Bringing Hope, Building Futures: Tackling child poverty delivery plan 2026-2031 – annex 7: Equalities Impact Assessment (EQIA)

Key Findings

Child Poverty and the Protected Characteristics

This section sets out a summary of what we know about child poverty and the protected characteristics. It is based on a range of evidence and views gathered from stakeholder organisations and people with lived experience of poverty through the consultation process.

Although the analysis below focuses on one protected characteristic at a time, it is important to note that people may have different protected characteristics which intersect and that child poverty can be experienced in many distinct ways within different families across Scotland. We have included the equality impacts of intersectional experience of child poverty related to the three drivers where there is sufficient evidence, though we note that gaps remain in terms of intersectional data on outcomes in Scotland.^[5]

Age

The main purpose of the Act and all plans published thus far is to improve the lives of children in Scotland. Children are protected under the ‘Age’ characteristic, and they cannot by their own actions remove themselves from a household in poverty. Further details on an impact assessment for children can be found in Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment.

The approach of this plan, similar to previous plans, is to increase disposable incomes for families by increasing earnings and reducing household costs. A package of action is also geared towards enhancing life chances for children and their families, ensuring that any progress in poverty reduction is long lasting and sustained.

The actions in the plan focus on ensuring that parents are supported to increase their income, which can support better children’s outcomes. This includes young parents who are at greater risk of being in poverty. Furthermore, evidence shows that having a child can lead to parents falling into (or deeper into) poverty. As such, policies also need to ensure support for families in the early years of a child’s life and indeed at the preconception point.

General issues around age of parents are discussed below. Issues around the birth of the child and very young children and poverty are described in the section on pregnancy and maternity.

Children are more likely to be in poverty across all measures compared to adults.^[6] It is estimated that 23% of children (240,000 children each year) were living in relative poverty after housing costs in 2021-24.

The youngest households (household heads aged 16-24) have been consistently more likely to be in relative poverty compared to older households. In 2021-24, 37% of people in households in this group were in relative poverty after housing costs.

In comparison, the age groups 25-34, 35-44, 45-54 and 55-64 all had similar (and lower) poverty rates between 18% and 21%.

Older households tend to have lower poverty rates compared to working-age households. There were no marked differences between households with heads aged 65-74, 75-84, and 85 and older.

Through the consultation process, children and young people described mental health pressures linked to poverty including isolation, low self-esteem and stigma. They highlighted that young people’s access to education is affected by cost of the school day, transport, digital barriers, and lack of confidence. In terms of social security, they noted that young parents under 25 face reduced Universal Credit entitlements despite facing similar costs related to raising children.

They also noted positive impacts from ongoing work, including:

• Free school meals, school clothing grants, and breakfast programmes helping to reduce household costs.
• Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel, which has improved access to education and services - though calls were made to extend eligibility to the age of 25.
• Youth work, mentoring, Community Learning and Development programmes, and employability pathways (e.g. apprenticeships) were highlighted as ways to mitigate inequality.

Opportunities to further advance equality which emerged from consultation regarding children and young people included: expanding age‑appropriate mental health provision; extending free school meals and transport support; and enhancing early‑years support to yield long‑term benefits.

Income from employment

Employment in Scotland varies by age group, with younger and older age groups having lower employment rates. The employment rate for 16 to 24 year olds has been consistently lower than the employment rate for any other age group since July 2005 to June 2006. This is due to higher numbers of people aged 16 to 24 being in education.^[7]

In January to December 2024, an estimated 304,100 people aged 16 to 24 were in employment in Scotland. This is 5,300 fewer than the number of 16 to 24 year olds employed in 2023. The estimated employment rate for 16 to 24 year olds was 54.8% in 2024. This was 1.2 percentage points (pp) lower than the year before (55.9%) and 3.1 pp lower than in 2019 (57.9%).^[8]

Young people are less likely to be in contractually secure employment and more likely to work in lower-paid sectors such as retail, leisure and entertainment.^[9] The Minimum wage is set also by age, with rates for those aged 21 or younger much lower than for older workers. Children and young people from lower socioeconomic groups are also less likely to have access to parental networks in terms of employment opportunities.^[10]

Families with younger mothers under 25 years old are one of the priority family types, with young mothers less likely to be in paid work. Women and young people are at higher risk of in-work poverty and have a lower average hourly rate of pay. Evidence also shows they have difficulties in embracing further education whilst managing motherhood, with only 17% of mothers under 20 having a qualification at Higher Grade or above compared with 50% of mothers in their early twenties and 80% at 25 or older.^[11]

Children and young people living in the most deprived communities are less likely to enter an initial positive destination than those in the least deprived areas. The proportion of school leavers from the most deprived areas who were in a positive destination decreased from 94.0 per cent in 2022-23 to 93.6 per cent in 2023-24. The proportion of leavers from the least deprived areas who were in a positive destination increased slightly from 97.7 per cent to 97.9 per cent over the same time period. Together, this has led to a widening of the deprivation gap, from 3.7 percentage points in 2022-23 to 4.3 percentage points in 2023-24. Despite this, this is the second narrowest gap since consistent records began in 2009-10.^[12] For young mothers under 20, 17% have a qualification at Higher Grade or above compared with 50% of those in their early twenties and 80% of mothers 25 or older.^[13]

In Scotland, educational outcomes for looked after children have significantly improved over the past 10 years. However, there are still large gaps compared with all pupils. Looked after school leavers are more likely to leave school earlier and do so with fewer qualifications. For example in the 2021/22 school year, 78% of looked after school leavers achieved one or more qualification at SCQF level 4 or better, compared to 96% of all leavers. On a similar trend, 32% of school leavers looked after within the year left school in S4 or earlier, at more than double the rate of all school leavers (12%).^[14]

Once the child finishes their education and is out of the care system, a myriad of different challenges makes it particularly difficult for care leavers to increase their income through employment. A study from Australia examined barriers care leavers face to improving their education and employment.^[15] The main barriers included a need for extra support to overcome the impacts of trauma, relationship breakdown and frequent placement changes. These barriers are then combined or associated with ongoing life challenges for care leavers such as already living on a low income, mental health issues, and limited social networks.

Income from social security

The generosity of some social security benefits for the under 25s is lower than for older age groups (for example, standard Universal Credit allowance and rates for Local Housing Allowance).^[16]

We know that young people are less likely to have experienced navigating complex social security systems and can face barriers in accessing support services. These barriers and inequalities are more prevalent when a person belongs to more than one protected characteristic or priority family group. Young mothers are less likely to access various advice and support services, which may result in them missing out on accessing money to which they are entitled.

Mothers under 25 are considerably more reliant on state benefits and tax credits than older mothers, making them disproportionally impacted by cuts or changes to eligibility criteria in benefits or support services.^[17]

Reducing costs of living

Young people are often more financially vulnerable than older people. They have had less time to build on savings, and to learn and develop experience in managing finances or navigating complex social security systems.

Adults under 25 are less likely to have savings, which, combined with low paid jobs, make it harder to meet living costs.^[18] Younger people experience a higher prevalence of poverty and food insecurity and spend a higher proportion of their income on housing and food than older people. Young people are also more likely to be financially vulnerable and more likely to be in unmanageable debt.^[19]

Living in poverty can add societal and economic pressures on parents to care for their children. For some families this means that they are more likely to then experience the care system. We know that those with care experience are more likely to live in poverty, be food insecure, and miss out on life experiences.^[20]

Disability

Families with a disabled person make up a third of all families in Scotland. Around a fifth (18%) of parents are disabled and 52% of children in poverty live in a household with a disabled person.^[21] Poverty rates remain higher for households in which somebody is disabled compared to those where no-one is disabled. The gap between the two groups has remained steady over the last few years, albeit rates for households with a disabled person can fluctuate.

In 2021-24, the poverty rate after housing costs for people in households with a disabled person was 23% (550,000 people each year). This compares with 17% (510,000 people) in a household without disabled household members.^[22]

Engagement highlighted:

• Disabled households face significantly higher poverty rates, and increased costs (transport, heating, specialist equipment);
• Long waits for disability benefit case transfers push families into poverty;
• Families with a disabled member face challenges around limited accessible childcare and wraparound care;
• Disabled children also face inconsistent ASL provision and higher exclusion risks.

In our consultation exercise, Social Security Scotland’s more person-centred Carer Support Payment application process was viewed positively. Opportunities to further advance equality of opportunity included: improving case transfer times and benefit processing; further investment in accessible childcare and transport; tailored employability and disability‑aware workplace support, and strengthening disability competency among employers and services.

Income from employment

Statistics from January 2022 show that approximately one fifth of Scotland's working-age population is disabled.^[23] Disabled parents are less likely to be in paid employment compared to non-disabled parents and those who are in employment tend to work fewer hours, particularly disabled mothers.^[24]

Evidence from January 2024 showed the employment rate for disabled people in Scotland increased by 9 percentage points since 2014.^[25] Non-disabled employment rates also increased by 3 percentage points during this time period. This increase in the employment rate was larger in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK, although the employment rate remains lower. However, the employment rate has largely increased due to an increase in disability prevalence (70% of the total change), meaning that this change is primarily due to working people becoming disabled.

The Scottish Government’s ambition is to halve the Disability Employment Gap (DEG) by 2038 – based on the 2016 baseline gap of 37.4 p.p. (percentage points). As of 2025, the Scottish Government is on track to achieve this ambition. The ONS Annual Population Survey showed the DEG to be 31.5 p.p. in 2024. From 2023 to 2024, the employment rate for disabled people decreased from 52.7% to 51.4%, while the rate for non-disabled people stayed the same (83%). While progress has been made towards the 18.7 p.p. target, it remains slow due to barriers in the workplace. Addressing accessibility, stigma and inclusive recruitment practices are vital to close the gap.^[26]

Disabled people face a number of barriers to employment, including health needs and caring responsibilities, lack of affordable childcare, transport, inaccessible job adverts and application processes, workplace discrimination, lack of flexible working and inadequate support. While recognising these barriers mean that employment is not a realistic option for some, many disabled people would like to be in employment. Disabled people are also more likely to work in lower paid occupations and have less access to fair work.^[27] Evidence suggests that dedicated and tailored employment support is required to not only find, but also to remain and progress in employment and there is a need for a greater availability of flexible and remote working.^[28]

Income from social security

Disabled people experience a range of difficulties with benefits currently delivered by the UK social security system, including a lack of advice and support, lack of trust in the system, and a complex, inflexible or unsuitable application process. Disabled people are also disproportionately impacted by cuts, freezes and or changes to eligibility criteria, partly because of a higher reliance on benefits.^[29]

Reducing costs of living

Some illnesses and disabilities incur additional living costs and the poverty measure does not normally consider this. Research also shows that additional costs associated with disability vary greatly in level and nature. There is no general agreement on how to measure these costs.^[30] Additional costs may include, for example, specialist equipment and home adaptations, specialist therapies, extra transport costs, specialist toys and play equipment, paid-for care and increased energy costs, either as a result of increased heating for those with limited mobility or the cost of running specialist electrical equipment.^[31]

Families with a disabled person are also less likely to have savings and there are more likely to report a negative impact on their mental health as a result of the cost of living crisis.

In 2021-24, as in previous years, the poverty rate was higher for individuals in households with a disabled person, when disability-related benefits are not included in the household income. After housing costs, the poverty rate was 26% (640,000 people each year) for people living with a disabled household member, and 16% (470,000 people) for those without.^[32]

Disabled people also face a number of challenges with the transport system.^[33] Many of these are likely to be even more difficult when travelling with young children, and can be exacerbated in rural areas. Families with long-term conditions find it harder to afford childcare and for those with disabled children, there are specific barriers around finding the right childcare to support children’s needs.

In 2024/25, of the 34,067 households assessed as homeless or threatened with homelessness, 51% (17,224 households) had at least one support need identified (learning disability, physical disability, mental health problem, alcohol/drug dependency, independent living skills).^[34]

Pregnancy and Maternity

Pregnancy can bring a period of sudden increased financial pressure, and sustained money worries have been reported following the birth of a baby, increasing the risk of child poverty. Households with young children remain among the most vulnerable to entering poverty, with children from families with the youngest child under 1 having a higher risk of being in relative poverty (35% in 2021-24).^[35]

For some families having a baby can be a trigger point for falling into, or deeper into, poverty. Mothers who stop paid work after having a child and do not return by the time the child is 5 are more likely to be younger and single mothers, making them more susceptible to living in poverty.

Consultation highlighted the importance of pregnancy and the first 1,000 days, poor maternal health, nutrition, or limited early support having long-term impacts on children, and young mothers facing financial insecurity due to age‑scaled benefits. Opportunities to advance equality of opportunity focused on holistic early‑years support, including with finances and health.

Income from employment

Motherhood can have a significant impact on the number of hours that mothers can work, which then affects their pay and income relative to non-mothers and to men. Most new mothers see a reduction in their income from employment – due to reduced income from parental leave or re-adjustment of working patterns.

Current parental leave policies assume women need to undertake majority of childcare and for those who are eligible for maternity pay, this is still below the Living Wage. When ready to go to work, the labour market still needs to support sufficient well-paid, flexible options and work practices that foster gender equality and facilitate family life.

Recent UK analysis shows that having children leads to a substantial and long-lasting reduction in mothers’ earnings.^[36] The research showed that five years after the birth of a first child monthly earnings were reduced on average by 42%, or £1,051 per month, compared with earnings one year before the birth.

Income from social security

Mothers who are already in precarious employment can be negatively affected by the social security system, with insecure and unpredictable work influencing women’s entitlement to Statutory Maternity Pay/Maternity Allowance. Although Statutory Maternity Leave is available for 52 weeks, statutory Maternity Pay is only payable for 39 weeks.

Many parents re-access or access social security payments following birth of child. However, the generosity of some social security benefits (e.g. Universal Credit and Local Housing Allowance) for younger parents under the age of 25 is lower than for older age groups.

Mothers under 20 are considerably more reliant on state benefits and tax credits than are older mothers, making them disproportionally impacted by cuts or changes to eligibility criteria in benefits or support services.^[37]

Reducing costs of living

We know that there are high additional costs faced during the pregnancy and maternity period, with families having very limited or no flexibility to cut back essential items for their baby. Similarly, families with a baby have been particularly affected by the cost of living crisis, with increases in the prices of necessary products such as infant formula and nappies.

Furthermore, there is a difference in public funding for childcare by age, with less support for children younger than 2. This may result in parents of young children having to spend more on childcare, resulting in less disposable income to spend on other essentials.

Pregnant young women and the youngest mothers are also overrepresented in applications for homeless assessments in Scotland. Some of them will likely be domestic abuse survivors with very limited support networks.

Race

Minority ethnic families are the second smallest priority family group, after only children in families with a young mother. They make up just 1 in 10 children in Scotland in 2021–24. However, they have the highest risk of child poverty of all of the priority groups, with nearly half (47%) in poverty in 2021–24. This means that although only 10% of children in Scotland are from a minority ethnic background, they represent 20% of all children in poverty in Scotland.^[38]

Over the five year period 2019-24, people from non-white minority ethnic groups were more likely to be in relative poverty after housing costs compared to those from the ‘White - British’ and ‘White - Other’ groups. The poverty rate was 43% for the ‘Asian or Asian British’ ethnic groups and 50% for ‘Mixed, Black or Black British and Other’ ethnic groups. The poverty rate amongst the ‘White - Other’ group was 20% and that of the ‘White - British’ group was 18% (840,000 people).

Due to the small sample sizes for some of the ethnic groups, and the fact that ethnic composition of the population is not accounted for in the survey weighting process, estimates fluctuate between years and the measurement uncertainty is fairly large.

Consultation also highlighted the higher risk of poverty for minority ethnic families and the barriers these families face including discrimination, lower benefit uptake, poorer housing access, and digital/language obstacles.

Additionally, the engagement noted the particular barriers faced by migrants and households with no resource to public funds (NRPF), including: severe hardship due to exclusion from Universal Credit and related benefits, despite high child‑related costs and limited childcare, transport, and employment support options.

Recommendations to advance equality included:

• Collecting and disaggregating ethnicity data to address gaps;
• Promoting culturally sensitive, anti‑racist service delivery;
• Providing emergency support for NRPF children.

Income from employment

The employment rate for people from minority ethnic groups in Scotland is consistently lower than the employment rate for white people. The employment rate for minority ethnic groups aged 16 to 64 was estimated at 64.8% in January to December 2024 compared to 75.0% for white groups.^[39] The minority ethnic employment rate gap is the difference between the employment rates for minority ethnic groups and white groups aged 16 to 64. In 2024, the estimated minority ethnic employment gap was therefore 10.2 percentage points.

While minority ethnic school leavers tend to outperform other pupils, this does not translate into better work outcomes. Minority ethnic workers can face heightened barriers (including racism and discrimination, language and cultural barriers) both in terms of access to the labour market and progression opportunities during employment, and women may face additional barriers in accessing and navigating quality employment. They are more likely to work irregular hours, which can lead to challenges around finding suitable childcare.^[40]

Income from social security

Generally, minority ethnic families are less reliant on income through social security, though reliance on benefit income varies widely by ethnic group. Asian Pakistani and Bangladeshi families have the highest reliance on benefit income of all ethnic groups, while Asian Indian and Chinese households have a lower reliance on benefits than white households.^[41]

Some minority ethnic groups have a lower acceptance rate for social security applications in Scotland than white applicants. Overall, the proportion of clients approved was highest for ‘Mixed or multiple ethnic groups’ (78%), followed by ‘African’ (77%), ‘White’ (76%) and ‘Prefer not to say’ (76%). Approval rate was lowest for clients identifying as ‘Other ethnic group’ (69%), followed by ‘Asian’ (71%) and ‘Caribbean or Black’ (74%).^[42]

Evidence suggests there are particular barriers faced by minority ethnic communities, such as lack of awareness regarding the benefits available to them, difficulty accessing services or interacting with them – for example due to cultural or language barriers, where English might not be spoken or well understood - and continued structural barriers that are compounded by discrimination and racism faced by minority ethnic people, which can cause trust issues.^[43]

Reducing costs of living

Evidence suggests that minority ethnic parents are more likely to try to increase income through paid employment through seeking more hours or an additional job to address rising living costs. Debt is a bigger issue for minority ethnic households with children, with 13% of these households in UK having unmanageable debt, compared to 9% for all households with children.

Research by Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggests that minority ethnic households are less likely to be managing well financially due to lower incomes and higher costs.^[44] For example, children in minority ethnic families in Scotland are more likely to be living in rented accommodation, particularly the private rented sector, than white children. They are also more likely to be living in high-cost housing. Nearly 1 in 5 (18%) children in minority ethnic families are in housing that costs one-third or more of their total household income.

Sex

Child poverty is intrinsically linked to women’s poverty.^[45] This is due to a combination of factors, but mostly because of the significant role women play in doing the unpaid work needed for individuals households and society to run, including the caring for children.

In 2021-24, women and men experienced the same level of relative poverty after housing costs (19%). This can be explained because poverty is measured at a household level and means that men and women in the same household are both either in poverty or not in poverty. Statistics alone provide a limited view of gendered poverty experiences. It masks how income is distributed across members of the same household, the choices individuals can make in increasing their income, or the diverse challenges people may face.

However, by looking at single-adult households (with or without dependent children) it is possible to identify differences in poverty rates. For context, in 2021-24, the relative poverty rate after housing costs for single adults (working-age and pensioners) was 27%, higher than for the total adult population (19%). Rates have been historically highest for single mothers but have gradually declined to be comparable with other single household types. In the most recent period, poverty rates were highest for single childless men (33%, 90,000). The poverty rate for single childless women and single mothers was 28% and 30% respectively. Estimates for single fathers are not available due to small sample sizes.^[46]

Indeed, the vast majority of one-parent households are led by women.^[47] But there are other households at greater risk of poverty, which are also more likely to be headed by women. For example, households with a mother aged under 25, families with a baby under one (where women are more likely to be reducing working hours or stopping/pausing paid work completely) or families with three or more children (where caring is mostly the responsibility of the women). Therefore the actions which are mindful of the barriers and personal circumstances of priority groups will be particularly beneficial for this protected characteristic.

Income from employment

We know that women earn less than men and are more likely to be in insecure, low-paid work and are overrepresented in sectors that have historically low pay, low progress and are often undervalued.^[48]

The employment rate for men in Scotland has consistently been above the employment rate for women in Scotland. Though this gap had previously been narrowing over time, it widened from July 2023 to June 2024. The estimated employment rate for women in Scotland has been slowly increasing over time, from 67.7% in July 2004 to June 2005 to 71.2% in July 2024 to June 2025.^[49]

In 2025, the gender pay gap for full-time employees in Scotland was 3.5% and in the UK was 6.9%. Scotland has a narrower gender pay gap for full-time and all employees than the UK in 2025. The gender pay gap for both Scotland and the UK has typically been narrowing over time since the series began. The gender pay gap in Scotland has been narrower than in the UK since 2003. In 2025, the gender pay gap for full-time employees in Scotland widened from 2.0% in 2024 to 3.5% in 2025. This is due to men’s hourly earnings (excluding overtime) increasing at a faster rate than women’s hourly earnings (excluding overtime), when considering full-time employees. The gender pay gap for full-time employees in the UK narrowed from 7.1% in 2024 to 6.9% in 2025.^[50]

In 2025, the proportion of women (employees aged 18+) in Scotland earning less than the real living wage was estimated at 12.0%, compared with 10.5% for men.^[51] Wider evidence also highlights how low pay is gendered with women representing 72% of those trapped in persistent low pay across Scotland.^[52] Analysis of UK-wide data has shown that mothers experience a much wider pay gap, earning 43% less than fathers in their weekly earnings.

Women disproportionately carry out caring responsibilities in both formal and informal sectors and as either paid or unpaid carers.^[53] Caring can have a significant impact on those who provide it, including reducing the time and energy the individual has for paid work and limiting their choice in terms of career and work locations, and can have a significant impact on carers’ wellbeing. Women are also more likely to have career breaks in order to accommodate unpaid caring roles. The economic impact of caring can have an immediate impact on current household income but can also reduce their pension income in the future. Taking a career break can also create additional barriers when attempting to return into paid employment. These inequalities in caring responsibility can drive aspects of the gender pay gap, whilst hiding the true costs and value of care provision.

The issues are further exacerbated when other intersectional inequalities are considered. Those in the priority family groups are disproportionately facing low pay, with lone parents, people living with a disability and carers often experiencing lower pay. Further, the size of the motherhood pay gap is associated with family size and increases with a growing number of children in a family. While some minority ethnic women experience discrimination due to their gender and their race, this is more pronounced for migrant women not born in the UK who often experience a wider pay gap. We know that many families often belong to more than one priority group and women who belong to one or more of these family types face multiple intersecting disadvantages in accessing equal pay.^[54]

Research from Close the Gap published in 2019 highlighted key issues minority ethnic women face in recruitment, education, training and development, pay, under-employment, workplace culture, and their caring responsibilities.^[55] This report links a number of statistics, including employment rates and pay gaps, for minority ethnic women with their experiences and opportunities in the labour market. Close the Gap’s survey found that women experience discrimination, racial prejudice and bias in nearly all areas mentioned above. Respondents to this research suggest that BME women may face barriers to feeling included in conversations that impact their pay and working conditions or other areas that impact collective agreement or perceived employee voice. These experiences differed between minority ethnic group, for example African women were more likely to report experiencing these in relation to recruitment than the average response across all participants.

Stakeholder consultation reinforced much of this evidence, with respondents highlighting gendered issues such as: fair pay for women; under-valuation of work traditionally carried out by women (i.e. cleaning, care and retail); the need for policy alignment, especially with transport and flexible childcare, to facilitate women’s access to employment and employability support; and women having limited income from employment due to unpaid caring responsibilities.

Inequality in unpaid work drives aspects of the gender pay gap, whilst hiding the true costs and benefits of care. Therefore, tackling gender inequality takes a central role in eradicating child poverty.

Income from social security

Women are twice as dependent on social security as men.^[56] Lone parents, the vast majority of whom are women, may experience higher levels of anxiety and uncertainty when looking to claim benefits and evidence suggests they can be disproportionately impacted by cuts, freezes, benefit caps and limits. Lone parents are also more likely to be in debt and/or financially vulnerable.^[57]

For Social Security Scotland, the proportion of applicants who self-identified as ‘Man’ (27%) remained substantially lower than those who self-identified as ‘Woman’ (65%), though the gap has closed in recent years.^[58] As noted earlier, women are more likely to care for children, but not only in terms of the physical side of caring, also in terms of financial management of resources. Data shows, for example, that the vast majority of applicants applying for benefits relating to children, i.e. Best Start Grant and Best Start Foods, Child Disability Payment, and Scottish Child Payment, continue to be women. For most other benefits, gender differences were less pronounced however women were still the largest proportion of applicants. Job Start Payment was the only benefit where the largest proportion of applicants were men at 52%.

Payments made through the Scottish social security system tend to be linked to the eligibility of Universal Credit - which is administered by the UK Government. Therefore, in the context of child poverty, any changes to eligibility can have a significant impact on women’s income from social security.^[59]

Cuts to social security benefits in recent years have had wide ranging impacts across the population. Analysis by the Women’s Budget Group shows that social security cuts since 2010 at UK level as a result of austerity measures, have significantly impacted women and girls.^[60] The Group found that women were more likely to be negatively impacted by cuts, but cuts did not impact all women equally. In particular:

• women in the lowest income decile lost on average £3,348 per year;
• black women across all income groups, lose on average £2,498 per year (compared to white men who lose on average £990 per year);
• lone parents lose nearly £7,000 per year on average;
• disabled women significantly lose out by £2,553 per year on average. While generally, cuts to benefit schemes have impacted those with disabilities more than those without, disabled women lost out more than disabled men.

In summary, women tend to be more reliant on income from social security and, therefore, more vulnerable to changes to the social security system. Intersecting protected characteristics can further negatively impact women, with those from minority ethnic backgrounds, with a lone parent status and with a disability more likely to be impacted by cuts to benefits.

Reducing costs of living

Evidence shows that there is a gendered dimension to cost of living, particularly around housing and financial resilience. Intersecting characteristics, such as ethnicity and disability, can increase inequalities for women, and can also be a buffer to further disadvantage.

The National Advisory Council on Women and Girls report from 2024 summarises the multiple ways in which women have been disproportionately affected by the cost of living crisis.^[61] The report shows that women are: more likely to be in debt than men; more reliant on benefits; less likely to have savings; and less likely to have access to an occupational pension. Pay inequalities reduces the ability to save and means that financial resilience is lower amongst women, limiting their ability to respond to crisis.

Housing has a gendered dimension. Overall, women are less likely to own property than men, and lone parents (of whom 92% in Scotland are women) and working aged women with no children are the least likely groups to own a property. Women in Scotland are overall more likely to be in receipt of Housing Benefit or the housing element of Universal Credit than men.

We know that there is a strong relationship between domestic abuse and poverty, particularly for women, which can often result in them becoming homeless. In 2023-24 where gender information was recorded, just over four-in-five (81%) incidents of domestic abuse in 2023-24 involved a female victim and a male suspected perpetrator. This was the same as in 2021-22 and 2022-23.^[62]

Accessing secure housing is harder for women, particularly for those fleeing domestic abuse.^[63] Women are less likely to own property than men, and lone parents and working aged women with no children are the least likely groups to own a property. In 2024-25, 13.5% of households assessed as homeless or threatened with homelessness were single parent females, while 4.% were single parent male households.^[64] The most common reason for single parent female households becoming homeless was due to a violent or abusive dispute within the household. SG statistics show that there were 17,240 households in temporary accommodation as of 31 March 2025. Of these households, 4,940 had children or a pregnant woman living in them. In total, 10,180 children were in temporary accommodation as of 31 March 2025.

There is limited evidence on experiences of fuel insecurity by gender. A report by the Scottish Women’s Budget Group highlights some specific households who are struggling to afford energy costs. They particularly refer to lone parent families (most likely to be headed by women). The survey found that 80% of lone parent households were struggling with energy costs and 43% were not having baths or showers to reduce energy costs.

We have limited evidence on the experiences of fuel insecurity by gender, but we know lone parent families (most likely headed by women) report struggling with energy costs.

Evidence focusing on the experiences of women during the cost-of-living and crisis rising costs generally across Scotland highlights particular barriers faced by women from minority ethnic communities.^[65] Survey results showed that minority ethnic women were more likely to struggle to manage childcare costs (60%) take on more debt (46%), and struggle with food costs (42%), in comparison to the figures for women across all ethnic groups responding to the survey (28%, 23%, and 37% respectively). Women from minority ethnic communities responding to this survey also reported struggling with energy costs (44%), although this figure is slightly lower than the figure for all survey respondents (46%).

Overall, from a gender perspective, women often function as ‘poverty managers’ in the home and are often responsible for managing household budgets and making finances stretch to meet household need. Research from the Poverty Alliance illustrates how women adopt a range of coping strategies to manage reduced incomes and increased costs.^[66] However, they noted a concern for the future as many women stated that they had run out of ways to cope with rising costs. The Scottish Women’s Budget Group also described women as 'shock absorbers' of poverty because they often cut back on essentials for themselves so that the effects are not felt by the rest of the household.^[67]

In summary, evidence highlights the need for a third delivery plan which ensures that the tackling child poverty agenda sits alongside policy action to tackle gender inequalities.

Specific policies and proposals listed in the plan that could contribute towards addressing the following issues:

• Reducing the gender pay gap;
• Increasing the value of care in society;
• Increasing the provision of formal care to allow more women to enter paid employment;
• Supporting women to re-enter the world of work after a period of non-paid caring.

Marriage and Civil Partnership

In 2021-24, the relative poverty rate after housing costs was highest for divorced (or separated) adults (28%, 90,000) and single adults (29%, 270,000). Married and cohabiting adults were the least likely to be in poverty (14%, 15% ; 310,000 and 90,000) with widowed being in the middle (21% and 60,000).

Poverty among widowed and divorced/separated adults largely decreased over the long term, whereas the trend for singles, cohabiting and married adults was broadly flat over time.^[68] Following divorce, men are more likely to re-enter home ownership in comparison to women. Divorced women are more likely to suffer prolonged financial hardship in the long term than men and in the event of separation or the loss of a partner, women can be especially vulnerable to entering poverty.

Income from employment

Increasing income from employment can be difficult for lone parent families as the majority of lone parents are in paid employment already, but still in poverty. Given the vast majority of lone parents are women, they tend to work fewer hours and have a lower hourly wage, reflecting the gender pay gap and also the greater weight placed on women to undertake unpaid work such as childcare. Furthermore, similar gendered challenges are present, such as lone parents being less likely to have low or no qualifications and those with degrees more likely to work in low or medium skilled occupations.^[69]

Income from social security

Lone parent families are more likely than other priority groups to have applied for Universal Credit or crisis grant to help with the cost of living. Evidence also suggests that lone parents are likely to suffer from high levels of anxiety and uncertainty when looking to claim benefits. They are more likely to be disproportionately impacted by cuts, conditionality, freezes and benefits caps and limits. This is particularly true for those who also have a disabled adult or child in the household, partly because of a higher reliance on benefits.

Reducing costs of living

Lone parent households are the least wealthy household type in Scotland, which is likely to translate into less disposable income. They are therefore particularly vulnerable to the cost of living crisis and often suffer the worst impacts. Many lone parents (70%) have no or low (under £250) savings and are more likely to be in debt or arrears. As a result, they are least likely to be able to pay unexpected bills of £300 and are more likely to but back on essentials.^[70]

Religion or Belief

Scottish Government data on religion is available for adults only and so the analysis undertaken in relation to religion and poverty does not include children.

Faith and worship is highly important for a significant proportion of the Scottish population and can bring benefits to wider wellbeing. Although there is relatively limited evidence around religion, employment and poverty, the latest available data shows that poverty rates remain disproportionately high for some religious groups. Over the five year period 2019-24, Muslim adults were more likely to be in relative poverty (53%, 50,000 each year) than adults overall (19%), after housing costs were taken into account. ^[71]

By contrast, of adults belonging to the Church of Scotland, 15% were in relative poverty after housing costs (150,000 adults each year), compared to 17% of Roman Catholic adults (90,000 adults) and adults of other Christian denominations (20%; 70,000 adults).^[72]

The employment rate of Muslims in Scotland has been consistently lower than that of the wider population. Estimates for other minority religious groups remain statistically limited due to small sample sizes, but previous equalities research suggests that employment outcomes for religious groups in Scotland such as Sikh, Hindu and Buddhist are often less favourable than the overall population.

Research by Sikh Sanjog indicates that Sikh women face a number of barriers both in seeking employment and within the workplace.^[73] These include low self-esteem, cultural and family barriers, language and literacy barriers, and structural barriers such as employers not understanding cultural nuances, including the wearing of traditional clothing in the workplace.

Social Security Scotland data for April 2024 to March 2025 shows that 58% of applicants had no religion, compared to 11% who were ‘Roman Catholic’, 9% ‘Church of Scotland’, 4% ‘Other Christian’ and 4% Muslim.^[74] All other religious groups accounted for 1% or less of applicants each and 12% chose ‘Prefer not to say’. According to Scotland’s census 2022, 49% of Scottish adults reported having no religion, 13% reported their religion as ‘Roman Catholic’, 23% ‘Church of Scotland’, 5% ‘Other Christian’, 2% Muslim and 2% were another religion.

Best Start Grant and Best Start Foods and Scottish Child Payment had the highest proportions of Muslim applicants compared to other benefits, with 8% and 7% respectively.

While no direct impacts to religion or belief were identified through the consultation process, alignment was noted with cultural experiences of minority ethnic or migrant groups who may face discrimination or stigma. To advance equality of opportunity, it was highlighted that services should remain culturally sensitive and respectful of religious practice.

Reducing costs of living

There is no known evidence of prevalence of food insecurity for religious groups, but we note that many faith-based organisations are involved in food aid activities.

Sexual Orientation

The 2022 census found that there were 183,860 LGBTQI+ people in Scotland, which represents 4.0% of people aged 16 and over.^[75] Of these, 80,104 people identified as Gay or Lesbian, 80,256 people identified as Bisexual and 23,503 identified as other sexual orientation. The most common responses in this category were ‘pansexual’, ‘asexual’ and ‘queer’. Those three different groups account for over half (57.1%) of people in this category.

Data shows that the poverty rate in Scotland has been consistently higher for LGB+ adults compared to straight/heterosexual adults. In 2021-24, 28% of LGB+ adults (number not available due to small number in sample) were in poverty, compared to 19% of straight adults (560,000 adults) and 18% of adults where sexual orientation was not known (230,000 adults).^[76] We do not have any data on how the impact of being in poverty or on a low income differs depending on sexual orientation, but will keep this under review, including taking any appropriate and proportionate measures to fill these gaps, such as commissioning research, or involving relevant groups.

Evidence shows that LGBTQI+ people are more likely to experience housing instability, poor housing, homelessness or negative treatment by housing services.^[77] However, there is a lack of data which allows for an intersectional analysis of related areas, such as homelessness applications from LGBT women.

Gender Reassignment

There were 19,970 transgender people in Scotland according to the 2022 Census. This is 0.44% of people aged 16 and over.^[78] A survey of transgender and non-binary people in Scotland reported that 33% of respondents were claiming benefits.^[79]

The Scottish Trans and Non-Binary Experiences Summary Report 2024 highlighted key findings on socio-economic issues for trans and non-binary respondents. With regards to the cost of living, the report found that 52% of respondents said that rising costs had caused them to need to make decisions between essential household purchases and purchases relating to their transition. Levels of food insecurity are particularly high among trans and non-binary people. A national health needs assessment in 2022 showed that 30% of trans men, 27% of non-binary people and 19% of trans women reported being worried about running out of food because of a lack of money or other resources in the previous 12 months.^[80]

The data shows that there are some barriers faced by transgender people when accessing and claiming benefits. While most respondents (75%) to the Scottish Trans and Non-Binary Experiences Summary Report 2024 felt their transgender status, history or gender identity had not made it harder to receive benefits, 7% felt it had and 18% were unsure.^[81] A 2021 Trans Lives Survey also indicates that transgender people can struggle to live safely, openly and comfortably in society, where the fear of stigmatisation can mean avoiding certain situations for fear of experiencing transphobia or discrimination.^[82]

When considering access to benefits, the Scottish Government recognises that a requirement for an individual to provide their gender when making an application may be a potential barrier to transgender people and those who identify as non-binary. Non-binary people in particular can be excluded if individuals are asked to tick a box to indicate their gender and only binary options are available. Application forms for Social Security Scotland do therefore not require information on the gender of the applicant and use inclusive forms of address. Equality monitoring is part of the application, though applicants can choose not to answer any of the questions. Social Security Scotland staff are also trained to embody the values of dignity and respect and all training for new staff includes awareness of equality, diversity and inclusivity, underpinned by human rights principles.