Thanks Martin - yes absolutely, these are very persistent trends and the policymaking failures we point to are deeply engrained. We have a report out in a few weeks that digs into this - also depressing I won't lie, but points to some new ways of working that show promise (e.g. test learn and grow).

A huge thanks to everyone who's helped @nehaldavison.bsky.social and I on this - @shaina-sangha.bsky.social @emma-conway.bsky.social @tompope.bsky.social @melissaittoo.bsky.social @sammacrory.bsky.social @njdavies.bsky.social @drhannahwhite.bsky.social and our kind interviewees and reviewers 👏

Have a read here (includes a 2-page summary of key findings)
www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/...

Finally – the IfG question – why have successive governments failed to do better? Why have attainment inequalities persisted for so long?

We set out an overview of 5 systemic policymaking failures in the report – a teaser for a forthcoming paper in a few weeks which digs into this in more detail.

The government will need to encourage delivery partners (local government, providers and schools) to focus on the most ‘left behind’ groups within a constrained fiscal environment – including those who may not reach GLD by 2028, but whose progress is nonetheless important for the overall mission.

And local authorities’ new GLD targets – provisionally set by DfE – stipulate that local authorities should increase their average GLD while at least maintaining the same attainment gap as now. This is a good start. But maintaining attainment gaps is not the same as reducing them.

The lion’s share of funding is still directed at expanding childcare entitlements for working parents, leaving comparably less investment available for driving up early education quality and tackling entrenched inequalities.

There’s lots to celebrate in the Best Start in Life strategy - clearer pathways into the early years profession, financial incentives for early years teachers in disadvantaged areas, Best Start Family Hubs across the country, and investment in home learning and parenting programmes.

But…

So, what does this mean for government?

FSM-eligible boys are critical for the missions. But the government’s current approach risks continuing to sideline this group.

As adults, this group experiences worse employment prospects, earnings and health, and more contact with the criminal justice system.

The costs are multiple – for individuals, families, communities and the state – and cut across at least four of the five government missions.

These early opportunity gaps affect FSM-eligible boys throughout school.

Just 2 in 5 reached an ‘expected level’ in assessments at KS2 and KS4 in 2023-24.

More than 2 in 3 FSM-eligible boys left school without a Level 3 qualification, and over 3 in 4 didn’t go on to higher education.

But FSM-eligible boys also face particular intersecting disadvantages on top of these, including:
- Lower expectations and unconscious bias at school
- Affected by multi-generational negative experiences of school
- Less shared reading at home
- More affected by poor SEND provision

And gaps are rooted partly in the structural inequalities associated with growing up in low-income households

These opportunity gaps are rooted partly in gender-based inequalities – in the home, classroom and wider society.

Illustrative examples of these here (many will be familiar)

We found that FSM-eligible boys are more likely to reach GLD in:
- London
- Areas where there is a larger share of FSM-eligible children in general
- Areas where there is a smaller share of children with identified SEND.
- Areas with a higher % children in outstanding-rated early years settings.

We did some regression analysis to find best demographic predictors (using available data) of local variation in school readiness among FSM-eligible boys…
(full results in the report's methodology and annex)

Performance varies widely by local area.

FSM-eligible boys face some of the widest opportunity gaps in areas that are doing well on GLD overall. In Kingston, Windsor and Maidenhead, and Bath and NE Somerset over 70% children reached GLD overall but only 35% of FSM-eligible boys did.