Attainment Scotland Fund (ASF) Evaluation Summative report, 2026

Conclusion

To what extent has the Scottish Attainment Challenge Mission been achieved?

The Attainment Scotland Fund (ASF) provides targeted investment to improve outcomes for children and young people impacted by poverty, supporting the mission to reduce the poverty‑related attainment gap. This summative report synthesises evidence gathered since the SAC refresh (2022/23 – 2026) and builds on the evidence base from the evaluation of the initial SAC from 2015/16 – 2021/22 to assess progress towards its long‑term outcomes. Evidence is drawn from the SAC Leads Survey (2025), School Survey (2025), case study research (2025), and national stakeholder interviews (2025/26), alongside previous analytical outputs.

Implementation of the fund

National direction, provided through refreshed guidance and the SAC Logic Model, has been positively received and seen to have a key role supporting clarity of purpose and strengthening local planning. However, a challenge repeated across multiple SAC Leads Surveys is that national guidance is issued too late to be fully integrated into planning cycles.

The introduction of the Strategic Equity Fund (SEF) in 2022 marked a significant shift in how resources were allocated to reduce the poverty‑related attainment gap, from an approach targeted only at local authorities with higher levels of deprivation, to providing funding to all local authorities. Authorities that had not previously received strategic funding welcomed SEF as a more equitable distribution mechanism and used it to establish new structures and roles, increasing local responsiveness. Concerns from the previously designated Challenge Authorities persist regarding ‘tapering’ down of their payments.

The importance of strategic level funding for all local authorities was recognised across the data collected as being of critical importance. The move overall was seen positively as a recognition that the poverty-related attainment gap exists in all local authorities and that it should be addressed across Scotland rather than just particular pockets of deprivation. The recognition that poverty exists in all local authorities was welcomed and internalised the importance of addressing it throughout the system as a whole. This strategic funding complemented the PEF allocated directly to schools where approaches can be based on local need/decision-making at the school level. Notwithstanding, the ongoing misalignment between financial‑year allocations and academic‑year planning means that resource allocation is not yet fully optimised. Fixed term funding undermines recruitment and retention because it does not facilitate recruitment to permanent positions with certainty.

Across the evaluation, strong use of data and evidence has been a key strength of SAC implementation, with authorities developing monitoring strategies, oversight and collaboration approaches in support of effective targeting of resources. Some issues persist around reporting burdens and duplication. Attainment Advisors also remain a central strength, echoing earlier findings, however stakeholders highlight variability due to capacity constraints.

Approaches to equity continue to evolve and are strongly underpinned by learning and teaching and families and communities. Recent adaptations reflect emerging pressures such as cost of living and COVID‑19 impacts. Many authorities have adjusted their strategic use of SEF and PEF for 2025/26. PEF investment is generally viewed as effective, however variability in school‑level capacity persists. The Care Experienced Children and Young People (CECYP) Fund remains widely valued. Virtual School Head Teachers have been increasingly observed and are viewed as effective.

Overall, SAC is increasingly embedded within wider policy frameworks. While challenges remain, the cumulative evidence demonstrates maturing structures, approaches increasingly responding to identified needs and increased understanding, strengthened governance, and continued progress toward the SAC long-term mission.

Embedded practices and culture

Engagement with families and communities is becoming increasingly embedded, with case studies highlighting schools’ role in supporting families, particularly in the most deprived areas. The importance of family link workers and other similar post-holders in delivering approaches to support families and communities has been consistently highlighted throughout this phase of the evaluation. Children and young people’s voice informing change has been strengthened through the national programmes and school‑level activity, though stakeholders warn that participation can be inconsistent without sustained investment and participation must not be tokenistic.

Readiness to learn has become a strategic priority, with survey and case study evidence indicating improvements, particularly where wellbeing and nurture approaches are emphasised, even as COVID‑19 and cost‑of‑living pressures continue to affect learners.

An equity‑focused culture and ethos have become more embedded across the system, supported by leadership, collaborative working, professional learning, learning and teaching approaches, inclusive practice and work to reduce stigma, although capacity and workload impact on the degree to which this is effective across the board. However, sustainability remains the key risk and area of concern. While many approaches and cultural shifts appear durable, these are widely noted to require continuous, ongoing effort and funding to sustain them.

Overall, the evidence collected for this summative report and before reinforces earlier findings on the emergence and benefit of data informed practice and decision making, collaboration, and an embedded culture of equity, while pointing to emerging system level shifts; SEF’s universal reach, stronger policy alignment, extending the Virtual School Headteacher model to a wider number of local authorities, and a more explicit focus on readiness to learn. Strong progress has been made in systems and practice, though some stakeholders note that translating these gains into consistently measurable national outcomes remains an ongoing challenge.

Closing the gap

Using the National Improvement Framework basket of measures, the evidence shows continued narrowing of the poverty‑related gap in Achievement of Curriculum for Excellence Levels (ACEL) for literacy and numeracy at primary and S3.

In 2024/25, primary literacy and numeracy gaps were the narrowest on record, with S3 literacy and numeracy gaps also at their lowest levels, indicating sustained recovery beyond the immediate post‑pandemic period. By contrast, school‑leaver attainment based on National Qualifications shows widening gaps at SCQF Levels 4 and 5 and a recent widening at Level 6, tempering the otherwise positive ACEL trend.

The newer All SCQF five‑plus pass measures show slight attainment gains at Levels 4, 5 and 6, and the deprivation gap narrowing in 2024/25 for Level 5; however the gap widened in 2024/25 for Levels 4 and 6. Participation among 16–19‑year‑olds reached its highest level in 2024, with the deprivation gap steadily narrowing since 2016, while positive initial destinations remain high despite a small gap increase in 2023/24 and a marked reduction since 2015/16 overall. For the health and well-being measures where data is available, the gap between the most and least disadvantaged is narrowing in attendance rates and the 27–30-month review. There is a slight increase in the gap between the most and least disadvantaged with a total strengths and difficulties score of 14 or more, indicating a need for focus on health and wellbeing. Overall, in line with the interim report, for the 12 NIF measures for which data is available and comparable, the poverty-related attainment gap has narrowed in 8 measures and widened in 4 between 2016/17 and the latest data available. This is an improvement from the findings in the Interim Report. At the national level, this shows some continued indications of progress.

It is important to note that drawing definitive conclusions about progress based on the NIF measures alone risks eclipsing broader and wider progress in the system, as well as not being able to fully capture the progress and achievements of all learner journeys. Evaluation evidence should be seen in the round to provide a broader and more holistic view of progress. Perceptions from stakeholders and school staff generally report improvements in literacy, numeracy, and wellbeing, with most perceiving at least some closure of the poverty‑related attainment gap. Enablers include collaboration, effective use of data and evidence, strategic planning, targeted staffing, wellbeing and nurture, study support, and headteacher autonomy over PEF.

Persistent risks include reduced funding for some authorities, attendance concerns, and wider pressures linked to COVID‑19 and the cost of living, raising ongoing questions about sustainability. Concerns have also been raised about the increase in numbers of pupils with Additional Support Needs (ASN) and the impact this will have on the ability to improve attainment or close the poverty-related attainment gap.

Overall, the evidence supports previous findings on ACEL improvement, participation, and stakeholder‑reported progress, while newly highlighting record ACEL gains alongside widening school‑leaver attainment gaps.

Achievement

The evidence presented shows the ASF has succeeded in broadening opportunities to learn beyond the classroom and to achieve in wider domains, providing opportunities such as residential/holiday activities, outdoor learning, after‑school clubs and sports. Positive impacts were widely reported across the board and in the case studies, with inclusion, provision of life skills, improvements to mental health and wellbeing, improvements in attendance and supporting transitions being regularly reported.

Case studies highlight the added access to trips, residentials, cultural experiences, outdoor learning programmes (e.g., Columba 1400, Duke of Edinburgh), alongside extra-curricular activities such as barista skills, beekeeping, volunteering and leadership awards. The participants responding to case studies have reported a range of positive benefits both within and outside of school, and the School Survey indicates these benefits are widespread across schools.

Levels of provision in particular for care‑experienced children and young people have been extensively increased, with tailored wellbeing initiatives, wider achievements/qualifications, attendance initiatives, outdoor learning, mentoring and Virtual School Headteacher support being most frequently provided. Secondary schools and those serving more deprived communities provide broader offers for care experienced children.

PEF is frequently used to remove cost barriers for those in poverty (funding trips and providing equipment) and is administered in schools discreetly to avoid stigma.

However, a gap between strategic and school‑level perspectives persists (96% of SAC Leads versus 45% of headteachers/leads reporting a wider‑achievement focus), suggesting barriers to delivery in some settings. Secondary schools, urban and more‑deprived schools report greater emphasis than primary, rural/small‑town and less‑deprived schools.

Professional learning to support teachers provide wider achievement options is not widespread but is increasing, and some schools have established leadership roles to embed this focus.

There remains a gap between pupils from the most and least deprived areas who achieve 5 or more passes at All SCQF Levels 4, 5, 6 or above. However, considering pupils from the most deprived areas only, the proportion of pupils achieving five or more passes has increased from 41% to 53% at Level 5 and from 16% to 24% at Level 6, between 2015/16 and 2024/25. It should be borne in mind that the number of award providers and types of awards has expanded in this period. However, the important aspect of this trend is that pupils are achieving these awards.

Overall, the evidence corroborates previous findings that ASF widens participation, strengthens wellbeing and builds skills, while newly highlighting curriculum diversification, targeted CECYP support (including Virtual School Headteacher involvement), and measurable gains for the most deprived in All SCQF attainment, alongside delivery challenges that warrant continued attention.

SAC is increasingly embedded within wider policy frameworks. Challenges remain but cumulative evidence demonstrates maturing structures, strengthened governance, responsive delivery and continued progress toward the long‑term mission. ASF has made substantial contributions to strengthening educational equity across Scotland in support of the SAC Mission.

There has been strong and positive progress in developing culture and ethos, collaboration, use of data and evidence, engagement and support with families and communities, wider opportunities and readiness to learn. Learning and teaching, leadership and professional learning underpin culture and ethos.

The attainment gap has narrowed in some cases between the most and least disadvantaged for primary and secondary literacy and numeracy, however school leaver attainment shows less progress. Challenges remain in staff capacity and long‑term sustainability. There remains a mismatch between the indicators and stakeholder perceptions on the extent to which the poverty-related attainment gap has been closed, with stakeholder reports being more positive.

The evaluation has determined that the SAC Mission is partially achieved, with strong foundations established but further sustained progress and funding required to deliver consistent, sustainable, measurable improvement at national level.