All local authorities provided support to schools in relation to the planning and reporting of PEF. This includes providing professional learning, guidance and planning/reporting templates. Whilst around half of local authorities encourage schools to embed PEF planning within their school improvement plans (SIPs), others favour a separate, stand-alone plan. Several have moved from one approach to the other.

Both approaches have reported benefits. For those who favour a separate PEF plan, a more detailed, contextual analysis has helped ensure interventions are appropriately targeted. Where plans are embedded within SIPs, there is evidence that equity is being considered across all improvement activity. This is recognised as having increased importance in terms sustainability beyond the current SAC programme.

The majority of local authorities expect the impact of PEF to be reported within Standards and Quality Reports. However, a minority favour a separate PEF report.

Improvements to the planning and reporting of PEF include more streamlined approaches, more effective use of data and more focused outcomes. Local authority approaches continue to evolve. For example, one local authority has now adopted an approach which aligns PEF planning and reporting with the financial year rather than the academic session. It is expected this will mitigate previous difficulties which resulted in an underspend.

Within their PEF guidance most local authorities provide advice and expectations on engaging with stakeholders as part of planning and reporting. Most also provide guidance on how schools should make their plans and reports available to stakeholders.

Examples of planning and reporting

1. The integration of PEF planning and reporting within the main Standards and Quality Report and improvement plan supports schools to align the use of PEF with wider school improvement aims. It also focuses on providing additionality to achieve these aims for pupils experiencing, or at risk of, poverty.
2. PEF planning was previously woven throughout school improvement plans; a standalone PEF plan was introduced for session 2023-24. The standalone plan has enabled a clearer identification of the rationale for PEF spend and associated intended outcomes and measures while maintaining the link with the overall school improvement plan. Planning has also been streamlined to link more effectively with procurement and finance.
3. The introduction of a standalone PEF impact report allows schools to report specifically on effective use of spend, successful interventions and the impact on the education outcomes of learners.
4. The mid-way reporting period in December allows schools to reflect on impact of PEF plans and adopt contingency planning if expected impact is not being achieved. End of year reporting on spend helps to inform future planning depending on success of projects/interventions.

As part of quality assurance most local authorities described processes for reviewing school planning and reporting. In the majority of examples central officers provided feedback to schools. Around half of local authorities described the important role of the attainment advisor in supporting this process. There are a few examples where attainment advisors have sole responsibility for reviewing plans and reports. In the best examples, collated information is used to inform wider local authority planning and support, including opportunities for collaboration.

Most processes also included proportionate school visits which have a focus on PEF. These are often carried out by central officers in partnership with the attainment advisor. There are also examples of peer headteachers being involved in these visits to share practice and encourage collaboration. The visits provide an opportunity to support and challenge approaches to equity. Where appropriate, follow-up support is often provided by the attainment advisor.

Ensuring a PEF focus during school visits and reviews has increased accountability. Local authorities report that, as a result, there is better identification of children who may be impacted by poverty, more robust contextual analysis and greater consideration of sustainability.

A range of strategies are used by local authorities to help identify poverty-related gaps, monitor pupil progress and track the impact of the Attainment Scotland Fund. These include tracking systems, toolkits, school profiles and ‘excellence and equity workbooks’. Many of these are used by individual establishments and central officers to plan, monitor and review approaches to equity within and across schools. There is evidence that leaders intersect data to more accurately identify poverty-related gaps and individuals impacted by disadvantage. They are also able monitor progress more robustly.

Most local authorities described how financial management processes contribute to the quality assurance of PEF. The role of finance officers who provide regular advice and budget reports has been positively highlighted. In a few examples, schools contribute a proportion of PEF to help fund this support. There is variability in the proportion of PEF contributed.

Guidance is provided around finance, particularly around procurement and several local authorities have developed specific tools to help schools manage PEF budgets. As a result, there has been a reduction in PEF underspend across the country.

Examples of quality assuring plans and reports

1. During the summer break, central officers review school improvement plans. The identified themes for PEF spend are shared with schools, creating opportunities for those with similar priorities to collaborate. Development needs are identified, influencing the professional learning offer and allowing targeted support to be directed appropriately. Best practice is highlighted to ensure the most effective practice is shared across the system. Additional quality assurance takes place in September, providing an opportunity for schools to strengthen their plans following initial feedback from the quality review.
2. Progress towards achieving PEF outcomes forms part of the professional dialogue at school visits. These were originally carried out by the attainment advisor and quality improvement officers. However, in a move towards ensuring a self-improving system, peer headteachers have been involved in these visits since session 2022-23.
3. All schools with significant numbers of learners living in quintile 1 had a one-day review carried out by central officers, headteachers, the attainment advisor and regional improvement collaborative associates. PEF plans and approaches were scrutinised and feedback provided to headteachers. The attainment advisor has visited and engaged with schools to provide advice and guidance.
4. All schools complete a budget plan which they submit alongside their PEF plan. This is completed following discussion with school resource officers. The SAC lead meets termly with the school resource officers to monitor each spend and agree any required actions where there is a risk of any underspend.
5. PEF budget monitoring is facilitated by regular meetings between headteachers and finance department who also provide regular budget monitoring reports. The equity tracker provides central officers with an overview of school interventions, and this is discussed as part of quality improvement visits.

Local authorities have a variety of supports in place to ensure effective use of PEF. Most highlight professional learning as a key approach. Examples include:

• mandatory training for new headteachers in the use of PEF
• sessions on the use of data to identify and address poverty-related gaps
• support with planning and reporting
• professional enquiry programmes focusing on equity

An important aspect of professional learning is often the opportunity to share practice and learn from each other. There is evidence that local authorities also provide similar opportunities through headteacher meetings, the facilitation of various networks and the sharing of case studies.

The provision of written guidance has been recognised as an important element of support within most local authorities. In the best examples, this includes further support resources which have been developed in response to identified needs such as specific toolkits.

The majority of local authorities provided information on how they have encouraged and supported schools to meaningfully involve stakeholders in decision making. Clear expectations are outlined within guidance with some providing direct support to schools, for example, around participatory budgeting. Evidence suggests that there remains variability in how well schools engage stakeholders in decisions around PEF. Parent Councils often play an important role, but it is acknowledged that they are not always representative of the diversity of a school community. There are examples of local authorities working with Chairs of Parent Councils to raise awareness of the impact of poverty. There are other examples where events such as parents evenings are used to gather views from a wider group.

Examples of support provided to schools

1. The induction programme for all newly appointed primary headteachers is mandatory. It includes a training module to equip participants with the necessary skills for effective use of PEF. This covers PEF management, including planning, data analysis, stakeholder consultation, intervention design, and reporting.
2. A network for school SAC leads has been established to support staff with responsibility for PEF. A range of resources, professional learning and opportunities for sharing practice has ensured they are well supported in this role.
3. Every school that accesses PEF is requested to produce a case study to further evidence local impact. A template has been produced as part of the local PEF guidance to support this task. It is envisaged that a local bank of interesting PEF practice examples will be developed that the wider system can access and use to inform PEF plans. This is also an opportunity to celebrate success and showcase how the poverty-related gap is being tackled.
4. Quality lead officers support schools through the continued development of the equity hub. This online resource has everything from policy to practice guidance and case studies regarding every aspect of the ASF. There is a designated online Teams page that ensures that all national and local messaging related to equity can be easily accessed.
5. The education service provides local PEF guidance which is updated annually in line with national policy. Online support materials with information and signposting to national and local resources, professional learning, evidenced-based interventions and links to the Cost of the School Day materials are also available. School leaders have positively referenced using this information during PEF sampling visits.
6. All schools are expected to ensure plans are meaningfully shaped by stakeholders including pupils, parents and community partners. Schools have been supported to increase stakeholder engagement in decision making by the quality improvement officer for equity and the attainment advisor. As a result, the majority of schools have clear strategies and procedures in place to ensure this is meaningful, proportionate and sustainable. There has been a small increase in schools enquiring about the use of participatory budgeting.