Improving Educational Outcomes for Disadvantaged Children

Here we look at the advice, expert services and resources available for improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged children in the UK.

 

A child’s family income, postcode or personal circumstances should not determine how well they do at school. Yet in 2026, disadvantaged children across the UK remain substantially less likely than their more affluent classmates to reach expected academic standards, attend school consistently, progress into further education or access the wider experiences that support long-term success.

Schools cannot remove poverty on their own. However, they can make an enormous difference by providing consistently strong teaching, identifying barriers early and using additional funding intelligently. The most effective approaches combine high expectations with targeted academic support, inclusive pastoral care, strong family relationships and practical action to remove the hidden costs of participating fully in school life.

 

What Does Educational Disadvantage Mean?

Educational disadvantage is often associated with eligibility for free school meals or Pupil Premium funding. However, this is only part of the picture.

A child may experience disadvantage because of:

• Low household income or insecure housing
• Food insecurity
• Limited access to books, technology or a suitable place to study
• Caring responsibilities
• Poor physical or mental health
• Special educational needs and disabilities
• Family disruption, bereavement or involvement with social care
• Living in care or previously being looked after
• Persistent absence
• Rural, coastal or transport-related isolation
• Limited access to enrichment, cultural activities and professional networks
• English being an additional language
• Discrimination or low expectations
• Frequent movement between schools

These circumstances frequently overlap. A pupil may be eligible for Pupil Premium funding while also having SEND, experiencing unstable housing and living in an area with limited public services.

This means schools should avoid treating disadvantaged pupils as a single, uniform group. Eligibility provides a useful starting point, but effective support depends on understanding each pupil’s actual barriers to learning.

 

The State of Educational Outcomes in 2026

The most recent national figures show that the disadvantage gap remains wide and, at some stages, is worsening.

In England, 47% of disadvantaged pupils reached the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics at the end of Key Stage 2 in 2025. This compared with 69% of other pupils, creating a gap of 22 percentage points. Only 4% of disadvantaged pupils reached the higher standard across the three subjects, compared with 11% of their peers, according to the government’s Key Stage 2 attainment statistics for 2024-25.

The disparity is similarly pronounced at secondary level. The average Attainment 8 gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils increased from 13.6 points in 2018-19 to 15.5 points in 2024-25. The decline since the pandemic has been concentrated among disadvantaged pupils, whose average score fell while outcomes for other pupils remained broadly stable. More information is available in the Department for Education’s Key Stage 4 performance statistics.

The Education Endowment Foundation’s Guide to the Pupil Premium estimates that disadvantaged pupils are around 19 months behind their more affluent peers by the end of secondary school. Approximately 2.2 million pupils attracted Pupil Premium funding during 2025-26, representing almost one-quarter of primary and secondary pupils in England.

The Education Policy Institute’s 2026 Annual Report concluded that progress had stalled at best. Between 2024 and 2025, the disadvantage gap widened in the early years and at Key Stage 4, while remaining unchanged at Key Stage 2. EPI’s more detailed 2026 analysis of disadvantage shows how these inequalities develop from reception through to post-16 education.

These national averages also conceal considerable variation.

The gap can be particularly severe for pupils who experience persistent disadvantage over several years. Outcomes also differ substantially according to geography, ethnicity, gender, SEND status and school attendance. Coastal, rural and post-industrial communities may face additional challenges relating to transport, employment, access to specialist services and teacher recruitment.

The figures used most frequently relate to England because education policy is devolved. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland operate different curricula, accountability systems and disadvantage funding arrangements. Nevertheless, all four nations continue to face a strong relationship between poverty and educational outcomes.

 

What Improvements Are Needed?

Closing the attainment gap will require action beyond the school gates as well as improvement within schools.

Earlier intervention

Disadvantage is already visible when children begin school. The Education Policy Institute’s analysis of educational disadvantage demonstrates how gaps emerge during the early years and become progressively more difficult to reverse.

Investment in early language, communication, self-regulation and family support is therefore essential. Waiting until pupils begin to fall behind in Key Stage 2 or Key Stage 4 makes intervention more difficult and expensive.

Early years settings and primary schools need reliable ways to identify emerging needs without labelling children or lowering expectations.

Better attendance support

Poor attendance is both a symptom and a cause of educational disadvantage. Children cannot benefit from improved teaching or tutoring when they are frequently absent.

Research published by the Education Endowment Foundation on the biggest challenges to disadvantaged pupils’ attainment found that schools commonly identify attendance, low literacy and social, emotional and mental health needs as major barriers.

An effective attendance strategy should go beyond sanctions. It should seek to understand whether absence is linked to anxiety, unmet SEND, bullying, transport, housing, family illness, caring responsibilities or a breakdown in trust between families and the school.

Consistently high-quality teaching

Additional interventions cannot compensate for weak everyday teaching. Disadvantaged pupils benefit particularly from clear explanations, carefully sequenced curricula, strong formative assessment, effective feedback and teachers who understand how to address misconceptions.

The Education Endowment Foundation’s Teaching and Learning Toolkit allows schools to compare different educational approaches according to their likely impact, cost and strength of supporting evidence.

Schools should avoid using most of their disadvantage funding on isolated activities delivered away from the classroom. Improving teaching quality, especially in literacy, is usually the most scalable and sustainable approach.

A stronger focus on literacy and language

Weak reading, vocabulary and communication skills can restrict a pupil’s access to every subject.

Schools should treat literacy as a whole-school responsibility rather than an issue for English departments alone. Useful approaches include explicit vocabulary instruction, structured talk, reading fluency practice, access to high-quality texts and targeted support for pupils who have fallen behind.

The National Literacy Trust provides research, programmes and classroom resources covering reading, writing, spoken language and literacy inequality.

Language development should be considered across the curriculum, including mathematics, science, humanities and vocational subjects.

Faster identification of SEND

Socio-economic disadvantage and SEND frequently intersect. Unidentified speech, language, communication, literacy or neurodevelopmental needs can lead to disengagement, poor behaviour, absence or exclusion.

Schools need timely access to assessment and specialist support. Staff should avoid assuming that low attainment reflects low ability, lack of aspiration or limited parental interest.

The Education Endowment Foundation’s SEND in mainstream schools guidance provides evidence-informed recommendations for creating a positive and inclusive learning environment.

Fair access to enrichment

Educational inequality is not confined to examination results. More affluent children are generally more likely to access music lessons, sport, travel, museums, theatre, private tuition, work experience and professional networks.

Schools should examine who participates in trips, clubs, leadership opportunities and careers programmes. Simply making an activity available does not guarantee equitable access. Costs, transport, equipment, confidence and family knowledge can all become barriers.

The Child Poverty Action Group’s work on the cost of the school day can help schools identify charges, expectations and routines that prevent pupils from low-income families from participating fully.

Greater continuity between phases

Disadvantaged pupils can lose momentum during transitions between early years and primary school, primary and secondary school, or school and post-16 education.

Transition planning should share meaningful information about learning needs, attendance, trusted relationships and successful strategies. It should not be limited to transferring labels or assessment scores.

Action on child poverty

Schools can mitigate some effects of poverty, but they cannot solve inadequate housing, food insecurity, poor public transport or long waiting lists for health and SEND support.

A credible national strategy must therefore connect education policy with family income, housing, health, social care, early years provision and local services.

 

Pupil Premium and Other Support Structures

Pupil Premium in England

Pupil Premium is additional funding intended to improve outcomes for children from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

For the 2025-26 financial year, schools received:

• £1,515 for each eligible primary-aged pupil
• £1,075 for each eligible secondary-aged pupil

These rates represented a cash increase on the previous year, although the House of Commons Library’s overview of Pupil Premium funding calculated that their value had fallen slightly after economy-wide inflation.

Additional funding is available for looked-after and previously looked-after children. Service Pupil Premium supports children from service families, although its purpose and eligibility criteria differ from the deprivation element.

The Department for Education’s guidance on using Pupil Premium groups effective spending into three broad areas:

1. High-quality teaching
2. Targeted academic support
3. Wider strategies that help pupils attend, belong and succeed

Schools must publish a Pupil Premium strategy statement explaining the barriers they have identified, how funding will be used and how impact will be evaluated. Current allocations and grant requirements can be checked through the government’s Pupil Premium conditions of grant.

The funding should not be treated as a personal allowance that must be spent only on individual eligible pupils. Whole-school improvements can be appropriate where they are chosen primarily to address the needs of disadvantaged learners.

Early Years Pupil Premium

The Early Years Pupil Premium provides additional funding to eligible early years providers. It can be used to strengthen language development, improve staff expertise, support parental engagement and provide evidence-based early intervention.

Its effectiveness depends on eligible families being identified and funding being connected to a clear improvement plan.

Tutoring and targeted support

Tutoring can be effective when it is closely connected to classroom teaching, delivered by well-trained staff and targeted at clearly diagnosed learning gaps.

Schools should avoid assuming that any form of additional tuition will automatically improve outcomes. Group size, curriculum alignment, tutor quality, attendance and implementation all influence impact. The EEF’s evidence review of small-group tuition provides a useful starting point for planning this support.

Scotland

Scotland addresses the poverty-related attainment gap through the Scottish Attainment Challenge and the Attainment Scotland Fund.

Pupil Equity Funding is allocated directly to schools, largely according to estimated free school meal eligibility. Strategic Equity Funding is provided to all 32 local authorities to support wider approaches to improving outcomes for children affected by poverty.

Wales

In Wales, the Pupil Development Grant supports schools and settings in reducing the effects of poverty on educational attainment.

As with Pupil Premium, effective use depends on accurate diagnosis, evidence-informed planning and careful evaluation rather than a collection of disconnected activities.

Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland provides Targeting Social Need funding through school budgets in recognition of the additional costs associated with socio-economic disadvantage and educational underachievement.

Other relevant measures include Sure Start, Extended Schools, free school meals, uniform grants, the Pathway Fund and programmes focused on literacy, numeracy and early learning. The Department of Education provides an overview of these measures through its guidance on tackling educational disadvantage.

 

Using Disadvantage Funding Effectively

Schools should begin with diagnosis, not with a list of products or interventions.

The EEF Guide to the Pupil Premium recommends a structured process that includes:

1. Identifying the specific barriers experienced by pupils.
2. Examining attainment, progress, attendance, behaviour, exclusions, participation and pupil voice.
3. Speaking with pupils, families and frontline staff.
4. Selecting a small number of evidence-informed priorities.
5. Defining what successful implementation will look like.
6. Training and supporting staff.
7. Monitoring delivery as well as final outcomes.
8. Adapting or stopping activities that are not working.

Schools should also analyse variation within the disadvantaged cohort. For example, higher-attaining disadvantaged pupils may be overlooked because they meet age-related expectations, even though they are less likely than similarly attaining peers to maintain their trajectory through secondary school.

The Department for Education’s Pupil Premium guidance for school leaders advises schools to diagnose the needs of individual pupils and groups rather than relying on assumptions associated with eligibility.

Common weaknesses in disadvantage strategies include:

• Using generic descriptions such as “low aspiration” without evidence
• Purchasing interventions before diagnosing the problem
• Spreading funding across too many small activities
• Removing pupils from high-quality classroom teaching unnecessarily
• Measuring spending rather than impact
• Focusing only on examination-year pupils
• Treating all eligible pupils as having the same needs
• Lowering curriculum expectations
• Stigmatising pupils through visible targeting
• Failing to evaluate whether an intervention was implemented properly

 

Experts Supporting Schools and Education Leaders

A growing number of researchers, consultants and school improvement specialists help education providers interpret evidence and develop effective disadvantage strategies.

Professor Lee Elliot Major OBE

Professor Lee Elliot Major OBE is a leading authority on social mobility and education. He is Professor of Social Mobility at the University of Exeter and has been described as the UK’s first professor in the field. He was previously Chief Executive of the Sutton Trust and has advised schools, universities and policymakers on improving opportunities for disadvantaged young people.

His work explores how family background, education and informal social expectations shape life chances. He has written extensively about social mobility, university access, class-related inequalities and the practical steps educators can take to widen opportunity.

For schools, a valuable aspect of his work is its emphasis on both academic attainment and the less visible “codes” that influence progression. These can include knowledge of professional environments, confidence in unfamiliar settings, access to networks and an understanding of how education and employment systems operate.

His research encourages schools to maintain high expectations while explicitly teaching knowledge and behaviours that more advantaged pupils may acquire outside school.

Schools and education leaders can also explore his research and professional background through his his LSE profile.

 

Nicole Taylor, Equity Education Services

Nicole Taylor is an education leader, school improvement professional and founder of Equity Education Services.

She has worked in curriculum, assessment and school improvement, including as a school improvement lead within a multi-academy trust. Her experience combines strategic leadership with practical work supporting schools to embed equity in their everyday systems.

Equity Education Services was established to help schools move beyond one-off training and translate equity commitments into practical changes in leadership, curriculum, policy and classroom practice.

Taylor’s approach emphasises that training has limited value when staff return to unchanged systems. Equity work therefore needs to be embedded in decision-making, implementation and accountability rather than treated as a standalone initiative.

In her article explaining why she started an equity education consultancy, Taylor argues that goodwill alone does not change systems. Schools also need the structures, knowledge and practical tools required to make equity part of everyday practice.

Her work is particularly relevant to schools seeking support with:

• Equity reviews and audits
• School improvement planning
• Curriculum and policy reviews
• Leadership development
• Staff training
• Implementation support
• Identifying structural barriers affecting disadvantaged or underrepresented pupils

Further info on how she can help schools to improve attainment for disadvantaged pupils is available on the Equity Education Services website.

 

Marc Rowland

Marc Rowland is a nationally recognised adviser on educational disadvantage and Pupil Premium strategy. He works with Unity Research School and has supported schools, academy trusts, local authorities, governments and Research Schools in developing evidence-informed approaches to disadvantage.

He has reportedly worked with more than 500 schools, as well as the Department for Education and the Government of Jersey, to improve strategies and outcomes for disadvantaged learners.

Rowland is the author of Addressing Educational Disadvantage in Schools and Colleges: The Essex Way and has produced numerous practical resources for leaders responsible for Pupil Premium and wider disadvantage strategies.

His work stresses that disadvantage extends beyond Pupil Premium eligibility and that poorly identified barriers inevitably lead to poorly chosen actions. His article on moving from disadvantage strategy to the classroom explains how school culture, relationships, classroom teaching and participation all contribute to pupils’ educational experiences.

Rowland advocates a disciplined focus on pupils’ day-to-day learning experiences. His work frequently highlights literacy, attendance, relationships, inclusion, poverty-proofing and the quality of classroom teaching.

He also warns against deficit thinking. Disadvantaged pupils lack opportunity, not potential. The task for schools is to identify and remove barriers while preserving challenge, ambition and access to a rich curriculum.

His more recent guidance on supporting disadvantaged pupils to thrive emphasises the importance of people, place and provision, as well as collective responsibility for disadvantage across a school.

 

Practical Priorities for Schools

Build a detailed understanding of need

Combine data with professional knowledge and pupil voice. Examine:

• Reading ages and language development
• Attendance and punctuality
• SEND identification
• Behaviour and exclusions
• Access to devices and study space
• Participation in trips and clubs
• Subject choices
• Careers engagement
• Parental communication
• Mental health and wellbeing
• Mobility between schools
• Progress among previously high-attaining pupils

Avoid using free school meal status as the only indicator of need.

Marc Rowland’s guidance on understanding educational disadvantage is particularly useful when schools are trying to move beyond broad assumptions and identify the barriers affecting their own pupils.

Make teaching quality the central priority

Use funding to improve curriculum design, professional development, coaching, assessment and staff retention.

The objective should be to make strong teaching more consistent, particularly for pupils who are least able to compensate for gaps through private tuition or support at home.

Schools can compare the evidence behind different teaching approaches using the EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit.

Develop a whole-school literacy strategy

Schools should establish how vocabulary, reading, writing and spoken language will be developed in every subject.

Intervention should supplement rather than replace access to an ambitious curriculum.

The National Literacy Trust’s resources for schools include classroom activities, research, professional development materials and guidance covering reading, writing and spoken language.

Review attendance pupil by pupil

Segmenting absence data can reveal very different causes. A universal reward or sanction system is unlikely to address anxiety, unmet SEND, transport difficulties and family illness equally well.

Assign trusted adults, work constructively with families and coordinate with health, SEND and local services where necessary.

The government’s Working Together to Improve School Attendance guidance sets out expectations for schools, trusts, local authorities and families.

Poverty-proof school participation

Review the real costs of:

• Uniform
• Equipment
• Devices and internet access
• School trips
• Revision materials
• Clubs
• Music and sport
• Transport
• Celebrations and non-uniform days

Schools should ensure pupils can receive support discreetly and without stigma.

The Child Poverty Action Group’s guide to tackling child poverty in schools and its work on reducing the cost of the school day provide practical starting points.

Schools can also investigate the Poverty Proofing the School Day programme developed by Children North East.

Strengthen relationships with families

Communication should be accessible, respectful and two-way.

Schools may need to vary communication methods, provide translation, arrange meetings at practical times and avoid assuming that non-attendance at school events indicates a lack of interest.

The EEF’s guidance on working with parents to support children’s learning includes practical recommendations for improving parental engagement.

Improve access to enrichment and careers

Proactively encourage disadvantaged pupils to participate rather than relying on first-come, first-served systems.

Schools can provide encounters with universities, employers, apprenticeships, arts organisations and community groups while ensuring that careers guidance begins well before pupils make major subject choices.

The Sutton Trust offers programmes, research and resources intended to improve social mobility and widen access to education and professional opportunities. Its explanation of social mobility and the barriers affecting young people provides useful context for school leaders.

Evaluate impact honestly

A programme should not continue simply because it is popular or has been used for several years.

Schools should ask:

• Was the intervention delivered as planned?
• Did the intended pupils participate?
• Did attendance remain high?
• What changed?
• Was the change educationally meaningful?
• Could the outcome have occurred without the intervention?
• Is the approach sustainable?
• Should it be continued, adapted or stopped?

The EEF’s implementation guidance report helps schools plan, deliver and sustain evidence-informed changes.

 

Resources for Supporting Disadvantaged Children

Education Endowment Foundation

The Education Endowment Foundation provides one of the most useful collections of educational evidence available to UK schools.

Its Teaching and Learning Toolkit summarises the cost, likely impact and strength of evidence behind different educational approaches.

The EEF Guide to the Pupil Premium provides a step-by-step process for developing, implementing and evaluating a school strategy.

The EEF also publishes guidance on:

• Improving literacy
• SEND in mainstream schools
• Metacognition and self-regulated learning
• Parental engagement
• Effective implementation
• Professional development

Department for Education

The Department for Education publishes Pupil Premium eligibility, allocation and accountability guidance.

Schools should consult the guidance for the relevant financial or academic year rather than relying on older templates, as funding rates, conditions and reporting requirements can change.

The government also publishes research on supporting the attainment of disadvantaged pupils, including a briefing for school leaders.

Education Policy Institute

The Education Policy Institute publishes detailed analysis of attainment gaps by age, disadvantage, ethnicity, gender, SEND, English as an additional language and geography.

Its 2026 Annual Report can help school and trust leaders compare local patterns with national trends and understand how disadvantage interacts with other pupil characteristics.

The report includes a dedicated section on economic disadvantage and educational outcomes.

Research Schools Network

The Research Schools Network supports schools in using evidence and improving implementation.

Its network of Research Schools works with schools, colleges and early years settings across England, with a particular focus on improving outcomes for socio-economically disadvantaged children and young people.

Schools can search the network’s events, training and practical resources covering Pupil Premium, literacy, attendance, SEND, curriculum development and school improvement.

Sutton Trust

The Sutton Trust researches social mobility, university access, apprenticeships, early years education and the experiences of disadvantaged young people.

Its work is particularly useful for schools examining progression, higher education access and the experiences of high-attaining disadvantaged pupils.

The Trust’s research explaining what social mobility means provides a helpful overview of how education, employment, family background and geography affect opportunity.

Child Poverty Action Group

The Child Poverty Action Group provides research and practical guidance on how poverty and school costs affect children and families.

Its work on tackling the cost of the school day can help schools identify policies, activities and routines that unintentionally exclude or stigmatise pupils from low-income families.

Its downloadable guide for schools on tackling child poverty includes practical recommendations relating to uniform, trips, resources, food, family communication and participation.

Children North East

Children North East developed the Poverty Proofing the School Day programme.

The programme helps schools consult pupils and families, identify financial barriers and remove practices that unintentionally stigmatise or exclude children experiencing poverty.

The Difference

The Difference supports schools in developing inclusive practice and reducing exclusion.

Its resources and programmes are relevant where disadvantage overlaps with SEND, mental health needs, school absence, behaviour challenges or alternative provision.

National Literacy Trust

The National Literacy Trust provides research, programmes and educational resources covering reading, writing, spoken language and literacy inequality.

Its work can help schools design approaches that connect classroom teaching with reading culture, family engagement and access to books.

Anna Freud

Anna Freud provides guidance, training and resources relating to children’s mental health and school-based support.

Its free mental health resources for schools and colleges include toolkits, lesson plans, guides, animations and policy templates.

The organisation’s Mentally Healthy Schools resources can help leaders develop a whole-school approach to emotional wellbeing.

Place2Be

Place2Be is a children’s mental health charity that works directly with pupils, families and staff in UK schools.

Its mental health resources for schools include assembly ideas, classroom activities, videos and practical guidance.

Place2Be also offers a free online Mental Health Champions Foundation Programme for teachers, school staff and other professionals who work with children and young people.

Education Scotland’s Equity Toolkit

For Scottish schools, Scotland’s Equity Toolkit brings together guidance, professional learning resources and examples of practice related to the Scottish Attainment Challenge.

The toolkit can support schools in planning, implementing and evaluating approaches funded through Pupil Equity Funding and other equity-focused programmes.

 

A Framework for an Effective Disadvantage Strategy

A practical school strategy can be organised around six questions.

1. Who is experiencing disadvantage?

Look beyond eligibility codes to identify financial, academic, social, emotional and practical barriers.

2. What is preventing success?

Use evidence rather than assumptions. Identify whether the main issues involve teaching, literacy, attendance, SEND, wellbeing, participation or another factor.

3. What change is needed?

Define specific outcomes, such as improved reading fluency, reduced persistent absence or increased participation in enrichment.

4. Which approach has the strongest evidence?

Use external research alongside knowledge of the school’s context. The EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit can help schools assess the evidence behind potential approaches.

5. How will the approach be implemented?

Specify responsibilities, training, timelines, resources and quality assurance. The EEF’s implementation guidance provides a useful framework.

6. How will impact be assessed?

Measure outcomes, but also check whether implementation occurred as intended.

 

Conclusion

Improving outcomes for disadvantaged children is not achieved through a single intervention, funding stream or member of staff. It requires a sustained, school-wide commitment to excellent teaching, ambitious curricula, early identification, inclusive systems and trusted relationships.

Pupil Premium and equivalent funding arrangements provide important resources, but funding alone does not close attainment gaps. Its impact depends on whether schools understand the barriers pupils face, select appropriate evidence-informed responses and implement them consistently.

Experts such as Lee Elliot Major, Nicole Taylor and Equity Education Services and Marc Rowland can help schools challenge assumptions, strengthen their strategies and turn research into practical improvement.

The strongest schools do not define disadvantaged children by what they lack. They recognise their potential, remove obstacles to participation and ensure that background does not place an artificial limit on achievement.

Closing the disadvantage gap will also require wider action on poverty, housing, health, SEND and family support. Within that broader effort, however, schools remain one of the most powerful institutions for expanding opportunity and changing the course of a child’s life.