In larger schools, data can paint a clearer picture of disadvantage. But in small schools, lower pupil numbers can mask significant need. A handful of Pupil Premium pupils might not trigger alarm bells, yet behind those numbers lie complex stories of financial strain, rural deprivation, and limited access to services.
‘Much rural employment is insecure and poorly paid, leading to volatile and irregular incomes. It is difficult to find affordable housing, connectivity is poor, and fuel poverty is widespread.’ (Shucksmith et al., 2023)
Rural poverty is often hidden in plain sight. Families may live in homes that appear idyllic — yet these properties can be costly to heat, maintain, and access. Limited public transport, fewer local services, and social isolation compound the challenge. Services like food banks, mental health support, and extracurricular opportunities are often miles away. And while fewer children may qualify for Free School Meals, many live in households just above the threshold — what researchers call the “working poor” which is often not captured by FSM/PP eligibility.
Terms like “PP”, “FSM”, or “SEND” are useful for funding and policy, but they don’t capture the lived experience of a child. In small schools, where staff often wear multiple hats and know families personally, there’s an opportunity — and a responsibility — to look beyond labels.
Instead of asking “Is this child disadvantaged?”, we should ask: