The £2,690 Most Adoptive Parents Have Never Heard Of
- David Church
- Jul 20
- 4 min read
When my own child was adopted, I sat down expecting the school to raise Pupil Premium Plus with me. Thirteen years as a Deputy Head, and I knew exactly what it was, what it was worth, and what it should be funding. Nobody mentioned it. I had to ask.
If a former senior leader has to be the one to bring it up, what happens to every parent who doesn't know the term exists?
That question has stayed with me longer than almost anything else since founding Braythorpe.
Both sides of the same conversation
I've sat in plenty of school meetings from the other chair too, as the Deputy Head explaining funding to a family. Both chairs teach you something the other one doesn't.
From the school side, you learn that most staff genuinely want to get this right, and that funding rules are dense enough to trip up even conscientious people. From the parent side, even a well-informed one, you learn that nobody hands you a manual. Unless you already know to ask, you find out what you're entitled to by accident, or you don't find out at all.
Pupil Premium Plus sits right in that gap. It's one of the most significant entitlements attached to an adopted or looked-after child, and one of the least understood, on either side of the gate.
What it actually is
For 2026–27, Pupil Premium Plus is worth £2,690 per pupil, for every child who is currently or was previously in care, from Reception through to Year 11. That includes children adopted from care, and those under a special guardianship or child arrangements order.
It exists because the evidence is consistent: early adversity, placement instability and developmental trauma shape how a child learns, and closing that gap takes more than good intentions. It isn't a top-up. It's roughly double what a child on standard Pupil Premium receives.
Once a child is adopted, the legal category changes from looked-after to previously looked-after, and with it, some of the structure falls away. There's no more statutory Personal Education Plan. No Virtual School quality-assuring termly targets. The money still follows the child, but the scaffolding that used to hold schools accountable for spending it well doesn't follow in the same way.
That's the exact point where things start to drift. Not through anyone acting in bad faith. Through nobody being quite sure whose job it is to ask the question.
The myth I heard most often as a Deputy Head
"Pupil Premium Plus is for catching kids up academically."
I heard some version of that in more budget conversations than I can count. It isn't true, and it's an expensive misunderstanding when it goes unchallenged.
The DfE's own spending framework has three tiers, aligned with the EEF's tiered model. High-quality teaching. Targeted academic support. And a third tier, named just as explicitly as the other two, for non-academic barriers: attendance, behaviour, and social and emotional wellbeing. SEMH provision and therapeutic support sit inside that third tier, not outside the rules.
The actual condition isn't that spending has to look academic. It's that it has to be evidence-informed and linked to a child's educational outcomes. A child who's anxious every morning and can't settle by first break isn't accessing the curriculum any better than one who's behind on phonics. Both are barriers to learning. Only one of them tends to get funded without a fight.
The other question I get from parents
"Now she's adopted, does the funding just stop?"
No. That's the myth I hear most from the other chair, the parent chair. The entitlement doesn't end at adoption. What changes is who's watching it.
While a child is in care, funding runs through the Virtual School Head and is tied to that termly Personal Education Plan. Once adopted, it goes straight to the school, and there's no equivalent statutory document forcing a regular conversation about how it's being used. The school still has to spend it on that individual child's needs. Nobody is required to check in with you about it in the same structured way.
That's not a loophole. It's a genuine gap in the system, and it's exactly where a parent asking the right question does the most good.
What's worth asking
Not as a challenge. As the plain, direct version of a conversation most schools are glad to have, once someone starts it.
What does our Pupil Premium Plus strategy actually look like for my child specifically, not the wider cohort?
How much of the £2,690 has been allocated this year, and to what?
Is any of it going toward emotional or therapeutic support, or is it being treated as academic-only?
If my child has an EHCP, how are the SEND budget and PP+ working together rather than overlapping?
Who's the Designated Teacher for looked-after and previously looked-after children here, and can I speak to them directly?
Every school has that Designated Teacher role. It's statutory, not optional, and it's the right door to knock on.
Want the fuller reference to bring into that meeting? Our free guide, Pupil Premium Plus: Facts vs Myths, sets out the DfE rules in full, with every claim sourced and hyperlinked, so you don't have to take our word for any of it.
Both sides have to be in the room
The gap between what this funding can do and what it actually does rarely comes down to bad faith. It comes down to an honest conversation not happening, because nobody quite knew whose job it was to start it.
I've made the call that tells a parent their child needs more support. I've also made the call as a parent, asking a school what's actually being done with the money attached to my own child. Neither chair is comfortable. Both are necessary, and they work far better when the person in each one understands what the other is working with.
If you're not sure how your child's Pupil Premium Plus is being used, or you want to walk into that conversation prepared rather than guessing, a parent consultation can help you get there.
Sources
This article is for general information and isn't legal advice.
Comments