8 8 9 27Mud River 95 15 14 14 8 11 27Peden Hill 185 17 16 14 13 16 31

Upper Fraser 59 15 22 21 7 15 32Pineview/Hixon 88 19 21 20 13 17 33

The Bowl 131 31 23 23 18 16 40Ospika North 99 28 13 17 10 13 41

Mackenzie 85 24 19 17 12 11 41South Fort George 153 45 36 30 29 29 60

School District 57 1849 18 16 15 11 13 32

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Oak Bay 63 5 5 3 2 5 11Mount Tolmie 49 6 10 7 5 4 12Gordon Head 110 6 9 7 5 8 18

Cedar Hill-Swan Lake 74 5 14 8 4 5 18Strawberry Vale 38 3 5 8 11 0 18

Fairfield 61 10 16 15 5 10 20University 60 5 3 7 5 13 22James Bay 40 8 10 10 3 8 23

Hillside 102 10 11 9 8 9 28Fernwood 46 20 11 11 0 7 30

View Royal-Thetis Lake 103 12 12 11 15 12 31Mayfair 55 18 16 17 9 24 33

Carey-Glanford 150 18 19 15 11 14 35Esquimalt 53 19 15 19 7 12 40

Saxe Point 39 26 10 21 13 8 41High Quadra 105 13 25 18 15 22 42

Downtown-Vic West 59 31 25 29 18 22 44Burnside 78 23 34 18 14 22 53

School District 61 1285 13 15 13 9 12 30

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Langford 63 2 8 6 5 2 16Sooke/West Coast 161 2 9 11 11 5 22

Colwood-Royal Roads 87 7 13 15 8 7 22Metchosin 103 12 11 13 9 8 24

Lagoon 89 17 11 13 7 9 24Highlands 67 13 16 28 5 11 27

Millstream-Atkins 94 9 11 12 7 4 29School District 62 664 8 11 13 8 6 23

Tota

l Cou

nt

Phys

ical

Soci

al

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Com

mun

icat

ion

One

or M

ore

Cordova Bay 159 11 11 9 9 7 22Central Saanich-Keating 251 13 13 13 8 10 24

Elk Lake 81 14 16 9 4 8 27Deep Cove-McTavish 127 13 9 13 13 12 28

Sidney 122 15 21 21 20 12 34School District 63 740 13 14 13 11 10 26

FIG 1: WAVE 4 EDI DATA TABLE

”...vulnerable children in BC are not spread evenly throughout the province. EDI research reveals a large “geography of opportunity” where some children face steep difficulties and others do not...”

2019 23

1117

37

%% %

%%

%

0%

25%

50%

0%

25%

50%

LANGUAGE & COGNITIVE COMMUNICATION ONE OR MORE SCALES

SOCIAL COMPETENCEPHYSICAL HEALTH& WELL-BEING EMOTIONAL MATURITY

2

27

4

51

3

32

4

24

2

28

10

55

3

most scales increased over time. the Emotional maturity scale increased from 11% in Wave 2 to 23% in Wave 4.

the language & Cognitive Development scale remained fairly stable moving from 12% in Wave 2 to 11% in Wave 4.

EDI TRENDS IN SD54the chart below illustrates the overall vulnerability and by scale results for the last three Waves in the Bulkley Valley district.

the overall vulnerability rate increased in SD54 between Wave 2 and Wave 4. the vulnerability rate over the last three Waves indicates a trend towards approximately one-third of the children in the SD54 population vulnerable in Kindergarten.

FIG 2: COMPARISON OF SCHOOL DISTRICT RATES OF VULNERABILITY FOR SD54

FIG 3: SCHOOL DISTRICT RATES OF VULNERABILITY OVER TIME FOR SD54

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4

1 + Scales

Physical

Social

Emotional

Language &Cognitive

Communication

”...vulnerable children in BC are not spread evenly throughout the province. EDI research reveals a large “geography of opportunity” where some children face steep difficulties and others do not...”

Table of Critical Differences (c.d.)

EDI Count c.d.

25-26 1527-29 1430-35 1336-44 1245-55 1156-69 1070-85 986-108 8109-138 7139-200 6201-360 5361-535 4536 plus 3

E.g. the vulnerability rate in a neighbourhood with 75 EDI children must increase or decrease by 9% to be considered a meaningful change.

of time can be considered. Some areas show a consistent increase or decrease in vulnerability, while others have had a similar proportion of vulnerability each time. these, now at least eight year trends, provide a solid understanding of children’s development for those areas. less clear are the areas where the results have not followed a consistent pattern, but have fluctuated from one time to the next. In these areas, analysis of results must include a finer understanding of each of the cohorts and of the parallel growth or change in the community.

UNDERSTANDING CHANGE OvER TIMEone way of understanding whether a neighbourhood or school district has seen a meaningful change in vulnerability rates over time is to determine if it shows a ‘critical difference’. Critical difference depends on the number of children participating in the EDI in a given area. neighbourhoods with smaller EDI counts require a larger change in vulnerability rates to say that there has been meaningful change. (Zumbo, forer and Guhn, April 2011)

now that we have four data collection points, trends in children’s development over the entire period

Houston

Smithers- Telkwa

Smithers- Telkwa

Smithers -Walnut Park

Percent vulnerable onone or more EDI scales

0 - 16%

17 - 23%

24 - 28%

29 - 34%

35% and aboveSuppressed(less than 35 children)

FIG 4: NEIGHBOURHOOD RATES OF VULNERABILITY OVER TIME

WAvE 2overallvulnerability: 26%

WAvE 3 overallvulnerability: 29%

WAvE 4overallvulnerability: 37%

”...vulnerable children in BC are not spread evenly throughout the province. EDI research reveals a large “geography of opportunity” where some children face steep difficulties and others do not...”

Human Early Learning Partnership TEL 604-822-1278

FAX 604-822-0640

WEB www.earlylearning.ubc.ca

Effective community action must build from a foundation of effective child and family policy.

COMMUNITY ACTION

Children’s development is influenced by a variety of factors, among them: genetics, family environment, socio-economic conditions, neighbourhood influences, availability of early child development services, and policy directions.

HElP developed a tEAm-ECD diagram (figure 5) to understand all of the environmental influences that affect children’s development: from those closest to them, particularly the family, to more distant influences such as provincial and national policy.

Changes in the state of children’s development at the level of the population will be as a result of the interplay of these factors in a community. EDI results can be used to guide community planners and policy makers in making decisions about priorities for early child development supports and services, but they

Global Environment

RelationalCommunity

ECDPrograms& Services

Nation

Region

Residential AreaFamily

FIG 5: TOTAL ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT MODEL FOR EARLY CHILD DEVELOPMENT (TEAM-ECD)

cannot be accurately used to evaluate one aspect of the environment, or one specific program, in isolation from the others.

Community action groups will have more impact if they have the following elements:

Strong intersectoral leadership

A focus on local EDI outcomes

Alignment between the school system and the early care, learning and development sectors

A plan to increase access to service by decreasing barriers for families; and

A commitment to advocacy

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTJoanne Schroeder Knowledge Translation Director Human Early Learning Partnership joanne.schroeder@ubc.ca

FOR LOCAL ECD PLANNING & SERVICESMichael McDiarmid HELP District Trainer m.mcdiarmid@sd54.bc.ca