tled to benefit up to their 6th birthday […], subject to the overall assessment required by the Constitution. The necessary livelihood of children also includes their special needs, namely those occasioned by virtue of their development and growth (BVerfGE 125, 175 <228>). But the Federal Constitutional Court does not examine whether, as in a basket-of-goods model, the legislature has based each individual item of statistically determined need on an amount that secures existence, but merely whether, in an overall assessment and without any evident failure to cover the minimum level of existence, needs have been determined based on a calculation that stands up to scrutiny (see C I 2 b above). That is the case. (a) Children in standard needs level 6 are not precluded from receiving benefits for education and social participation. Children who attend a daycare centre can receive support for excursions and a midday meal […];[…] apart from kindergartens, such centres, whatever they be named, include all establishments for the care of children in the pre-school age group […]. In addition, children in this age group are eligible for benefits under § 28 sec. 7 SGB II, which are compatible with the Constitution (see C II 2 g cc 3 below). 127 (b) In the statistical calculation of a regularly paid lump sum for children, the legislature may furthermore take into consideration that needs change with age, and may expect that money that is paid from birth but is not needed during certain periods should be put aside in order to cover future needs. The amount allowed for consumer goods for body care for a child up to six years of age is, at EUR 2.19 per month, indeed very small. It can, for instance, pay for just a few days’ nappies. The amount of EUR 7.02 for shoes is also small, and is EUR 2.58 less than the sum allowed for children aged 6 to 14 […]. However, the overall assessment does not currently show that internal compensation, for example by means of putting money aside, would not be possible. 128 (2) In the overall assessment required by the Constitution there is currently no objection to the level of standard needs determined for level 4 for adolescents from the ages 15 to 18 […]. It is true that the deductions for consumer expenses for alcohol and tobacco by families with children do seem too high because of indications that there is a decline in adolescents’ consumption […]; the legislature can, however, take this into account in its next regular review of the level of standard needs. 129 (3) There is no constitutional objection to the decision by the legislature to regard the costs identified in the income and consumption survey for out-of-school lessons and hobby courses with a value of EUR 3.58 as not relevant in terms of standard needs. This decision can be justified in a way that is able to bear scrutiny, for the legislature has covered needs for taking part in social, political and cultural life since 1 January 2011 (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <223>; 132, 134 <160, para. 64>) separately in the so-called “education package” (Bildungspaket) […]. The Constitution does not forbid this (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <237>). These expenses thus continue to be part of the needs to secure existence, which the legislature is required to cover […], and are 130 24/29