Digital Education Resource Archive

Post-16 level 3 and below pathways

Cookies on Explore Education
Statistics
We use some essential cookies to make this
service work.
We’d also like to use analytics cookies so we can
understand how you use the service and make
improvements.
Shape the future of Explore education statistics
Share your feedback to help us improve this service
Close
This is the latest release
Published 28 October 2025
Release type Ad hoc statistics ?
Receive Sign up for email alerts
Quick links
Download all data (zip)
Release contents
Explore data
  View cookies
Beta This is a new service – your feedback (opens in new tab) will help us to improve it.
Academic year 2024/25
Home to school transport: LA
data collection
Accept analytics cookies Reject analytics cookies
Explore education statistics
Home Find statistics and data Home to school transport: LA data collection
updates
Produced by Department for Education
This publication presents data reported by local
authorities in England on pre-16 pupils or children
of compulsory school age (opens in new tab) and below
who are receiving home to school transport (HTST) as
well as post-16 learners who are receiving transport to
education or training funded by their local authority. 
You can find out who is eligible for compulsory school
age (pre-16) HTST from the statutory guidance (opens in
new tab), and there is additional guidance for post-16
transport to education and training (opens in new tab).
The information in this release is based on the first
HTST data collection. This was a voluntary collection and
took place in February/March 2025. Three-quarters of
local authorities responded. As a new data collection, we
expect the quality of the data returns to improve over
time as it becomes more established.
Response rates varied by question and results should
therefore be treated with caution as the sample may not
be representative in all cases. The data presented is
from local authorities that provided data for all options in
each question. The number of authorities included for
each question is labelled as “base”. With the exception
of overall numbers of pupils/learners eligible for
transport, national estimates have not been derived from
the data due to the varying numbers and types of local
authorities responding to each question.
This publication will be updated annually.
Help and support
Related information
Data guidance
Contact us
Search this page

Headline facts and figures - 2024/25
Estimate of pupils/learners using
LA funded transport
520,000
National estimate extrapolated from
responses from 115 local authorities
Pre-16 SEND HTST pupils using
single occupancy vehicles
9%
Based on responses from 108 local
authorities
An estimated 520,000 pupils and learners are eligible for local authority
funded transport to their education provider/training 
Using data from the 115 responding local authorities we have extrapolated the
number of pre-16 pupils receiving HTST to estimate the number of pupils
nationally. Approximately 470,000 pre-16 pupils are eligible for HTST (6% of all
pre-16 pupils); around 180,000 pupils receive HTST because of their special
educational needs and/or disability (SEND) (around 40% of pre-16 pupils using
HTST) and around 290,000 (60% of pre-16 pupils using HTST) are eligible for
reasons other than SEND. These estimates have been derived by calculating the
average proportion of pupils receiving transport in London, urban and rural
authorities and using these averages to estimate the number of eligible pupils in
local authorities that did not respond. 
We estimate there are 50,000 learners using post-16 transport. This estimate has
been derived by calculating the average proportion of the population aged 16-25
in London, urban and rural authorities receiving transport and using these
averages to estimate the number of eligible learners in local authorities that did not
respond.
9% of pre-16 pupils receiving HTST because of SEND travelled in single
occupancy vehicles
Based on responses from 108 local authorities, nine percent of pre-16 pupils
receiving HTST because of their SEND travelled in single occupancy vehicles.
Explore data and files used in this release
Additional supporting files
Hide
All supporting files from this release are listed for individual download below:
HTST data collection (xlsx, 77 Kb)
Tables showing numbers/percentages of pupils and learners receiving local authority
funded home to school transport split by school type, eligibility and mode of transport,
collected from local authorities
Go to top
View or create your own tables
View tables that we have built for you, or
create your own tables from open data
using our table tool
Data catalogue
Browse and download open data files
from this release in our data catalogue
Download all data (ZIP)
Download all data available in this release
as a compressed ZIP file
Pupils and learners using transport who are travelling in single
occupancy vehicles
Hide
9% of pre-16 pupils receiving HTST because of their special educational needs and/or
disability (SEND) travelled in single occupancy vehicles (base: 108 local authorities). 
1% of pre-16 pupils receiving HTST for reasons other than SEND travelled in single
occupancy vehicles (base: 100 local authorities).
15% of post-16 learners receiving transport because of their special educational needs
and/or learning difficulties and disabilities (SEN/LLDD) travelled in single occupancy
vehicles (base: 78 local authorities).
4% of post-16 learners receiving transport for reasons other than SEN/LLDD travelled
in single occupancy vehicles (base: 60 local authorities, note this estimate is based on
responses from fewer than half of local authorities).
Footnotes: 
1. Local authorities were asked to provide numbers of pupils and learners using
transport on 3rd February 2025.
2. A minority of local authorities could not distinguish between pupils using single
occupancy vehicles by SEND and non-SEND.
3. A minority of local authorities did not include pupils who travel in single occupancy
vehicles where they are the only pupil from the area travelling to a school.
Go to top
Data collection
Hide
Hide all sections
Data presented in this publication has been collected from local authority transport
teams. 
Full guidance (opens in new tab) was provided to local authorities, including reference
dates and data item definitions. 
Data was collected from local authorities on a voluntary basis for the first time in
February 2025. We will use feedback from this first collection to make improvements
for the next collection.
The reported number of pupils/learners using transport is as at 3rd February 2025 and
spend data is for financial year 2023-24. We wanted to collect the most up to date data
on pupil numbers and spend data for the most recent complete financial year.
Go to top
Data quality
Hide
The HTST data collection is being developed to:
build a clearer picture of local authority provided transport at local and national levels,
and
enable local authorities to benchmark against each other when the quality of the data
allows.
115 local authorities (or 75%) submitted data for this initial collection. Table 1 shows
that a good response rate by region was achieved, though rates for local authorities in
the East Midlands and London were relatively lower. Table 2 shows the response rates
for London, rural and urban local authorities, showing that rural authorities were more
likely to have responded to the data collection than urban and London authorities. Urban
and rural has been defined using the percentage of the population living in rural settings
as published by ONS. Rural local authorities are those where at least 15% of the
population live in rural settings.
Table 1: Overall response rate by region
Region Number of
responding local
authorities
Percentage of local authorities in
the region that responded
East Midlands 6 60%
East of
England
11 100%
London 21 64%
North East 11 92%
North West 19 79%
South East 15 79%
South West 11 73%
West
Midlands
10 71%
Yorkshire and
the Humber
11 73%
Table 2: Overall response rate by urban/rural
Urban/rural Number of responding
local authorities
Percentage of local authorities
that responded
London 21 64%
Urban 48 74%
Rural 46 84%
The quality of the data returned by local authorities varied by question. In terms of
coverage, all 115 authorities were able to provide data for the highest-level questions:
how many pre-16 pupils received HTST and how many post-16 learners received
transport. We are satisfied that the data provides, for the first time, a robust
assessment of the number of pupils using free HTST, but we also believe that this will
improve further as the collection matures.
Response rates varied across data items; this includes where more detailed
breakdowns were not readily available. While complete responses were received from
some local authorities to the lower-level questions, data received from others reflected
the fact that there has previously been no standardised data collection, hence they
were unable to provide full answers.  These included:
Null responses – local authorities did not have the data to answer the question.
Several of the post-16 transport questions were left blank with comments that local
authorities did not hold the data requested. Sometimes this was because we asked
for the data split between 16-18 and 19-25 year olds for those using transport as a
result of their special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and they were not
able to segment the data in this way; and sometimes it was because they could not
separate the post-16 data from the pre-16 data because pupils and learners of
different ages shared routes and vehicles.
Questions were interpreted differently – emails received and comments left by local
authorities made clear that they had interpreted some questions in different ways.
For example, when asked for numbers of pupils and spend by ‘mode of transport’
the distinction between “dedicated school transport” and “any other vehicle” was
unclear and local authorities responded differently; and when asked about pupils
travelling in single occupancy vehicles, some local authorities excluded pupils where
they were the only pupil travelling from an area to their school, but we had intended
for these pupils to be included. We have confidence in the percentages presented
as only a small number of the local authorities included raised this issue.
Errors in the data returned – such as typographical errors and inconsistencies
between numbers of pupils reported for different questions. While we have
performed checks on the data, including comparing reported spend and spend
recorded in Section 251 data returns for 2023-24 (Section 251 is part of
the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 – local authorities submit
statements of planned and actual expenditure on education and children’s social
care) and comparing the number of pupils reported in responses to different
questions, we were unable to contact all local authorities where their data appeared
to contain errors. Of the 15 local authorities we did contact, five subsequently
returned corrected data. We are aware of some reasons for the difference in spend:
a small number of LAs were unable to separate their spend by pre- and post-16 as
pupils and learners use the same vehicles/routes; and a small number said they had
not included all overheads in the mode data, such as the cost of vehicles, passenger
assistants and office staff. For the local authorities included in the percentages
presented, the difference in the overall number of pupils/learners is small, however
there is a slightly larger difference in the spend data. 
As this is a new data collection, we expect the quality of the data returns to continue to
improve over time as the collection becomes established. For example, reductions in
the number of unknown values for detailed breakdowns, improvements in our guidance
and categories, and increased response rates. Caveats for each data item are given in
the accompanying footnotes.
Go to top
Data processing
Hide
Data verification
We have not corrected errors in the data except where we contacted the local authority
to verify their return in a minority of cases. The data should therefore be treated with
caution given the potential for remaining errors.
We have not contacted local authorities to correct their data where the question was
misinterpreted. We will seek to improve the clarity of the questions and guidance for
future collections. The data should therefore be treated with caution.
Estimating national figures
With the exception of overall numbers of pupils eligible for HTST, national estimates
have not been derived from the data due to the varying numbers and types of local
authorities responding to each question.
To estimate the number of pre-16 pupils using HTST nationally, we have calculated the
average proportion of pupils receiving HTST in London, urban and rural authorities and
used these averages to estimate the number of eligible pupils in local authorities that
did not respond. To estimate the number of post-16 learners using transport nationally,
we have calculated the average proportion of the population aged 16-25 in London,
urban and rural authorities receiving transport and used these averages to estimate the
number of eligible learners in local authorities that did not respond.
Go to top
Data availability and rounding
Hide
Data availability
The following symbols are used in the supporting data files: 
low - denotes figures based on percentages that round to 0, but are not 0. 
Where any number is shown as zero, the original figure submitted was zero. 
Rounding
Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number, therefore component parts
may not sum to 100.
Go to top
Official statistics in development
Hide
These statistics are official statistics in development undergoing evaluation. They have
been developed under the guidance of the Head of Profession for Statistics and
published to involve users and stakeholders at an early stage in assessing their
suitability and quality.
Official statistics in development have been produced as far as possible in line with the
Code of Practice for Statistics.
This can be broadly interpreted to mean that these statistics are:
managed impartially and objectively in the public interest
meet identified user needs
produced according to sound methods
well explained and readily accessible
Find out more about the standards we follow to produce these statistics through
our Standards for official statistics published by DfE guidance (opens in new tab).
We will be reviewing and improving our methodology and considering whether future
publications are necessary as part of the development. Feedback on the quality and
relevance of these statistics can be sent to school.travel@education.gov.uk.
Go to top
Help and support
Ad hoc official statistics
Ad hoc official statistics are one off publications that have been produced as far as
possible in line with the Code of Practice for Statistics.
This can be broadly interpreted to mean that these statistics are:
managed impartially and objectively in the public interest
meet identified user needs
produced according to sound methods
well explained and readily accessible
Find out more about the standards we follow to produce these statistics through our
Standards for official statistics published by DfE guidance (opens in new tab).
Contact us
If you have a specific enquiry about Home to school transport: LA data collection
statistics and data:
School Systems and Organisation Analysis
Email: school.travel@education.gov.uk
Contact name: Richard Allison
Press office
If you have a media enquiry:
Telephone: 020 7783 8300
Public enquiries
If you have a general enquiry about the Department for Education (DfE) or education:
Telephone: 037 0000 2288
Opening times: 
Monday to Friday from 9.30am to 5pm (excluding bank holidays)
Is this page useful?
Print this page
Yes No
Report a problem with this page
Cookies Privacy notice Contact us Accessibility statement Glossary Help and support
This service is maintained by the Department for Education
Our statistical practice is regulated by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR)
All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0 , except where otherwise stated
Build: 20251008.12
© Crown copyright


Home to school transport : LA data collection : Academic year 2024/25

Government evidence to the STRB : October 2025

Reasonable Adjustments of General Qualifications

Powell, Andrew

Lewis, Joe

Skills policy in England

Guidance
Equality duties on education
inspection
Guidance on the education inspection approach to
providers’ and inspectors’ duties under the Equality Act
2010.
From:
Ofsted
Published
5 November 2025
Applies to England
Print this page
Ofsted works in the interests of children, learners, apprentices, trainees,
Get emails about this page
  
Menu
Home Education, training and skills Inspections and performance of education providers
Inspection and performance of schools
Contents
Providers’ duties under the Equality Act—
Inspectors’ duties under the Equality Act—
Evidence or allegations of discrimination and/or breaches of the Equality Act—
Specific circumstances where equalities must be considered in education
settings
—
Inspection approach: Supreme Court ruling on the meaning of sex in the Equality
Act
—
early career teachers (ECTs) and national professional qualification
(NPQ) participants – referred to collectively as ‘learners’ throughout for
ease of reading. Our aim is to help raise standards in education, skills
and children’s social care, improving lives – particularly for the most
vulnerable.
As part of this, inspectors must consider whether providers are meeting
their obligations under the Equality Act 2010 during inspection. This
requirement is built into our inspection toolkits, which guide inspectors in
evaluating provision and reflect providers’ equality duties. We evaluate
whether providers prevent and respond appropriately to incidents of
unlawful behaviour. We also consider how they promote equal
opportunities, make reasonable adjustments and foster positive
relations.
Failure to notice and challenge bullying, unlawful discrimination,
harassment and victimisation will usually affect a provider’s grade for
‘leadership and governance’ (or ‘leadership’). The impact on other
evaluation areas depends on the education remit and how the act is
applied through other legislation, frameworks, and both statutory and
non-statutory guidance.
Ofsted also has its own responsibilities under the act, and we reflect
these duties in our inspection practice. These responsibilities are
embedded in our operating guides, which set out how inspections
should be carried out. Inspectors will ask leaders whether anyone
involved in the inspection process requires reasonable adjustments
during an inspection because of a disability, and will ensure that any
such requests are considered in consultation with the duty desk. They
will then ask any inspection team members the same question. They will
also consider other adaptations to the inspection process to avoid
putting others at a disadvantage because of a protected characteristic,
unless the duty desk provides an objective justification for refusing a
request. Inspectors should also consider the effect the proposed
adaptation would have on others and ensure that in making the
adaptation they are not directly discriminating against anyone else.
Again, the duty desk should be consulted in any such circumstance.
This guidance sets out providers’ duties (which inspectors must
understand and be familiar with) and inspectors’ duties under the act,
and some specific circumstances where equalities must be considered
as part of education inspections.
Providers’ duties under the Equality Act
Inspectors consider providers’ compliance with the act during
inspection. This includes the following duties:
1. Prohibited conduct
Providers must not directly or indirectly discriminate, harass or victimise
learners, staff or service users because of a protected characteristic.
The act defines direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment
and victimisation.
See parts 2 and 6 of the Equality Act.
2. Duty to make reasonable adjustments
Providers must anticipate and remove barriers that put disabled learners,
teachers and other staff at a substantial disadvantage compared with
non-disabled peers.
See sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act.
3. Public sector equality duty (PSED) (where relevant)
Publicly funded providers must have due regard to eliminating
discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advancing equality of
opportunity, and fostering good relations between people with and
without protected characteristics.
See section 149 of the Equality Act.
Inspectors’ duties under the Equality Act
Inspectors must themselves comply with the act in their role, including
how they carry out inspections. This includes the following duties:
1. Prohibited conduct
Inspectors must not discriminate in how they carry out inspections or
interact with providers, learners, staff or the public.
See part 3 of the Equality Act.
2. Duty to make reasonable adjustments
Inspectors must make reasonable adjustments for disabled people
involved in an inspection (for example, staff, learners and parents) to
ensure fair participation.
See sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act.
3. Public sector equality duty (PSED)
Inspectors must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when
carrying out inspection processes – that is, in planning, delivering, and
reporting on inspections.
See section 149 of the Equality Act.
Evidence or allegations of discrimination and/or
breaches of the Equality Act
On all inspections, if inspectors witness or find evidence of behaviour by
leaders and staff that does not comply with the act, or think there may
have been a breach of the act, they will refer this to the duty desk, which
will seek legal advice as required.
Specific circumstances where equalities must be
considered in education settings
Inspection focus on protected characteristics
Our inspection toolkits set out our focus on how well providers ensure
respect for the different protected characteristics, and (except for initial
teacher education (ITE) providers) promote an age-appropriate
understanding of the protected characteristics in the Equality Act.
If inspectors identify that a provider has not followed the relevant
statutory or non-statutory guidance, teaching about the protected
characteristics in an impartial and age-appropriate way where there is a
duty to do so, or is not fostering respect for them, they should contact
the duty desk, who may seek advice from policy and/or legal teams.
They must record this in their evidence base and report, explaining how
it has influenced their grading.
Inspectors should also contact the duty desk if they need further
guidance.
Inspection approach: Supreme Court ruling on the
meaning of sex in the Equality Act
The UK Supreme Court ruled on 16 April 2025 that the definition of sex
in the act should be interpreted as ‘biological’ sex only. This means that,
for the purposes of the act, a person’s legal sex is the one that was
recorded at their birth. According to the ruling, obtaining a Gender
Recognition Certificate (GRC) does not change your legal sex for the
purposes of the act.
In line with good safeguarding practice and to protect the privacy and
dignity of all pupils, it has long been the case that schools must provide
single-sex toilets and changing facilities in line with the legislative
requirements and their safeguarding duties. For other settings, such as
further education and skills and ITE providers, similar requirements
apply under workplace regulations, including to provide single-sex toilet,
changing and shower facilities (where changing and shower facilities are
required). 
In anticipation of potential future guidance from the Equality and Human
Rights Commission (EHRC), Ofsted and the relevant government
departments are working closely together on this area of policy and will,
respectively, provide any necessary guidance to providers or updates to
the inspection framework.
Published 5 November 2025
Get emails about this page
Print this page
Explore the topic
Inspection and performance of schools
Services and information Government activity
Is this page useful?
Yes
No
Report a problem with this page
Benefits
Births, death, marriages and care
Business and self-employed
Childcare and parenting
Citizenship and living in the UK
Crime, justice and the law
Disabled people
Driving and transport
Education and learning
Employing people
Environment and countryside
Housing and local services
Money and tax
Passports, travel and living abroad
Visas and immigration
Working, jobs and pensions
Departments
News
Guidance and regulation
Research and statistics
Policy papers and consultations
Transparency
How government works
Get involved
Help  Privacy  Cookies  Accessibility statement  Contact  Terms and conditions
Rhestr o Wasanaethau Cymraeg  Government Digital Service
 All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated
© Crown copyright


Equality duties on education inspection

Independent review of social work regulation : call for evidence : Government call for evidence

Early years inspection toolkit : Updated 9 September 2025

Children looked after in England including adoptions : reporting year 2025 : Published 26 November 2025

Research and analysis
Low income poverty
projections for children, FYE
2025 to FYE 2030, November
2025
Published 26 November 2025
Summary
In November 2025, the UK government announced that from April 2026 it will be
removing the two-child limit so that families can receive the child element of
Universal Credit for all children regardless of family size. This is a key measure in
the government’s agenda to tackle Child Poverty and ensure all children have the
Best Start in Life. Full details of the former will be set out soon in our comprehensive
  Menu
Home Parenting, childcare and children's services Children's health and welfare Child poverty
Low income poverty projections for children, FYE 2025 to FYE 2030, November 2025
Department
for Work & 
Pensions
Contents
Summary
Methodology
Low income projections for children
Statement of compliance with the Code of Practice for Statistics
Child Poverty Strategy targeted at tackling the structural and root causes of child
poverty across the country.
This analysis provides an estimate of the future low income poverty trends for
children after this policy was announced. The low income poverty projections are
based on the policy position immediately before the Budget 2025 but account for
the removal of the two-child limit. Any other measures announced at Budget 2025
are not included in these estimates.
It is estimated that there will be 4.3 million children in relative low income after
housing costs in the final year of parliament (FYE 2030). This is projected to
represent a reduction of 400,000 children in relative low income after housing costs
across the Parliament (between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030).
Projections of low income poverty trends are not a forecast, they are a projection
under a specific set of assumptions and are subject to a high degree of uncertainty.
They should only be used to provide an indication of future trends.
Methodology
The Department for Work and Pensions’ Policy Simulation Model (PSM) is used to
estimate future trends in low income poverty. The PSM is a static microsimulation
model[footnote 1] based on a snapshot of the UK population from the Family
Resources Survey (FRS), currently for the financial years ending 2022, 2023 and
2024. It uses caseload forecasts alongside benefit rules and economic
assumptions to simulate results such as poverty levels for each year, currently up to
and including FYE 2030, for the United Kingdom.
Calibration to benefit caseload data means the PSM better models benefit income
compared to survey estimates, as published in Households Below Average Income
(HBAI), because the FRS underreports benefit receipt. This means that the
modelled estimates of poverty levels can systematically differ from survey data. We
therefore apply the changes to poverty levels year on year produced by the PSM to
the most recent HBAI data to estimate the poverty levels. This better reflects the
estimated low income poverty trends but means that any sampling and
measurement error in the FYE 2024 HBAI data will affect the projected levels.
To project future low income poverty trends, the base PSM methodology has been
modified to better model the impact of changing caseloads as a result of the Move
to Universal Credit (UC). This involves changing the grossing regime so that working-
age income-related benefit caseload forecasts are held at their base level (FYE
2024 outturn) and adjusting the caseloads at the sample level using standard Move
to UC assumptions and take-up adjustments to match the overall UC forecast. This
ensures alignment with the UC caseload forecast but prevents the grossing regime
from artificially distorting the income distribution and ensures the projections are
sensitive to economic and policy factors.
The methodology used to produce these projections has been developed in
consultation with an external Expert Advisory Group.
This projections analysis uses a model consistent with the OBR’s economic and
caseload forecasts in March 2025. However, modifications have been made to
model policies announced since Spring Statement 2025, specifically:
Changes to the UC Bill including to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) policy
and UC Standard Allowance rates for Under 25s.
Change to the Winter Fuel Payment eligibility threshold.
Removing the two-child limit so that families can receive the child element of
Universal Credit for all children regardless of family size.
Expanding Free School Meals eligibility to all pupils in England with a parent
receiving Universal Credit.
Providing funding to schools in England to deliver a free breakfast club for
primary-aged children.
Increasing the amount provided through the Healthy Start scheme to £9.30 per
week for children under one, £4.65 per week for children aged 1-4, and £4.65
each week of pregnancy from 10 weeks.
Increase the eligibility for the Warm House Discount in England and Wales by
removing the high cost to heat threshold.
Reforming the Child Maintenance Service by removing Direct Pay.
The projections do not account for any other policies announced at Budget
2025 that may impact future poverty trends. Updated poverty projections will
be published after Budget 2025. 
Poverty projections are not a forecast, they are an estimate of future trends in low
income poverty levels under a very specific set of assumptions. The model relies on
multiple assumptions about the economy and benefit caseloads which are subject to
a high degree of uncertainty. Routine updates at each fiscal event, for example to
the OBR economic assumptions, can materially change projected poverty rates,
even without policy changes. Projections should therefore be interpreted as the
best currently available estimate rather than a precise forecast of future
poverty rates.
Poverty projections are presented for four measures of poverty: both relative and
absolute low income and both before and after housing costs.
Further information on the methodology behind the low income measures can be
found in How low income is measured in households below average income
statistics - GOV.UK and Household below average income series: quality and
methodology information report FYE 2024 - GOV.UK.
Estimates are rounded to the nearest 100,000 children and the nearest whole
percentage point for consistency with published HBAI low income poverty rates and
due to uncertainties inherent in the modelling approach.
Figures for FYE 2025 are based on projections because the most recent available
HBAI data is for FYE 2024.
Low income projections for children
It is estimated that there will be 4.3 million children in relative low income after
housing costs in the final year of parliament (FYE 2030). This is projected to
represent a reduction of 400,000 children in relative low income after housing costs
between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030. This is expected to be the largest reduction in
the number of children in relative low income After Housing Costs (AHC) over a
Parliament since comparable records began in the 1990s.[footnote 2]
Table 1a: Relative low income AHC projections for
children (UK)
HBAI Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
 FYE
2024
FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029
Number 4.5
million
4.6 million 4.7 million 4.3 million 4.3 million 4.3 million
Proportion 31% 32% 33% 30% 30% 30%
Table 1b: Projected change in relative low income
AHC levels for children over the Parliament (FYE 2025
to FYE 2030, UK)
Difference between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030 (relative AHC, children)
Number -400,000
Percentage point -2ppt
Table 2a: Relative low income Before Housing Costs
(BHC) projections for children (UK)
HBAI Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
 FYE
2024
FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029
Number 3.4
million
3.6 million 3.6 million 3.3 million 3.2 million 3.2 million
Proportion 23% 25% 25% 22% 22% 22%
Table 2b: Projected change in relative low income
BHC levels for children over the Parliament (FYE
2025 to FYE 2030, UK)
Difference between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030 (relative BHC, children)
Number -400,000
Percentage point -2ppt
Table 3a: Absolute low income AHC projections for
children (UK)
HBAI Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
 FYE
2024
FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029
Number 3.9
million
3.8 million 3.9 million 3.5 million 3.5 million 3.5 million
Proportion 26% 26% 27% 24% 24% 24%
Table 3b: Projected change in absolute low income
AHC levels for children over the Parliament (FYE 2025
to FYE 2030, UK)
Difference between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030 (absolute AHC, children)
Number -300,000
Percentage point -1ppt
Table 4a: Absolute low income BHC projections for
children (UK)
HBAI Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
 FYE
2024
FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029
Number 2.9
million
2.9 million 3.0 million 2.6 million 2.7 million 2.7 million
Proportion 20% 20% 20% 18% 18% 19%
Table 4b: Projected change in absolute low income
BHC levels for children over the Parliament (FYE
2025 to FYE 2030, UK)
Difference between FYE 2025 and FYE 2030 (absolute BHC, children)
Number -300,000
Percentage point -1ppt
Statement of compliance with the Code
of Practice for Statistics
The Code of Practice for Statistics (the Code) is built around 3 main concepts, or
pillars: 
trustworthiness – is about having confidence in the people and organisations that
publish statistics 
quality – is about using data and methods that produce statistics  
value – is about publishing statistics that support society’s needs 
The following explains how we have applied the pillars of the Code in a proportionate
way.
Trustworthiness
The figures were created to support government decision making and understand
how low income poverty levels are estimated to change over time. They are being
published to give equal access to all those with an interest in them.
Quality
The data that underpins this information is taken from DWP’s Policy Simulation
Model which includes caseload forecasts taken from DWP and HMRC data.
This projections analysis uses a model consistent with the Office for Budget
Responsibility’s economic and caseload forecasts in March 2025. Modifications
have been made to model policies announced since Spring Statement 2025, as
noted above. Modifications have also been made to better model the impact of
changing caseloads as a result of the Move to Universal Credit.
The methodology used to produce these projections has been developed in
consultation with an external Expert Advisory Group.
Value
Releasing this information serves the public interest in understanding the projected
low income poverty trends over time. The figures also help reduce the administrative
burden of answering Parliamentary questions, Freedom of Information requests and
other forms of ad hoc enquiry and serves public.
Further information and feedback
Contact DWP Press Office if you have any questions or feedback.
Help us improve GOV.UK
To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more
about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens
in a new tab).
Services and information
Benefits
Births, death, marriages and care
Business and self-employed
Childcare and parenting
Citizenship and living in the UK
Crime, justice and the law
Government
activity
Departments
News
Guidance and regulation
Research and statistics
Policy papers and
consultations
1. A static microsimulation model is a modelling approach which uses micro-level
observations, in this case from survey data, to simulate other states of the world
including future states. ↩
2. Using HBAI data from the financial years of the Parliaments starting from May
1997, the largest reduction in child poverty over a Parliament was under the 1997
to 2001 Labour Government, which oversaw a reduction of 300,000 children in
relative low income after housing costs (between FYE 1998 and FYE 2002). ↩
Back to top
Disabled people
Driving and transport
Education and learning
Employing people
Environment and countryside
Housing and local services
Money and tax
Passports, travel and living abroad
Visas and immigration
Working, jobs and pensions
Transparency
How government works
Get involved
Help  Privacy  Cookies  Accessibility statement  Contact
Terms and conditions  Rhestr o Wasanaethau Cymraeg
Government Digital Service
All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where
otherwise stated
© Crown copyright


Low income poverty projections for children, FYE 2025 to FYE 2030, November 2025

Not a member yet