The early years education sector in the United Kingdom asks a lot of its workforce. Practitioners are expected to support children's language, numeracy, social-emotional development, and more—often in settings stretched for time, staff, and resources. The training and professional development support needed to help staff meet these high expectations has traditionally been lacking. This is a missed opportunity. When early years practitioners are equipped with high-quality, evidence-informed professional development, the benefits ripple outwards: to children, to families, and to the sector as a whole.
RAND Europe recently published the results of evaluations into two early years training programmes—Concept Cat and The ONE—which offer a window into what's possible when continuing professional development (CPD) is designed with early years practitioners in mind. Both randomised controlled trials were funded by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) as part of the UK Department for Education's Stronger Practice Hubs initiative and were independently evaluated by RAND Europe, with University of Leeds acting as co-evaluators for Concept Cat. The aim of these trials was to build evidence for what works in improving teaching and learning in the early years, focusing on two promising programmes.
The trial for The ONE—a programme helping early years practitioners deliver play-based activities aimed at developing executive function and numeracy for 3-to-5-year-olds—was conducted in 150 early years settings. The trial for Concept Cat—a whole class teaching methodology for early verbal concepts—was conducted in 90 settings. Both evaluations found that early years practitioners are not only willing to engage with CPD—they're eager for it.
When early years practitioners are equipped with high-quality, evidence-informed professional development, the benefits ripple outwards: to children, to families, and to the sector as a whole.
In the Concept Cat trial, all surveyed practitioners said they planned to continue using the programme after the trial ended, citing increased confidence and improved understanding of how to support children's conceptual vocabulary development. In the ONE trial, 96 percent of practitioners agreed that the training prepared them to deliver the programme, and many settings trained more than the required one practitioner—some trained up to 13. This is a workforce that's hungry for meaningful, practical development opportunities when they're made accessible and relevant. The fact that training was easily accessible was also highly appreciated by practitioners. In Concept Cat, practitioners were asked to join an online training session at a time and day that suited them. In the ONE, trainers visited settings at times to meet the specific needs of each setting. Both trials had high levels of attendance which helped practitioners feel confident in delivering these interventions.
Our evaluations took place at a time when the early years sector is facing a well-documented workforce crisis. According to the Early Education and Childcare Coalition, nearly 60 percent of early years settings in England report difficulties recruiting staff, and turnover rates remain high, with many practitioners citing low pay, lack of progression, and insufficient professional development as key reasons for leaving. At the same time, the government has set ambitious targets to expand the early years workforce to meet the demands of its new Best Start in Life strategy. The findings from the Concept Cat and The ONE trials indicate that effective CPD could be one way of meeting these targets and reversing the downward trends in recruitment and retention. The evidence here is early but suggestive. In the ONE trial, 17 percent of managers believed the programme had a positive impact on retention. While in Concept Cat, one setting said they saw a drop in staff turnover during the programme. While neither trial was designed to measure retention outcomes directly, these findings point to a need for further research on how CPD might contribute to a more confident, supported, and ultimately more stable workforce.
But access is the key word here. One of the most important enablers in both trials was funding. The EEF subsidised staff cover costs—50 percent in the case of Concept Cat, and a flat £75 per practitioner in the ONE trial. This support made it feasible for settings to release staff for training, especially in environments where budgets are tight and staffing is fragile. Managers in both trials cited this funding as critical to participation. Without it, even the most well-designed CPD risks being out of reach.
If the UK government is serious about improving early years outcomes, investing in the people who deliver them is vital. Sufficient funding for CPD should not be seen as an optional extra, but as a core part of what it takes to run a high-quality educational setting. When we support practitioners to grow, we are not just investing in their development—we are investing in the future of the children they teach. Crucially, at a time when the early years workforce is shrinking, clear, funded pathways for professional growth could be a potent solution to attract new practitioners into the sector and keep them there.
