A third of schools are also cutting back on teaching staff and three-quarters are cutting teaching assistants in a bid to balance their books.
The survey findings from the National Foundation for Educational Research and commissioned by the Sutton Trust show the extent to which schools are struggling to make ends meet – with secondary schools seemingly suffering the most.
The survey involved 1,208 teachers and school leaders across primary and secondary schools.
Of the school leaders polled, 34% said they were cutting back on teaching staff for financial reasons, 74% said they were cutting teaching assistants, and 53% were cutting wider support staff.
Other areas where spending was being cut included IT equipment (55%), trips/outings (53%), and for secondaries subject choices at GCSE (33%) and A level (29%).
While primary school leaders were much more likely to be cutting teaching assistants (76% vs 50%), secondary leaders were more likely to be cutting teachers (51% vs 31%).
The Sutton Trust is warning that the figures are the highest they have been since 2020 – with the primary school figures at their highest level since it began polling on this issue in 2017.
The research also asked school leaders about the Pupil Premium funding – with 88% saying that the money they receive to support disadvantaged pupils is not enough.
At the same time, however, 46% of the school leaders admitted they were using the ringfenced Pupil Premium funding to plug gaps elsewhere in their budgets (46% in primary schools and 45% in secondary schools).
While the primary school figure is an improvement on last year’s poll when 50% said they were using Pupil Premium to plug budget gaps, the secondary school figure is notably worse – up 13 points from 32% last year.
When asked what budget gaps school leaders were using the Pupil Premium to fill, responses varied although staff salaries were top of the list:
- Staff salaries: 46% (43% primary; 66% secondary).
- Teaching assistant salaries: 79% (81% primary; 66% secondary).
- Extra-curricular activities/trips for non-Pupil Premium pupils: 33% (32% primary; 30% secondary).
- Academic interventions, including tutoring, for non-Pupil Premium pupils: 41% (40% primary; 55% secondary).
- Sports equipment: 10% (10% primary; 6% secondary).
- Heating: 5% (5% primary; 10% secondary).
- Canteen/catering: 8% (8% primary; 10% secondary).
- Building costs/repairs: 4% (5% primary; 6% secondary).
The results also show that 37% of school leaders have stopped offering tutoring to pupils since 2024 because of the withdrawal of government funding for the National Tutoring Programme.
The Sutton Trust is using the survey findings to add weight to its campaign for the real-terms restoration of Pupil Premium funding in June’s Spending Review.
The government delivered Phase 1 of the chancellor’s multi-year Spending Review last term, covering April 2025 to March 2026. Phase 2 of the Spending Review will be delivered in June and will cover at least two years from April 2026 onwards.
Pupil Premium allocations for the 2025/26 financial year stand at £1,515 for FSM Ever 6 primary pupils, £1,075 for FSM Ever 6 secondary students, and £,2630 for looked after and previously looked after children.
However, the Sutton Trust says the value in real-terms of the Pupil Premium has fallen by 20% since 2014/15 and it is also calling for the national funding formula to be reformed to “ensure schools facing the highest needs have adequate funding”.
Nick Harrison, CEO of the Sutton Trust, said: “State schools are overwhelmed with financial pressures, and many are rapidly heading towards breaking point. This is having a devastating impact on their ability to provide the support that the most disadvantaged pupils need, with almost half of secondary school leaders forced to use funding intended for poorer pupils to plug budget holes.
“If action isn’t taken, we’ll be failing the next generation. School funding must be protected in the forthcoming Spending Review if the government is serious about breaking down barriers to opportunity. Urgent action is needed, starting with carefully targeted measures to rebalance funding towards schools in the most deprived areas.”
Responding to the findings this week, Chris Paterson, co-CEO of the Education Endowment Foundation, said the findings were “a stark reminder” of the financial struggles facing many schools.
He added: “The Pupil Premium is one of the most effective tools we have to improve education equity in England – but only when it’s used as intended. It’s deeply worrying that some schools feel they have no option but to use this funding to cover general budget shortfalls. Schools must be properly funded and supported so they can protect the impact of the Pupil Premium.”
Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “No school leader wants to be in the position of losing teachers or support staff, but the financial situation facing schools and colleges has seldom been as grim as it is right now.
“Time and again schools are faced with increased costs but without the funding necessary to cover those costs. The latest example is the grant that is supposed to cover the increase to employer National Insurance contributions but which is seriously short in many cases – by tens of thousands of pounds.
“And the government is set to make the situation even worse by its proposal to implement a teachers’ pay award for 2025/26 without the funding necessary to enable schools to afford those costs. Its suggestion that this can be funded by further ‘efficiencies’ is for the birds. All possible ‘efficiencies’ were exhausted long ago and it is now just a synonym for cuts.
“The government must put this right. First, by ensuring that the teachers’ pay award is both fair and fully funded. Second, by making education a strategic priority in the multi-year Spending Review.”
- DfE: Guidance: Pupil Premium: allocations and conditions of grant 2025 to 2026, April 2025: www.gov.uk/government/publications/pupil-premium-allocations-and-conditions-of-grant-2025-to-2026