Schools across England are bracing for the most severe funding crisis in over a decade, with 75 percent of primary schools and 92 percent of secondary schools forced to make cuts in the 2025-26 academic year. The gap between rising costs and stagnant funding threatens to dismantle years of educational progress, pushing already stretched institutions to breaking point. With per-pupil funding dropping to the lowest real-terms levels in at least 15 years, schools face impossible choices between maintaining staff, preserving curriculum breadth, and keeping buildings operational. The crisis extends far beyond mere numbers, touching every aspect of educational provision from teacher recruitment to mental health support, infrastructure maintenance to extracurricular opportunities, creating a perfect storm that threatens the futures of millions of students.
The Scale of the Funding Shortfall
The 2025-26 academic year reveals a stark reality for English schools as costs increase by 4.1 percent while funding rises by only 3.4 percent, creating a 630 million pound real-terms cut to school funding. This shortfall equates to the salaries of 12,400 school staff including 5,700 teachers and 6,700 support staff who may lose their positions as schools struggle to balance budgets. After 14 years of austerity measures, the vast majority of schools currently cannot absorb increased costs, having already exhausted all possible efficiencies and cut non-essential expenditure to the bone.
Every local authority in the country will experience reductions in real-terms per-pupil funding, with the average cut reaching 1.2 percent and the worst-hit authority, Hammersmith and Fulham, facing a 1.9 percent reduction. The average primary school will see spending power cut by 1.1 percent while secondary schools face 1.2 percent reductions, forcing difficult decisions about staffing levels, subject offerings, and basic maintenance. These cuts arrive at a time when UK class sizes rank among the highest in Europe, with a million children taught in classes of 30 or more students.
The government announced that the 4 percent pay award for teachers would only be funded to 3 percent, leaving schools to find the remaining 1 percent from existing budgets already stretched beyond capacity. This decision effectively means more cuts for schools that have done everything possible to shield children from the impact of reduced funding over the past decade. School leaders warn that there are no more efficiencies to be made in school budgets and that further cuts will directly harm pupils’ education through subject elimination, staff losses, and deferred maintenance.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies independently verified that school funding will not keep pace with growing costs, underscoring the scale of the challenge facing educational institutions. Despite the Autumn Budget 2024 announcing a 2.3 billion pound increase in school spending for 2025-26, this amounts to only a 1.6 percent real-terms increase, insufficient to cover the actual cost increases schools face including teacher pay awards, national insurance contributions, and inflationary pressures on energy, supplies, and maintenance.
Schools Already in Financial Distress
The funding crisis builds upon an already precarious financial situation, with government accounts for the financial year 2023-24 revealing that one in seven schools are currently in deficit, the highest rate since at least 2010 and an increase from the previous year. This deteriorating financial position demonstrates that schools entered the current funding crisis from a position of weakness rather than strength, having depleted reserves and exhausted contingency measures during previous years of austerity.
After years of chronic government cuts, 74 percent of schools in England have less funding in real terms than in 2010, creating a cumulative effect where successive years of below-inflation funding increases compound into substantial real-terms losses. Schools have weathered more than a decade of budget pressures that parents will be well aware of, including reductions in teaching assistants, larger class sizes, reduced subject choices, and diminished extracurricular offerings. The relentless nature of these pressures has left schools in survival mode rather than able to focus on educational innovation and improvement.
Heads, teachers, and school staff have done everything within their power to shield children from the impact of cuts, including using personal funds to purchase classroom supplies, volunteering additional unpaid hours, and making creative adjustments to timetables and staffing. However, the capacity for further sacrifice and adjustment has been exhausted. School leaders emphasize that they simply cannot make any more cuts without directly harming pupils’ education, as all the possible efficiencies and workarounds have already been implemented.
Many primary schools face the additional challenge of falling pupil rolls, which when combined with funding cuts could force closures particularly in rural and disadvantaged areas. The funding formula based on per-pupil allocations means that enrollment declines translate directly into reduced budgets, even though fixed costs such as building maintenance, utilities, and core staffing remain constant. This creates a vicious cycle where declining enrollment forces cuts that make schools less attractive, leading to further enrollment losses and additional financial pressure.
Teacher Shortages and Recruitment Crisis
The funding crisis exacerbates an already severe teacher shortage, with the United States facing a deficit of approximately 110,000 teachers in the 2023-2024 academic year, projected to swell to nearly 200,000 by 2025. England confronts similar challenges as secondary schools struggle to recruit adequate numbers of teachers to meet demands, with job advertisements increasing by 12 percent compared to the previous year and 13 percent of secondary teachers reporting currently unfilled vacancies within their subject departments.
Teachers’ pay has grown more slowly than in other professions since 2010-11, making the education sector less competitive in attracting talent. In 2023-24, teachers’ pay was 12 percent lower in real terms than in 2010-11, representing 15 percentage points lower growth than average UK earnings over the same period. This widening pay gap makes it increasingly difficult to attract and retain talented educators, particularly in subject areas such as science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and modern languages where professionals can command significantly higher salaries in the private sector.
High levels of stress and burnout drive many teachers to leave the profession prematurely, with fewer than 40 percent of school staff feeling confident in their roles compared to 79 percent in 2020. A shocking 91 percent of teachers felt their mental health had been negatively affected by their jobs in the past 12 months, highlighting the urgent need for systemic changes to address working conditions. Disruptive classroom behavior contributes significantly to teacher stress, with 62 percent of teachers saying they have considered leaving the profession because of poor pupil behavior.
Teachers in England consistently work longer hours than people in other professions, with workload and working hours cited as main reasons for increasing numbers considering leaving. Only 59 percent of teachers now expect to still be teaching in three years, a significant decrease from pre-pandemic figures of 74-77 percent. Regret about entering the profession has also increased, with only 58 percent of teachers indicating they would choose to become a teacher if given the chance again, compared to 71 percent in 2019.
The recruitment crisis particularly affects STEM education, with about 69 percent of high schools struggling to fill physics teaching roles and 45 percent facing challenges hiring chemistry teachers. The absence of qualified STEM educators could result in 500,000 to 700,000 fewer students pursuing STEM careers by 2030, potentially creating a 280 billion dollar economic impact from unfilled technical positions. This represents not just an educational crisis but a threat to economic competitiveness and technological innovation.
The Trump administration’s decision to discontinue the Teacher Quality Partnership program and cut funding for the Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence Program and the School Leader Incentive Program removed critical support for teacher training programs in the United States. Several states and educational associations filed lawsuits to reverse these funding cuts, arguing that the decisions breached administrative procedures and disregarded congressional intent. The timing of these cuts during a severe teacher shortage exacerbates recruitment challenges and undermines efforts to address critical staffing gaps.
Impact on Special Educational Needs Provision
Students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities face particularly severe consequences from funding cuts, with councils in England facing a funding shortfall for SEND education exceeding 500 million pounds. The SEND system has been in crisis since 2014 when the Children and Families Act expanded the range of ages councils had to support without providing necessary additional funding, creating a structural deficit that has grown more severe each year.
The number of children in special schools has increased by 51.6 percent over the past decade, while the number of children with Education, Health and Care Plans has increased by 70.9 percent during the same timeframe, reaching 390,109 children. Government funding for SEND has increased since 2019 but has not matched demand or school-specific inflation, leaving a growing gap between needs and resources. The lack of funding between 2014 and 2019 created such enormous problems that the system now faces a crisis that only significant investment and reform can resolve.
Demand for SEND support has sharply risen in recent years while funding and resources have failed to keep pace, meaning children are not always provided with help quickly enough or in the right setting. Local authorities are on course to have a cumulative SEND deficit of 5 billion pounds by 2026, threatening their financial viability and ability to provide statutory services. The complexity of needs among children requiring intervention has increased, with schools and local authorities providing much greater support to children with autism diagnoses and social, emotional, and mental health difficulties.
An Ofsted report highlighted that children with SEND are not getting anywhere near the support they need in schools, even before new cuts that councils may be forced to implement. This double challenge of increasing need and decreasing resources creates an educational crisis where hundreds of thousands of disabled children face a lifetime of underachievement. The dearth of funding during the most critical period of development resigns these children to reduced opportunities and will ultimately cost government more through higher long-term support needs.
Experts emphasize that funding must be targeted at early intervention and helping mainstream schools provide meaningful SEND support, meeting children’s needs earlier rather than only at the point of crisis. Too often, support becomes available only when situations have deteriorated significantly, by which time interventions are more costly and less effective. With additional targeted funding supporting a coherent SEND strategy and greater early intervention, children may be better equipped to meet developmental milestones and long-term reliance on costly SEND support could be reduced.
Infrastructure Maintenance Backlog
Schools face an annual infrastructure funding gap of 85 billion dollars according to industry standards for both capital investment and routine maintenance, leaving buildings deteriorating while waiting lists for repairs grow longer. Broken benches and blackboards, dilapidated windows, dirty toilets, and plaster peeling off ceilings and walls characterize many government schools operating with minuscule maintenance budgets of approximately 75,000 rupees or pounds annually depending on jurisdiction.
Many schools rely heavily on corporate social responsibility funds from private companies for installing basic infrastructure, but without adequate funding for ongoing maintenance, much of this infrastructure becomes damaged within a few years of installation. Private entities typically work for up to three years in each school before releasing funds, but what happens afterward often involves deterioration due to inadequate maintenance budgets. Schools that received new floor tiles, painted walls, planted gardens, and upgraded toilets through corporate funding find these improvements falling into disrepair as maintenance allocations prove insufficient.
Capital funding for school modernization and maintenance projects tends to focus on larger projects at urban schools, with small rural schools often losing out despite their critical infrastructure needs. A share of the capital funding pot should be set aside specifically for small schools to ensure equitable access to maintenance and improvement resources. Rural schools face particularly acute challenges as they often serve as community hubs providing not just education but also social services, meeting spaces, and emergency resources.
The School Grants under programmes provide maintenance grants of 7,500 rupees per school per year, intended for repair work, painting blackboards and display boards, repairing teaching learning equipment, small repairs including drinking water facilities and electrical fittings. However, this allocation proves woefully inadequate for comprehensive maintenance of school facilities, forcing administrators to prioritize the most critical repairs while deferring less urgent but still important maintenance work. The cumulative effect of deferred maintenance creates a growing backlog that becomes increasingly expensive to address.
Schools report that annual maintenance budgets are so low that administrators must continuously seek additional resources from government grants or corporate social responsibility programs to repair essential infrastructure. The lack of adequate maintenance funding means that even well-intentioned infrastructure improvements deteriorate rapidly, representing poor value for initial investment and creating ongoing challenges for teaching and learning. Students attempting to learn in buildings with leaking roofs, broken windows, inadequate heating or cooling, and insufficient sanitation facilities face environmental barriers to educational achievement.
Overcrowding and Class Size Pressures
Overcrowding occurs when student enrollment exceeds the number of students a school was designed to accommodate, contributing to wear and tear on facilities and creating challenging learning environments. An ideal classroom would be limited to 15 to 20 students, but many classrooms today have over 30 or even 40 students, with some schools reporting classes of 50 or more learners particularly in developing countries.
Schools with enrollments exceeding capacity by more than 25 percent face severe overcrowding, more common among large schools, schools in the Western United States, and schools with more than 50 percent minority enrollment. The West led the nation in school enrollment growth with a 26 percent increase from 1989 to 1999, while cities and suburbs both experienced substantial enrollment growth creating pressure on existing facilities. Large schools were more likely than small and medium schools to be overcrowded by more than 25 percent of capacity at 14 percent versus 4 percent and 5 percent respectively.
Overcrowding creates numerous challenges for effective teaching and learning including increased noise levels making concentration difficult, reduced individual attention as teachers must divide time among more students, increased behavioral management challenges, insufficient space for movement and activities, accelerated wear on facilities and equipment, and safety concerns during emergencies. Research suggests that in overcrowded schools, crumbling buildings and excessive student numbers often go hand in hand, with schools overburdened by too many students experiencing more rapid facility deterioration.
With more than a million children in the UK taught in classes of 30 or more, overcrowding represents not an exceptional situation but a widespread challenge affecting educational quality across the system. The Department of Education’s figures show an average class size of 22.2 for the last school year, but this average masks significant variation with many classes substantially larger particularly in disadvantaged areas. Primary schools are buckling under overcrowding and underfunding, with the reality in many classrooms not reflected in average statistics.
Government claims about smaller class sizes mask the reality of overcrowded schools, with more than 30 pupils in many classes and almost 1,850 teaching posts remaining unfilled. Parents concerned about overcrowding face limited options particularly in areas where school choice is restricted by geography or admissions policies. The combination of funding cuts and rising enrollment in some areas means that overcrowding is likely to worsen before improvements become possible, creating increasingly challenging conditions for both students and teachers.
Cuts to Extracurricular Activities and Arts Programs
Extracurricular activities in music and visual arts are related to enhanced academic achievement and cognitive development, yet these programs face disproportionate cuts as schools prioritize core curriculum subjects in response to funding pressures. Research demonstrates that extracurricular activities in the arts have positive associations with academic performance, yet schools eliminating or reducing these offerings deprive students of important developmental opportunities.
Music programs including chorus, concert band, jazz band, marching band, musical theater, and pit orchestra provide students with performance opportunities, teamwork skills, creative expression, and cognitive benefits that transfer to academic subjects. Schools facing budget cuts often reduce or eliminate these programs despite evidence of their educational value. Approximately 19 percent of Japanese junior high school students participate in cultural clubs including music and visual arts, with 75 percent of cultural club members participating more than four days per week.
Visual arts programs including painting, sculpture, design arts, photography, and digital media develop creativity, fine motor skills, visual-spatial reasoning, and cultural awareness. Schools cutting arts programs remove opportunities for students to develop these competencies and discover potential career paths in creative industries. The National YoungArts Foundation accepts entries in ten categories including classical music, dance, design arts, film, jazz, photography, theater, visual arts, voice, and writing, demonstrating the breadth of arts education.
Beyond structured programs, extracurricular activities allow students to explore interests through slam poetry communities, improv groups, stand-up comedy, scenic design, light and audio production, video production, community-based art projects, art-related businesses, teaching opportunities, and volunteer work at galleries and museums. These activities develop skills, build portfolios, create social connections, and provide purpose beyond academic achievement. Schools eliminating extracurricular offerings reduce these opportunities for exploration and development.
The impact of arts program cuts extends beyond individual students to affect school culture and community engagement. School concerts, theatrical productions, art exhibitions, and other cultural events bring families and communities together, celebrating student achievement and creating shared experiences. When budget pressures force elimination of these programs, schools lose important mechanisms for building community connections and demonstrating the value of education beyond test scores.
Sports and physical education programs also face cuts despite evidence of health benefits and positive impacts on academic performance, behavior, and attendance. School sports provide structured physical activity, teach teamwork and discipline, develop athletic skills, create pathways to college scholarships, and foster school spirit and community identity. Eliminating or reducing sports programs removes these benefits while potentially increasing health problems associated with sedentary lifestyles.
Mental Health Support Gaps
Mental health has become a growing concern in schools with students increasingly affected by societal pressures, family dynamics, academic expectations, and the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. School counselors provide crucial support to students facing anxiety, depression, trauma, and stress, yet funding cuts threaten these essential services. The prevalence of mental illness in children represents a serious public health issue, with schools serving as front-line providers of mental health identification and intervention.
School counselors play vital roles including enhancing mental health awareness and reducing stigma, providing external referrals for short-term counseling or crisis intervention, recognizing warning signs such as sudden changes in grades or attendance, providing individual focus on mental health and social-emotional needs, offering resources and support for teachers and parents, and advocating to ensure student needs are met. The COVID-19 pandemic and shift to online learning exacerbated mental health needs of children and adolescents, especially among minoritized populations already facing disparities in access to services.
Throughout the week, many students spend more time in classrooms than with parents, making teachers, counselors, and school staff among the first to notice behavioral changes signaling mental or behavioral health issues. School counselors collaborate with teachers, administrators, parents, and social workers to ensure each student receives necessary care and resources. A school counselor’s office often serves as a safe haven where students can openly discuss concerns without fear of judgment, providing compassionate listening and expert guidance.
Counselors help students develop coping mechanisms, build resilience, and manage stress, which are crucial life skills extending far beyond academic achievement. They work to normalize conversations around emotional well-being, creating school cultures where students feel comfortable seeking help rather than suffering in silence. In crisis situations including personal loss, relationship issues, or self-esteem concerns, counselors provide immediate support helping students regain stability and continue their education.
Funding cuts that reduce counselor positions or increase counselor-to-student ratios undermine mental health support at a time when student needs are growing. Some schools eliminate counselor positions entirely, leaving teachers and administrators without specialized support in addressing student mental health concerns. Even when counselor positions are maintained, increased caseloads reduce the time available for each student, forcing counselors to prioritize crisis intervention over preventive support and relationship building.
Collaboration with outside mental health professionals becomes more important as in-school resources diminish, yet schools in disadvantaged areas often lack connections to community mental health services or serve students whose families cannot afford private mental health care. The gap between student mental health needs and available support services continues to widen, with potentially severe consequences for student wellbeing, academic achievement, and long-term life outcomes. Early intervention in mental health challenges prevents small issues from escalating into larger problems affecting academic performance and personal growth.
School Meal Programs Under Pressure
School meal programs provide critical nutrition to millions of students, with research showing that receiving free or reduced-price school lunches reduces food insecurity by at least 3.8 percent while improving dietary intake and academic outcomes. Children participating in school meals are less likely to have nutrient inadequacies and more likely to consume fruit, vegetables, and milk at breakfast and lunch compared to students not receiving school meals. Despite this evidence of effectiveness, school meal programs face funding pressures that threaten their continuation and quality.
Students from low-income households who eat both school breakfast and lunch have significantly better overall diet quality than comparable students who do not eat school meals, making these programs essential for addressing nutritional disparities. School meal nutrition standards have positive impacts on student food selection and consumption, especially for fruits and vegetables. Packed lunches brought from home often have more calories, fat, saturated fat, and sugar than school lunches while containing less protein, fiber, vitamin A, and calcium.
As of 2022 in England, 20.8 percent of the 8.9 million pupils attending schools in 2020-21 are known to be eligible for free school meals, representing over 1.8 million students depending on these programs for adequate nutrition. Sweden, Finland, Estonia, and India are among the few countries providing universal school meals to all pupils in compulsory education regardless of ability to pay. In India, the Midday Meal Scheme provides free lunches and staple foods to all government school students, ensuring that children receive at least one nutritious meal per day.
Budget pressures force schools to reduce meal quality, eliminate breakfast programs, or increase costs for families paying full price for meals. New Zealand’s revised “Ka Ora Ka Ako” free school lunch programme aimed to save 130 million dollars annually by reducing average meal costs to 3 dollars, but implementation problems plagued the 2025 school year. Schools reported late or missed deliveries, uncooked food, lack of nutrition, food wastage, ham in halal food, and insufficient vegetarian meals, forcing some schools to use their own limited funds to purchase replacement meals for pupils.
Rates of food insecurity among children are higher in summer when many lack access to good nutrition provided by school meal programs during the academic year, highlighting the year-round importance of these programs. Receiving free or reduced-price school lunches reduces the probability of household food insecurity at school entry, whereas paying full price for school lunch is associated with higher probability of household food insecurity among low-income families. The elimination or reduction of school meal programs would disproportionately harm students from disadvantaged backgrounds, exacerbating existing inequalities in health, nutrition, and educational outcomes.
Pennsylvania schools struggled to keep operations running as a months-long state budget impasse stalled over 3.5 billion dollars in education funding, with some districts forced to cut meal programs or reduce meal quality to conserve resources. The Pennsylvania School Boards Association estimated that funding frozen by legislative gridlock could climb to 6 billion dollars, placing enormous pressure on all aspects of school operations including nutritional programs. The consequences of budget delays and cuts extend beyond facilities and staffing to directly impact student nutrition and wellbeing.
Rural School Closures
Rural schools face particular vulnerability to funding cuts, with many small schools forced to close due to falling enrollment and insufficient per-pupil funding to cover fixed operational costs. Across regions including South Asia, rural school closures are becoming more frequent, often justified under the logic of rationalization or budget efficiency. When rural primary schools close, children do not simply move to the next nearest school but instead face longer walks along unsafe or flood-prone routes, prohibitive transport costs, or decisions by parents to keep children home.
For girls in rural areas, school closures have especially severe consequences as concerns about safety and propriety rise when schools are no longer within walking distance of homes. Early marriages become more likely as educational opportunities diminish, and household work replaces homework. Over time, educational gaps between boys and girls widen, entrenching inequality for another generation. Rural schools often serve as hubs for vaccination drives, midday meal schemes, and community meetings, so their closure cuts off these lifelines leaving voids in both services and social connection.
The economic impacts of school closures extend beyond education as families with means begin migrating to areas with better schools, causing property values to decline and local businesses to lose customers. The absence of young families makes it harder to justify investment in roads, water systems, or internet connectivity, creating a vicious cycle of declining services and continued outmigration. Children affected by school closures do not fade neatly into statistics but represent individual futures permanently altered by lack of educational access.
When children miss foundation years of education, catching up becomes exponentially harder as illiteracy limits job opportunities, reduces awareness of rights, and keeps families locked in poverty. The deprivation is quiet and almost invisible to those outside affected communities, but its effects echo for decades through reduced earning potential, limited civic participation, and intergenerational poverty. National education policies often assume that if schools close, children will simply transfer elsewhere, but this ignores the realities of rural geography, poverty, and gender norms.
The revised National Funding Formula in England helps compensate many rural schools for relatively high underlying running costs per pupil that small schools inevitably face, but this compensation should be set to allow for more than minimum staffing levels. A share of capital funding for school modernization and maintenance projects should be reserved for small schools that often lose out when spending focuses on larger projects at urban schools. Government should support and fund collaboration or clustering between small rural schools so they benefit from shared resources and expertise while maintaining local presence.
Schools located in rural areas or small towns were more likely than those in central cities and urban fringes to be under-enrolled by more than 25 percent of capacity at 27 percent versus 16 percent and 12 percent respectively, making them vulnerable to closure arguments based on efficiency metrics. However, education policy should recognize the wider social cost for communities where schools close, considering not just per-pupil costs but the value of schools as community anchors and development catalysts. Missing from many policy frameworks is a mandatory safety net guaranteeing that no community will be left without a functioning primary school within accessible distance.
Global Context and International Comparisons
The teacher shortage and education funding crisis extend far beyond England to affect countries worldwide, with UNESCO reporting an urgent need for 44 million primary and secondary teachers globally by 2030 to achieve universal education goals. The financing of additional teachers needed will cost 12.8 billion dollars annually for universal primary education and 106.8 billion dollars for universal secondary education, reaching a combined 120 billion dollars annually by 2030. These projections demonstrate that education funding challenges represent global rather than isolated national problems.
The global teacher shortage undermines educational systems worldwide, leading to larger class sizes, overburdened educators, educational disparities, and financial strain. The effect extends beyond mere numbers to create crises in educational quality and access, particularly affecting disadvantaged communities and developing nations. Countries must make key financial decisions about how much to pay current teachers, invest in infrastructure, and fund professionalization initiatives, while also factoring in projected costs of new teaching positions.
Public schools throughout the United States are approaching a fiscal crisis in 2025 as federal pandemic relief funding expires and student enrollment continues to decline, according to findings from the Georgetown Edunomics Lab. The Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief funds infused billions of federal dollars into schools during the pandemic, but by September 2024 these funds were depleted, placing approximately 250,000 education-related positions equating to 24 billion dollars in labor costs at risk. National public school enrollment has declined since 2020 due to lower birth rates and demographic shifts, with California experiencing particularly sharp decreases.
Enrollment declines create a perfect storm as reduced student numbers translate to decreased state funding based on per-pupil allocations, while districts face excess staff hired during the pandemic to counter learning deficits and provide social-emotional assistance. The staffing increases during pandemic years created obligations that districts now struggle to maintain as enrollment-based funding decreases and emergency federal support expires. Education experts cautioned school districts to be wary of committing to ongoing financial obligations using temporary funding, but many districts faced such acute needs that they felt compelled to hire additional staff despite knowing the funding would end.
International comparisons reveal that education funding challenges are not inevitable but reflect policy choices about public investment priorities and resource allocation. Countries that prioritize education funding including Finland, Singapore, and South Korea achieve strong educational outcomes with relatively high per-pupil spending and competitive teacher salaries. These nations demonstrate that adequate funding combined with effective policies can create high-quality educational systems that serve all students well.
The Pupil Premium and Disadvantaged Students
The pupil premium grant provides funding to improve educational outcomes for disadvantaged pupils in state-funded schools in England, with 2.9 billion pounds provided to schools in the 2023-24 financial year representing the largest support package for disadvantaged pupils. Pupil premium funding is allocated to eligible schools based on the number of pupils eligible for free school meals or recorded as eligible in the past six years, plus children previously in local authority care or other state care including those adopted from care.
Pupil premium is not a personal budget for individual pupils, and schools do not have to spend it solely on students meeting funding criteria but can use it to support other pupils with identified needs including those who have or have had social workers or who act as carers. Funding can also support whole-class interventions that benefit non-disadvantaged pupils alongside their disadvantaged peers. The recovery premium grant introduced following the COVID-19 pandemic provided over 300 million pounds of additional funding in 2021-22 and 1 billion pounds across 2022-23 and 2023-24.
Despite the existence of pupil premium funding, disadvantaged students face disproportionate impacts from overall school funding cuts as the premium supplements rather than replaces core funding. When schools must cut teaching positions, increase class sizes, eliminate subjects, or reduce support services due to inadequate core funding, disadvantaged students lose access to the interventions and support that pupil premium was intended to provide. The effectiveness of targeted funding for disadvantaged pupils depends on adequate overall school funding to maintain basic educational provision.
Schools should use pupil premium funding based on wealth of evidence about what works evaluated by the Education Endowment Foundation, implementing interventions proven effective in improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. However, when schools face overall budget crises, pupil premium funds may be diverted to cover core costs that should be funded through mainstream allocations, reducing the additional support available for disadvantaged pupils. The combination of frozen or reduced core funding with static pupil premium allocations means that disadvantaged students face widening gaps compared to their more advantaged peers.
The government updated guidance to help schools plan how to use pupil premium to best support disadvantaged pupils, but guidance proves insufficient when overall resources are inadequate. Schools serving high proportions of disadvantaged students face particular challenges as they receive significant pupil premium allocations but operate in contexts of high need with students requiring extensive support. These schools often struggle most during funding crises as they lack wealthy parent communities able to fundraise substantial amounts to supplement school budgets.
Long-Term Consequences of Underfunding
The consequences of education funding cuts extend far beyond the immediate academic year to shape long-term economic competitiveness, social mobility, and democratic participation. Students who receive inadequate education due to large classes, inexperienced teachers, limited curriculum, poor facilities, and insufficient support are less likely to achieve their potential, limiting both individual opportunities and collective prosperity. The cumulative effect of years of underfunding creates educational debt that compounds over time as each cohort of students receives diminished education compared to what they need and deserve.
STEM teacher shortages could result in 500,000 to 700,000 fewer students pursuing STEM careers by 2030, potentially creating a 280 billion dollar economic impact from unfilled technical positions. This represents not just individual lost opportunity but a threat to national competitiveness in technology, healthcare, engineering, and other critical sectors. The absence of qualified teachers in key subjects means that students never develop interests or skills in these areas, creating pipeline problems that affect university enrollments, workforce development, and innovation capacity.
Educational achievement strongly predicts lifetime earnings, employment stability, health outcomes, civic participation, and social mobility. Students who do not receive adequate education face limited career options, lower wages, greater unemployment risk, and reduced ability to adapt to changing labor market demands. The social costs of educational inadequacy include higher criminal justice costs, greater reliance on social services, reduced tax revenues, and diminished civic engagement. These costs far exceed the amounts saved through education budget cuts, representing false economy that creates larger long-term fiscal burdens.
Children with special educational needs and disabilities who do not receive appropriate support face lifetime underachievement that will cost government more in long-term support needs than would be required for adequate early intervention and education. The dearth of funding during the most critical developmental period resigns hundreds of thousands of children to reduced independence and productivity. Every child matters and the education of every child must matter, yet funding decisions often fail to reflect this principle.
Rural school closures create permanent disadvantages for affected communities as young families leave, property values decline, businesses close, and infrastructure investment ceases. The transformation of vibrant villages into aging, declining communities represents social and economic loss extending far beyond education. Reversing these patterns once established proves extremely difficult as downward spirals gather momentum and alternative opportunities become increasingly distant.
The erosion of arts and extracurricular programs deprives students of opportunities to develop creativity, teamwork, cultural awareness, and non-academic competencies increasingly valued by employers. The elimination of music, visual arts, drama, sports, and other activities creates narrower educational experiences focused only on tested subjects. This curriculum narrowing particularly harms disadvantaged students who lack access to private lessons, club sports, and other enrichment opportunities outside school.
Policy Responses and Potential Solutions
Addressing the education funding crisis requires policy responses at multiple levels including adequate baseline funding, targeted support for high-need populations and settings, and structural reforms to ensure sustainable financing. Education unions including the National Education Union, Association of School and College Leaders, and National Association of Head Teachers emphasize that while they recognize the difficult financial inheritance the government faces, children and young people’s education should not suffer as a result of broader fiscal challenges.
Taxing wealth more equitably could ensure wealth is distributed more equitably throughout society while raising billions of pounds to fix public services including education. Progressive taxation on wealth rather than income would create more sustainable funding sources less vulnerable to economic cycles. Earmarking portions of wealth taxes specifically for education would provide predictable, adequate funding enabling schools to plan multi-year budgets rather than operating in constant uncertainty.
The government should fully fund teacher pay awards from central budgets rather than expecting schools to absorb these costs from existing allocations, as the current approach effectively means cuts to other areas of school spending. National teacher pay decisions should include corresponding funding allocations ensuring that schools can afford negotiated pay levels without reducing other educational provision. This would prevent the current situation where pay awards intended to support recruitment and retention instead force staffing cuts.
Early intervention in special educational needs support would reduce long-term costs while better serving children and families. Funding must be targeted at helping mainstream schools provide meaningful SEND support, meeting children’s needs earlier rather than only at crisis points. Investing in teacher training for SEND, smaller class sizes enabling individualized attention, specialist support staff, and evidence-based interventions would reduce the number of children requiring expensive Education, Health and Care Plans while improving outcomes.
Capital funding for school infrastructure should include guaranteed allocations for maintenance preventing the accumulation of repair backlogs. Schools should receive adequate annual maintenance budgets based on building size, age, and condition rather than flat per-school amounts insufficient to address actual needs. Creating multi-year infrastructure improvement programmes would enable schools to plan major projects rather than constantly deferring necessary work.
Protecting and expanding pupil premium funding ensures that disadvantaged students receive additional support addressing barriers to achievement. The premium should be indexed to inflation maintaining real-terms value and potentially expanded to cover additional support needs. Schools serving high proportions of disadvantaged students should receive additional baseline funding recognizing that high-need contexts require more resources per pupil than average.
Rural school funding formulas should provide substantially higher per-pupil allocations reflecting unavoidable dis-economies of small scale while recognizing community anchor roles. Capital funding should specifically support small rural schools enabling them to maintain facilities despite limited enrollment. Supporting collaboration and resource sharing between rural schools through dedicated funding would help them maintain viability while preserving local access.
The Path Forward
The education funding crisis demands urgent attention as the consequences of continued underinvestment will compound over time creating ever-larger social and economic costs. Schools have exhausted efficiency measures and absorbed all possible cuts without harming education, meaning that further funding shortfalls will directly impact pupils through larger classes, fewer teachers, eliminated subjects, and deteriorating facilities. The current trajectory is unsustainable and the question is not whether education funding must increase but how quickly and substantially that increase will occur.
Political leadership must prioritize education funding recognizing it as investment in future prosperity, social cohesion, and democratic vitality rather than mere current expenditure. The false economy of education cuts becomes apparent when considering long-term costs of inadequate skills, reduced productivity, greater social problems, and diminished national competitiveness. Countries that invest adequately in education reap benefits for decades while those that underinvest pay compounding costs across multiple dimensions.
Public understanding and support for education funding is critical as political leaders respond to public priorities when making difficult budget decisions. Parents, teachers, students, and community members must vocally advocate for adequate education funding, making clear that other budget priorities cannot come at the expense of educational opportunity. The connection between current funding decisions and long-term outcomes for individual children and collective society must be made explicit and compelling.
Professional organizations including teacher unions, school leader associations, and educational researchers should continue documenting the impacts of funding cuts and presenting evidence-based policy alternatives. The Stop School Cuts campaign and similar efforts raise awareness about specific impacts of funding shortfalls while mobilizing constituencies to demand change. Collaboration between professional organizations, parent groups, and community organizations amplifies voices calling for adequate education funding.
International cooperation and learning can identify effective funding models and policy approaches from jurisdictions that maintain strong educational systems through adequate investment. Finland’s comprehensive approach to education funding, teacher professionalism, and equity; Singapore’s strategic investment in educational infrastructure and teacher development; and South Korea’s cultural prioritization of education offer lessons for countries struggling with funding challenges. While direct transfer of policies across different contexts faces challenges, understanding how successful educational systems are financed and sustained provides valuable insights.
The moral imperative of providing adequate education to all children regardless of background should drive policy discussions recognizing that educational opportunity represents both individual right and collective responsibility. Every child deserves teachers who are adequately paid and supported, reasonable class sizes enabling individual attention, safe and well-maintained facilities, comprehensive curriculum including arts and extracurricular activities, mental health and special education support when needed, and adequate nutrition through school meal programs. Achieving these basic conditions requires political will to prioritize education funding over competing demands, recognizing that investment in children represents the foundation of future prosperity.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much are schools being cut in the 2025-26 academic year?
Schools face a 630 million pound real-terms cut as costs increase by 4.1 percent while funding rises by only 3.4 percent, with 75 percent of primary schools and 92 percent of secondary schools forced to make cuts. This shortfall equates to the salaries of 12,400 school staff including 5,700 teachers and 6,700 support staff. Per-pupil funding will drop to the lowest real-terms levels in at least 15 years.
Why are so many schools already in deficit?
One in seven schools are currently in deficit, the highest rate since at least 2010, due to years of below-inflation funding increases combined with rising costs for staff, energy, and maintenance. After 14 years of austerity, 74 percent of schools have less funding in real terms than in 2010, having exhausted reserves and efficiency measures while absorbing multiple years of inadequate funding increases.
What is causing the teacher shortage crisis?
Teacher shortages result from multiple factors including pay that has fallen 12 percent in real terms since 2010-11 while lagging 15 percentage points behind average UK earnings growth, high stress and burnout affecting 91 percent of teachers’ mental health, excessive workload with teachers working longer hours than most professions, and inadequate training and professional development. Only 59 percent of teachers expect to still be teaching in three years compared to 74-77 percent pre-pandemic.
How do funding cuts affect students with special educational needs?
Councils face a SEND funding shortfall exceeding 500 million pounds while the number of children with Education, Health and Care Plans has increased 70.9 percent to 390,109 children. Demand has sharply risen while funding failed to keep pace, meaning children are not provided help quickly enough or in the right setting. Local authorities face a cumulative SEND deficit of 5 billion pounds by 2026, threatening their ability to provide statutory services.
What happens when rural schools close due to funding cuts?
Rural school closures force children to travel longer distances along potentially unsafe routes or face prohibitive transport costs, with some parents keeping children home instead. For girls, closures increase early marriage risk as safety concerns rise. Communities lose vaccination drives, meal schemes, and meeting spaces while families with means migrate elsewhere causing property values to decline and local businesses to suffer, creating downward spirals difficult to reverse.
How do funding cuts impact mental health support in schools?
Funding cuts reduce counselor positions or increase counselor-to-student ratios, undermining mental health support as student needs grow due to pandemic impacts, societal pressures, and academic stress. School counselors provide essential services including crisis intervention, early identification of concerns, student support, teacher and parent resources, and advocacy. Eliminating or reducing counselor positions leaves students without critical support and teachers without specialized assistance addressing mental health concerns.
What is the pupil premium and how does it help disadvantaged students?
The pupil premium provides 2.9 billion pounds annually to schools based on numbers of students eligible for free school meals or previously in care, intended to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. However, when overall school funding is inadequate, pupil premium effectiveness diminishes as funds may cover core costs that should be funded mainstream, reducing additional support available. Disadvantaged students face disproportionate impacts when schools must cut positions, increase class sizes, or eliminate subjects due to inadequate core funding.
Why are arts and extracurricular programs being cut?
Schools prioritize core curriculum subjects when facing budget pressures, disproportionately cutting arts and extracurricular programs despite evidence these activities enhance academic achievement and cognitive development. Music programs, visual arts, drama, sports, and clubs require specialized staff, equipment, and facilities that become unaffordable when schools must reduce spending. These cuts deprive students of developmental opportunities, creative expression, teamwork skills, and potential career discovery particularly affecting disadvantaged students lacking private alternatives.
How do school meal programs face pressure from funding cuts?
Budget pressures force schools to reduce meal quality, eliminate breakfast programs, or increase costs for families despite evidence that school meals reduce food insecurity by at least 3.8 percent and improve dietary intake. Over 1.8 million English pupils depend on free school meals for adequate nutrition. Implementation problems including late deliveries, poor quality, and insufficient options force some schools to use limited funds to purchase replacement meals, diverting resources from educational purposes.
What is the infrastructure maintenance backlog in schools?
Schools face an 85 billion dollar annual infrastructure funding gap for both capital investment and routine maintenance, with many operating on maintenance budgets of approximately 75,000 pounds annually proving woefully inadequate. Deferred maintenance creates growing backlogs becoming increasingly expensive to address while students learn in buildings with leaking roofs, broken windows, inadequate heating or cooling, and insufficient sanitation creating environmental barriers to achievement.
How many additional teachers are needed globally by 2030?
UNESCO reports an urgent need for 44 million primary and secondary teachers worldwide by 2030 to achieve universal education goals, requiring combined financing of 120 billion dollars annually including 12.8 billion for universal primary education and 106.8 billion for universal secondary education. The global shortage undermines educational systems worldwide leading to larger class sizes, overburdened educators, educational disparities, and financial strain particularly affecting disadvantaged communities and developing nations.
What are the long-term consequences of education underfunding?
Underfunding creates educational debt compounding over time as each student cohort receives diminished education limiting individual opportunities and collective prosperity. STEM teacher shortages could create a 280 billion dollar economic impact from unfilled technical positions by 2030. Inadequate education predicts lower lifetime earnings, employment instability, worse health outcomes, reduced civic participation, higher criminal justice costs, and greater reliance on social services representing false economy creating larger long-term fiscal burdens than amounts saved through cuts.
Stay informed with the latest news and in-depth features below:
To read more, London City News