Research School Network: Making Sense of Pupil Premium in 2025: What Every PP Lead Needs to Know Making Sense of Pupil Premium in 2025: What Every PP Lead Needs to Know

Every year, schools are required to publish and review their Pupil Premium (PP) strategy statement by 31 December and using the DfE Template. For some of us, that’s become a well-worn routine. But if this is your first year as PP lead, the acronyms, the shifting policies and the technical language can feel overwhelming.

This blog aims to spell out, what has changed for 2025 – 26, what’s on the horizon, and what you need to connect with as you reflect on and prepare your PP strategy statement.

First principles: what is Pupil Premium actually for?

The Pupil Premium Grant (PPG) is additional funding given to schools to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. It is not ​“extra money for free school meals”, but it is calculated using free school meal eligibility.

The purpose is to help schools close the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers — not just by paying for meals, but by funding effective teaching, targeted academic support, and wider strategies, a menu of approaches that help pupils thrive.

> ​“The teacher is the intervention” — the quality of teaching makes the biggest difference.

> Don’t get caught in the trap of thinking there’s a fixed formula (e.g. 50% teaching, 25% targeted, 25% wider strategies). There isn’t. What matters is that you can show why you’ve made the choices you have, and that those choices are evidence-based.

> Evaluation is key — you don’t just spend, you track the impact.

This is where it gets a bit technical — but it’s important.

> Free School Meals (FSM): A child qualifies if their family receives certain benefits (e.g. Universal Credit, Income Support, Jobseekers Allowance) and meets the income threshold. At present, that threshold is £7,400 household income (after tax, before benefits) for families on UC.

> Ever 6 FSM: The DfE doesn’t just fund schools for pupils currently claiming FSM. Instead, it funds for all pupils who have been eligible for FSM at any point in the last six years (hence ​“Ever 6”). This is because disadvantage often has long-term effects — so a child who was eligible three years ago may still face challenges now.

> Looked-After or Previously Looked-After Children (LAC/PLAC): These pupils attract higher funding, regardless of FSM.

> Universal Credit (UC) expansion: From September 2026, every child in a household on UC will be eligible for FSM — regardless of income level. This is a massive shift. However, PPG will still be based on the Ever 6 model until DfE confirms otherwise.

This is the part that often trips up new PP leads. Here’s why:

> Schools’ Pupil Premium allocations are based on the previous autumn census data.

> For 2025 – 26 allocations, that means children recorded as FSM-eligible in October 2024.

> If a child becomes eligible for FSM today, in October 2025, they won’t generate PP funding until the 2026 – 27 allocation.


So there’s always about a year’s lag between children becoming eligible and schools receiving funding for them.

And with the UC expansion coming in 2026, the gap may be even more visible: FSM numbers will rise quickly, but schools won’t necessarily see the PP money for those new pupils straight away.

The Education Policy Institute’s 2025 report highlights that pupils with persistent disadvantage (eligible for FSM in 80%+ of their school life) do far worse, on average, than pupils who have only short-term eligibility. Almost a full year by the end of primary and nearly two years by the end of secondary.

> ​“By the end of primary school, the persistent disadvantage gap in 2024 was 11 months… pupils who are persistently disadvantaged were one month further behind other disadvantaged pupils.”

>“By the end of secondary school, the persistent disadvantage gap was 22.4 months… over three months further behind other disadvantaged students.”

This means:

> Your Ever 6 list will include both groups — those who ​“dip in and out” of FSM, and those who have been persistently disadvantaged.

> As a PP lead, you need to differentiate between these groups in your tracking. Both matter, but persistent disadvantage is associated with the largest gaps in attainment, attendance, and long-term outcomes.

The disadvantage gap remains wider than before the pandemic, despite recent narrowing. While there has been some recent narrowing, disadvantaged pupils are still significantly behind their peers, particularly in the early years and post-16 education. In 2024, the disadvantage gap among pupils aged 5 was 4.7 months, up slightly from 4.6 months in 2023 and considerably wider than in the five years prior to the pandemic.

Post-16 disadvantage is widening, with participation gaps growing. the 16 – 19 disadvantage gap widened again in 2024 and now stands at 3.3 grades – the widest seen in a year with normal grading arrangements since 2018. The proportion of students that were not studying towards any substantial qualifications or an apprenticeship at the beginning of year 12 has been consistently higher for disadvantaged students than it has for non-disadvantaged students. 21.9 per cent of disadvantaged students are opting out of education at P16 compared to 9.3 per cent of non-disadvantaged students.

As a new PP lead, remember that the disadvantage gap is still wider than before the pandemic, even if it has narrowed slightly. Gaps start early (4.7 months behind by age 5) and persist, with the most persistently disadvantaged pupils falling furthest behind. By post-16, the gap is widening again, with over 1 in 5 disadvantaged students dropping out of education compared to 1 in 10 peers. This means your strategy must go beyond short-term fixes: focus on strong early foundations, identify and target persistently disadvantaged pupils, and ensure robust support for transitions — especially into post-16 pathways.

This is a welfare policy where families can’t claim child tax credit or the child element of Universal Credit for more than two children (with some exceptions).

Why should schools care? Because it directly affects family income. Families with three or more children may struggle more with basics (uniforms, trips, food), which in turn creates greater demand on schools for support.

At the time of writing, the government is actively reviewing the two-child cap — there is strong political pressure to scrap it. If that happens, some families may be lifted out of extreme hardship, which could change how schools experience need. But again, benefit changes don’t immediately change PP allocations — they change the lived reality of families, and schools need to adapt quickly to support. Read more about the government’s Tackling Child Poverty Strategy here and reflect on what it means for you as a school leader.

Ofsted’s 2025 report ​“From Trait to State” argues for a more nuanced understanding of vulnerability in education. Rather than seeing it as a fixed trait, the report frames vulnerability as a dynamic state — something all learners can experience differently depending on internal and external factors. It’s shaped by social, economic, relational, and personal circumstances, and can be mitigated by protective factors like strong relationships, stability, and supportive environments.

Traditional measures such as FSM eligibility or SEND status can miss ​“hidden” vulnerabilities, so schools are encouraged to look beyond labels and consider the whole child. Importantly, Ofsted inspections should recognise how schools make decisions and evidence their support strategies, not just rely on outcomes. For PP leads, this means regularly reviewing who is at risk, actively building resilience, and documenting the impact of interventions, fostering a more inclusive and responsive approach to supporting all learners.

Here’s a simple checklist of updates and potential actions:

1. Check your allocation: download the 2025 – 26 allocation and see which pupils DfE counted (your Ever 6 list).

2. Map your persistent disadvantage group: run a quick check of which pupils have been FSM for most of their school life. Treat this as a distinct group in your strategy.

3. Plan for FSM expansion (2026) how will you prepare for an increase in FSM numbers, even though funding won’t rise immediately?

4. Reflect on family income pressures: How will the school respond to national policies like the two-child cap that affects a large number of families.

5. Read up on DfE Statutory requirements and PP support documents from EEF alongside RSN blogs.

6. Be evaluative: for every intervention, write down the intended outcome, how you’ll measure it, and when you’ll review it. The DFE Template and EEF’s Guide to Pupil Premium will support you in your next steps.

Writing your PP statement is not about compliance or lists of activities. It’s about being clear-eyed and transparent about who your disadvantaged pupils are, what barriers they face, and how your school will help them thrive.

2025 is a year of transition: allocations still based on old FSM rules, FSM eligibility about to widen, and persistent disadvantage more visible than ever. Schools can’t control the funding model or incoming policy changes but we can control how sharp our focus is on the pupils behind the numbers.

Here you will find a list of blogs all around Pupil Premium from across the Research School Network to further your knowledge and expertise.