The Government lacks knowledge of how funding for disadvantaged children is being spent by schools.
In a report published today, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warns that disadvantaged children may not be benefitting from funding intended for them, with the Department for Education (DfE) possessing only a limited picture of how schools are spending billions in funding associated with disadvantage.
The PAC’s inquiry heard that pupil premium funding, which is intended to improve educational outcomes for disadvantaged children, is being used for whole school interventions. Around 2m children in England from disadvantaged backgrounds are behind their peers academically, impacting their future life chances. Schools have autonomy to support disadvantaged children by using funding according to local context, with over 90% of c.£9.2bn in this funding is not ringfenced.
The report highlights that 47% of senior school leaders were using pupil premium to plug budget gaps in 2024, up from 23% in 2019, according to Sutton Trust research. The DfE believes that an accountability system, in which schools are required to report how funding will be used to support disadvantaged children’s attainment, helps schools to make good choices.
But the report finds that in 2023, a fifth of schools had not published such a report. The PAC recommends DfE introduce stronger and clearer mechanisms to understand how schools spend funding, whilst retaining the principle of local decision-making.
In 2022/23, a quarter of disadvantaged pupils achieved grade 5 or above in English and Maths GCSE, compared with 52% of those not known to be disadvantaged. The slight narrowing of the attainment gap between disadvantaged children and their peers in the last two years is welcomed. The PAC warns that this progress is too slow, with some way to go to return to pre-pandemic levels. The DfE acknowledged this as part of the inquiry, and has not set out the specific progress it wants to make on closing the gap and by when.
DfE uses the disadvantage attainment gap index to measure progress, which compares attainment at key stage 2 and key stage 4 of disadvantaged pupils against their peers. The index does not provide a breakdown of variation by local area, or by ethnicity or gender. The DfE agreed during the inquiry that wider outcomes such as progression into work and wellbeing should be considered alongside academic attainment, and the PAC recommends Government lay out how the attainment gap is considered alongside other factors.
The PAC’s report also questions the rationale for certain funding decisions. Pupil premium rates have failed to keep up with inflation with a 3% real-terms reduction since 2018-19, while disadvantage and deprivation-related interventions through core funding (for which there is weaker evidence of impact) has risen by 10% in real terms over the same period.
Separately, while the value of intervening as early as possible in a child’s life is well recognised, DfE has not reflected this in its funding. While the Early Years Pupil Premium has been increased by 45% to up to £570 per child per year, this is as against £1,480 for a primary school child in 24-25. The PAC’s report is calling on DfE to re-assess its evidence base for funding decisions, and align these decisions with developed evidence.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “Schools are best-placed to make decisions on how to support their pupils within their local context. Autonomy for schools in this area is an important principle. However, with autonomy must come accountability. Our report finds that, for too many schools, the Government is not sighted on how money that ought to be spent on helping disadvantaged children overcome their circumstances is actually being used. In a constrained funding environment, it becomes all the more important that schools are supported to make the right choices.
“It is welcome to see the DfE focused as it is on closing the attainment gap. The pandemic was a massive blow to the life chances of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, and any progress towards a pre-COVID position must be celebrated. The DfE now must make sure it is able to target funding appropriately, underpinned by the best available evidence, and taking a holistic approach in measuring success. No-one should be satisfied until not one of the two million children without the same advantages as their peers risk being left behind.”
