Foreword & executive summary

Foreword 

This year’s annual report on the disadvantage gap in England reveals the enduring and, in some areas, worsening disparities faced by disadvantaged and vulnerable pupils.  

Almost half a decade on, and we see precious few signs of recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. Perhaps that is because the pandemic struck an education system that was already struggling to cope against a backdrop of real terms funding cuts to schools and wider children’s services, rising child poverty and a shortage of teachers, particularly in some of the poorest areas of the country. 

As this report demonstrates, we are making little progress in closing the gap between vulnerable groups of pupils and their peers. And the most concerning area is in the early years, where we have seen a widening of the gap since 2019 (and, indeed earlier), particularly for economically disadvantaged young children and those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Previous EPI research has shown that 40 per cent of the gap at age 16 has already emerged by age 5 and so this is a crucial opportunity to tackle later life inequalities. Without urgent action, we will have a generation of young people at risk of leaving education without the skills and qualifications they need to thrive. 

Early intervention is key, but is only part of the solution. Indeed, more action is also needed towards the end of compulsory education to combat the widening disadvantage gap among 16–19-year-olds, alongside falling participation in post-16 education. We must urgently ask why so many young people are stepping away from education entirely, and how we can re-engage them to prevent entrenched cycles of poverty. 

This report is clear that we face a set of complex challenges where poverty, ethnicity, place and gender all interact to compromise the life chances of some of the country’s most vulnerable children. We set out clear, evidence-based recommendations to policymakers: from ensuring adequate and well-targeted funding for disadvantaged pupils in every phase, to addressing the structural drivers of poverty and absence, and prioritising SEND reforms. These are not marginal adjustments but essential steps if the government is to deliver on its Opportunity Mission – ensuring that no child’s outcomes are determined by their circumstances of birth. 

We hope the findings and recommendations in this report will galvanise urgent action from leaders across government, education, and wider society. Closing these gaps is not simply an educational priority; it is a moral and economic necessity. 

Natalie Perera, Chief Executive, Education Policy Institute 

Executive Summary 

This report marks our latest assessment of the attainment gap for disadvantaged students and other vulnerable groups across compulsory phases of education in the 2023/24 academic year. This is the second year following the return of pre-pandemic grading standards, meaning national results were broadly similar to 2023 and benchmarked against grade boundaries used in 2019. In the intervening years, we saw grade inflation under centre and teacher assessed grades in 2020 and 2021, and though exams returned in 2022, grading was more generous in that year due to government decisions to stagger the return to pre-pandemic standards.  

In this report we focus on comparing attainment gaps in 2024 with the previous year (2023) and changes since 2019, noting that this post-pandemic period has been affected not only by the staggered transition to pre-pandemic arrangements but other major challenges: an absence epidemic, a crisis in SEND provision, a reported decline in young people’s mental health and rising child poverty. Whilst many of these have long roots established prior to the pandemic, the pandemic has generally exacerbated these trends meaning that, four years on, many of the gaps we report on remain well above pre-pandemic levels and in some cases, at all-time highs. 

Disadvantage  

In 2019, the year before the pandemic’s onset, progress in closing the gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers had already stalled. Having made good progress in gap-narrowing until around 2017, we then saw signs of the gap starting to widen in reception year, key stage 2 and key stage 4 even prior to the pandemic.

The widening of the disadvantage gap accelerated during and after the pandemic. Between 2019 and 2024, the gap widened across all phases, including the 16-19 phase. Whilst the patterns vary across phases when comparing to the previous year (2023), the big picture is one of disadvantaged students falling further behind their peers since the pandemic. Our groundbreaking report ‘Breaking down the gap’, published earlier this year, found that the increase in the disadvantage gap since 2019 can largely be explained by the higher levels of absence among disadvantaged pupils.

As the table below shows, in 2024, there was a mixed picture for the disadvantage gap compared to 2023. We see a fall in the gap at key stage 2 (from 10.3 months in 2023 to 10.0 months in 2024) and a slight decrease at key stage 4 (from 19.2 months to 19.1 months), but it is too soon to tell if this will be sustained. In any case, these gaps remain up to one month larger than their pre-pandemic lows and we continue to have erased a decade of progress.

Meanwhile the gap in early years continued to rise in 2024 (reaching 4.7 months, up slightly from 4.6 months in 2023) and, as we discuss later in this summary and throughout, the trends in the early years gap should be a significant concern for policymakers.

Likewise, the 16-19 gap widened in 2024, with disadvantaged students 3.3 grades behind their peers, up from 3.1 grades in 2023. Perhaps more worrying still is that more than 1 in 5 disadvantaged 16 year olds are not studying towards any substantial qualifications or an apprenticeship, meaning that the participation gap in 16-19 education has also widened (from 10.2 percentage points in 2017 to 12.5 percentage points in the most recent year).

Change in disadvantage gaps since before the pandemic

Special educational needs and disabilities

Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) continue to experience substantial educational disadvantage, with some of the widest attainment gaps observed across all groups.

At the end of primary school, pupils with an EHCP were over two years (27.2 months) behind their peers in 2024, while those receiving SEN support were 16.8 months behind; among those taking GCSEs, students with an EHCP were over three years (39.6 months) behind, while those receiving SEN support were 21.8 months behind. In 16-19 education, those with an EHCP were 6.8 grades behind their peers, while those receiving SEN support were 3.5 grades behind.

These gaps have declined substantially since the start of our series, although they remain well above those for disadvantaged pupils. That said, recent shifts in the types of need identified in the SEND population – including notable increases in diagnoses related to autism, speech, language and communication needs, and social, emotional and mental health difficulties – means that the composition of the SEND population has changed and it is therefore challenging to interpret these trends as a measure of progress. To fully understand the trends in the SEND gap, there needs to be further research into the wider characteristics and outcomes for children with additional needs.

We see a more concerning picture at early years where SEND gaps for pupils in reception year have reached unprecedented levels: those with an EHCP were 20.1 months behind their peers in 2024 and pupils receiving SEN support were 12.6 months behind – both at their widest since the start of our series in 2013. We echo our previous concern that the early years SEND cohort appears to have been disproportionately affected in the wake of the pandemic, compounding the challenges faced by primary schools.

Change in SEND gaps since before the pandemic

Ethnicity

Attainment continues to vary significantly between different ethnic groups and across education phases. On average, White British children start school ahead of most ethnicities in reception year – except for Chinese, White and Asian, and White Irish pupils. However, by the end of key stage 4 and in 16-19 education, pupils from most other ethnic groups tend to outperform White British pupils.

Much of this appears to reflect the low attainment of disadvantaged White British pupils as they progress through education. By the time they sit their GCSEs, they are almost 2 years behind their non-disadvantaged (White British) peers. The only disadvantaged groups who perform worse than White British pupils are Gypsy/Roma pupils and Travellers of Irish heritage.

We also find that, at both key stage 4 and in 16-19 education, the attainment of White British students has declined since 2019 relative to all other ethnic groups. Our previous analysis (for 2019 to 2023), confirmed this trend at key stage 4, even after controlling for student, institutional and regional level differences, while the decline in 16-19 education is mostly explained by these other factors. More needs to be done by government to understand and address the complex and persistent issue of low attainment among White British students – particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds – in the wake of the pandemic.

Figure ES1: All ethnicities have improved their key stage 4 attainment relative to White British students since 2019

Gender

Girls outperform boys across all education phases on our headline measure. In 2024, girls in reception year were already 3.3 months ahead, a wider gap than in both 2023 (3.2 months) and 2019 (2.9 months). The gender gap then narrows in primary school and, by the end of Key Stage 2, the gap was one month. This represents a widening of 0.5 months since 2023, though remaining below its 2019 peak of 2.4 months. This recent widening appears to reflect an increase in the proportion of girls reaching the expected standard in reading in 2024, while outcomes for boys remained unchanged.

Gender gaps remain stable among older students. In 2024, female students in 16-19 education were 1.6 grades ahead of their male peers. At GCSE, girls were 4.5 months ahead of boys, unchanged from 2023 but a marked reduction from the 6.3-month gap in 2019.

We have previously highlighted that the narrowing gender gap between 2019 and 2023 partly reflects a decline in girls’ GCSE attainment. While the GCSE gap stabilised in 2024, this masks that girls have been making steadily less progress during secondary school in every year since 2019. On current trends girl’s progress will fall behind boys by 2029. In our recent blog, we argue that further research is needed to better understand gender attainment gaps – and whether these reflect broader disparities in areas such as mental health, social media use, and pupils’ perceptions of school safety and belonging.

Figure ES2: Since 2019 the progress that girls make during secondary school has been steadily declining relative to boys

English as an additional language

Attainment varies considerably by first language and time of entry into the English state school system. Pupils arriving late to the English state school system with English as an additional language (EAL) have large attainment gaps compared to their peers. However, these gaps have narrowed markedly over time.

In 2024, children with EAL in reception year were 1.6 months behind their peers – the smallest gap since our series began in 2013.

By the end of primary school, pupils with EAL who arrived late to the state school system were 8.7 months behind – a reduction of 1.1 months since 2023 and nearly seven months since 2019. At the end of secondary school, the gap was 10.3 months, down 1.5 months since 2023 and over 10 months since 2019.

Changes in the ethnic composition of the late-EAL group since the pandemic have contributed to this narrowing, but even after accounting for these shifts, we find substantial reductions – particularly in 2024.

Geography

This report features interactive geographic tools to help users explore how disadvantage gaps vary across England. For each phase and geographic level, we compare the attainment of disadvantaged pupils locally to the attainment of non-disadvantaged pupils nationally.

Once again, we find that disadvantaged pupils in London outperform their counterparts in other regions, with the West Midlands emerging as the next best-performing region in all four phases.

Consistent with the national trend of widening gaps post-pandemic, every region has seen an increase in the early years gap between 2019 and 2024, except for the South West. At key stage 2, the gap has widened in all regions other than the West Midlands. London is the only region that has narrowed the gap at GCSE. However, our previous analysis shows that regional patterns are affected by contextual factors, including significant differences in pupil and institutional characteristics between London and other regions, including ethnicity. Once we account for these factors, the change in regional gaps (between 2019 and 2023) was not statistically significant for many regions.

At the local authority level, seven London boroughs consistently rank among those with the smallest disadvantage gaps across all phases (based on being in the top 25 nationally): Kensington and Chelsea, Redbridge, Newham, Hackney, Barnet, Southwark and Wandsworth.

By contrast, Central Bedfordshire recorded some of the largest disadvantage gaps across all four phases in 2024. Seven other local authorities – Bath and North East Somerset, West Sussex, Oxfordshire, West Berkshire, Westmorland and Furness, South Gloucestershire, and North Somerset – ranked among those with the widest gaps across three out of four phases.

There is much more variation at local authority level looking at gap-changes between 2019 and 2024 than we see for the overall gap, as seen in our interactive geographic tools.

Change in regional gaps since before the pandemic

Conclusions and policy recommendations

It is clear that, several years on, the education system has yet to recover from the profound impact of the pandemic. Disadvantaged children and young people remain far behind their peers and we are seeing a looming equity crisis in the early years – particularly for children with special educational needs. The widening gaps among children just starting school reflect concerns reported by teachers about school readiness and raise important questions over the government’s ambition for 75 per cent of children to reach a ‘good level of development’ by 2028 – an ambition that may be increasingly out of reach for some groups.

Among 16–19-year-olds, the widening disadvantage gap is accompanied by a widening participation gap. Increasing numbers of disadvantaged young people are not pursuing substantial post-16 qualifications or an apprenticeship. We don’t yet know what is driving this impact, but it may not be coincidental that these cohorts also experienced significant disruptions to school attendance following the pandemic. The disengagement with education that contributes to persistent absence pre-16 may be leading to complete disengagement post-16.

We find that, while the gender gap is stable at GCSE, this masks the fact that girls have consistently made less progress over secondary school since 2019, against a backdrop of concerning declines in their reported mental health.

We also highlight that the attainment of White British students has declined since 2019 relative to all other ethnic groups at both GCSE and in 16-19 education. More needs to be done to understand the complex intersection of ethnicity, poverty, student absence and geography in the wake of the pandemic. Though several years old now, this should build on the work of the former Education Committee’s 2021 inquiry which cited wide-ranging reasons including persistent and multigenerational disadvantage; disengagement from the curriculum; low participation in higher education; family experiences of education; a lack of social capital such as youth groups; and place-based factors, including regional underinvestment.

Our policy recommendations are as follows:

• The government should assess the adequacy of disadvantage funding across all phases and improve its targeting. In particular, there should be: 

• • higher levels of funding for disadvantage, weighted more heavily towards persistently disadvantaged pupils; 

• • an increase in the early years pupil premium to match the pupil premium in later school years;  

• • a new student premium in the 16-19 phase, similar to the pupil premium at key stage 4, to address the stubbornly high 16-19 gap and increasing numbers of disadvantaged students not continuing into post-16 education at all. 

• The government needs to urgently publish its delayed child poverty strategy which should be backed by funded commitments including: 

• • removing the two-child benefits cap;  

• • introducing a national auto-enrolment scheme for free school meals so all eligible families would be automatically registered by the government and receive the support they are entitled to; 

• • making free meals available for pre-school children and funding them adequately. 

• We reiterate our call for improving outcomes for the youngest pupils with SEND who have been some of the worst affected in the wake of the pandemic. As part of wider SEND reforms, the government should prioritise training in child development and different types of SEND, making it a mandatory part of initial teacher training and early career development.

• With pupil absence a key driver of the growing disadvantage gap, the government’s absence strategy must address the root causes of absence, with improved SEND identification, better mental health support, and initiatives to foster pupils’ sense of school belonging.

• Urgent action is required to understand and address the sudden fall in post-16 participation for disadvantaged students. As with pre-16 absence, the government must take steps to identify and address the root causes of the fall in participation, and there is a need for further research to understand the drivers of this emerging gap.

• Given the consistent decline in girls’ progress throughout secondary school since the pandemic, we recommend further research to better understand gender attainment gaps and explore potential links with broader inequalities in mental health and wellbeing, including students’ sense of school belonging and safety.

• More focus is also needed to understand and address the complex picture of low attainment among disadvantaged White British students in the wake of the pandemic, building on the findings of the former Education Committee.

• Foreword & executive summary
• Disadvantage
• EAL
• Ethnicity
• Gender
• Geographic disadvantage gaps
• SEND
• Methodology