Bringing Hope, Building Futures: Tackling child poverty delivery plan 2026-2031 – annex 3: Evaluation strategy (2026 update)

1. Evidence-based policy making

Over the four years of Best Start, Bright Futures, evidence reaffirms that no single policy in isolation will help Scotland reach the child poverty targets. Instead, a successful child poverty strategy should:

• embed gender equality
• place families at the cornerstone of policy delivery and
• aim for long lasting impacts of policy action.

Gender equality supports child poverty reduction

Gender equality plays a significant role, as we have seen that in Scotland women continue to undertake the vast majority of the unpaid work for the family. This unpaid work, where women tend to be the primary caregivers for children and the unpaid carers for disabled or older family members, often needs to be balanced with paid employment. Decisions to make this possible can be made at a household level, aiming to balance family needs and current resources, but systemic factors play a significant role. This can include, for example, flexibility in working arrangements (most often women utilising flexible or part-time work patterns), parental leave policies (with gendered assumptions and structural barriers meaning women tend to use most of parental leave), or a gender pay gap that continues (with women more likely to earn less than men, and as such women are more likely to reduce their working hours, and therefore their income, to take on caring responsibilities).

Looking forward, from an analytical perspective, we need to clearly and consistently consider the progress made towards gender equality, and specifically how child poverty policies are actively considering gender and progressing the gender equality agenda. This is needed at two levels. Firstly, at individual policy level. For example, are labour market policies considering how women are actively supported to increase their income? Are transport policies considering gender-specific accessibility and safety challenges? Secondly, at a cumulative level across sectors. Are, for example, labour market policies considering childcare options for families?

Families are resilient problem solvers

Families are resilient problem solvers and often adjust to ever-changing circumstances and challenges. Evidence shows us that low income households are more vulnerable to periods of crisis or volatility, such as the recent cost of living crisis or during a global pandemic such as COVID-19 . Due to the relentless volatility of recent years, low-income families have increasingly depleted financial resources and resilience. In terms of policy, this means that there is a balance to be found in providing emergency responses that support those already in poverty, with preventative policies that aim to minimise the number of families falling into poverty. At the heart of prevention lies providing families with dignified choices.

Any type of policy, either responsive or preventative, needs to be supported by a strong societal infrastructure that helps everyone, but particularly those most disadvantaged. This relates to key services such as health, education and skills, housing, social care, childcare or social security. Recent evidence from place-based approaches shows the importance of having strong key services that can support families to thrive, as well as ensuring that the system of support for families at risk of poverty is more attuned to local needs, more joined up, easier to navigate and more family- and person-centred.

Designing and delivering support in a place-based, person-centred way has the potential to enhance the uptake, effectiveness, and sustainability of a range of support services, ensuring we achieve the best outcomes for families from our investments. This is visually represented in the conceptual response tier of child poverty (see Annex A). The conceptual response tier symbolises how experiences and barriers of poverty vary depending on a family’s circumstance and tackling child poverty will therefore mean totally different things to different families and will require different combinations of response included in a range of services and support.

For analysis this means that we need to consider the deep interconnection of impact across policies. For example, any intended or unintended consequences across policies that results in a better understanding of how policies support (or undermine) each other is needed.

A long-term journey

Whilst the 2030 statutory targets are imminent, policy action needs to consider a balanced approach to supporting routes out of poverty, preventing families from falling into poverty and ensuring long lasting impact of positive action.

From an analytical perspective, this means that evidence needs to provide both an account of short- and medium-term progress, and an assessment of the longer-term trajectory. Policies that do indeed support long-term improvements, such as those focusing on system change, take time. While they often do have a direct impact on families, this impact can be difficult to quantify or attribute to a specific intervention. Therefore, impact becomes difficult to report on.

There is a need to collate and assess a range of evidence from a variety of sources and, with patience, aim to understand improvements achieved, both for service users and stakeholders. Policies that support long-term and sustained impacts are necessary to ensure that any progress achieved is maintained.

As part of the analytical approach to support the long-term view, we are including now in the measurement framework key indicators to track consequences of poverty, such as wellbeing, attainment or housing security.

The evaluation strategy embeds these principles of gender equality, placing families at the centre, and sustainable impacts.