Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years

Published 8 February 2019

Last updated 4 October 2019 - see all updates

There is a new version of this page. View the latest version.

Contents

1. Main facts and figures

• in 2017/18 there were 652,349 pupils at the end of the early years foundation stage, and ethnicity was known for 632,430 (97%) of them
• 73% were White, 11% were Asian, 6% were Mixed, 5% were Black, 5% were from the Other ethnic group and 0.5% were Chinese
• 70% of all pupils achieved at least the expected standard in development
• in the broad ethnic groups, Chinese pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard
• in the more specific ethnic groups, pupils of Indian ethnicity were most likely to meet the expected standard
• pupils of all ethnicities eligible for free school meals (FSM) were less likely to meet the expected standard than non-eligible pupils
• in all ethnic groups, boys were less likely to meet the expected standard than girls

Things you need to know

Local authorities in England must collect and report the results for all state-funded pupils at the end of the early years foundation stage (EYFS), when pupils are usually 5 years old.

Results are reported for pupils at maintained schools (including academies) and private, voluntary and independent settings.

The data does not include pupils whose education is not paid for by the government.

Schools complete each child's early years foundation stage profile (EYFSP) during the summer term of the academic year in which the child reaches age 5, unless the child:

• has an exemption from the Secretary of State for Education
• is continuing in EYFS provision beyond the year in which they turn 5
• has recently arrived from abroad and so an accurate and valid assessment cannot be completed
• has spent a long time away from schooling, for example because of illness or medical treatment

The percentage achieving at least the expected standard in all development goals includes all pupils except those who are exempt.

Figures for some ethnic groups at the local authority level are very small, so these should be interpreted carefully.

In the analysis ‘Attainment of development goals, by ethnicity, gender and local authority’, figures for all ethnic groups except White and Mixed are based on small numbers of pupils and are highly variable over time.

What the data measures

This data measures the percentage of pupils who met the expected standard in development at the end of the early years foundation stage in England.

The early years foundation stage profile (EYFSP) is an assessment by teachers of pupils’s development at the end of the school year in which the pupils turn 5. Development is assessed against 17 measures (‘early learning goals’) in 7 areas of learning.

This data covers the academic year 2017/18 (September 2017 to July 2018).

Data was collected from about 652,349 pupils.

Percentages are the number of pupils who met the expected standard in development from a particular ethnic group out of the total number of pupils in that particular ethnic group (not including pupils who are exempt).

The ethnic categories used in this data

This data uses categories from the Department for Education’s school census, which is broadly based on the 2001 Census, with 3 exceptions:

• Travellers of Irish Heritage and Gypsy/Roma pupils have been separated into 2 categories
• Sri Lankan has been added to the Asian/Asian British group but is not reported separately
• Chinese pupils have been assigned a separate category

These changes were made after consultations with local authorities and lobby groups.

The categories in the school census are as follows:

White:

• White British
• White Irish
• Traveller of Irish Heritage
• Gypsy/Roma
• Other White

Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups:

• White and Black Caribbean
• White and Black African
• White and Asian
• Other Mixed background

Asian/Asian British:

• Indian
• Pakistani
• Bangladeshi
• Sri Lankan
• Other Asian background

Black/African/Caribbean/Black British:

• Black African
• Black Caribbean
• Other Black background

Chinese

Other ethnic group

Information is provided for both detailed and broad ethnic groups categories where possible and when the data is available. The 6 broad categories used are:

• Asian/Asian British
• Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
• Chinese
• Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
• White
• Other ethnic group

However, local authority data is only provided for 5 broad ethnic groups. Information about the specific ethnic categories is excluded to preserve confidentiality and ensure individuals cannot be identified. Information about the Other ethnic group is not given because DfE does not publish data for this group at these levels.

The 5 broad categories are:

• Asian/Asian British
• Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
• Chinese
• Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
• White

2. By ethnicity

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development, and total number of pupils, by ethnicity

Ethnicity	%	All pupils
All	70	652,349
Asian	68	69,154
Bangladeshi	66	10,271
Indian	77	20,190
Pakistani	63	27,076
Asian other	69	11,617
Black	68	32,342
Black African	69	22,099
Black Caribbean	67	5,659
Black other	67	4,584
Chinese	76	3,278
Mixed	72	41,621
Mixed White/Asian	74	10,288
Mixed White/Black African	72	5,683
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	68	9,973
Mixed other	72	15,677
White	71	473,998
White British	72	424,179
White Irish	74	1,598
Gypsy/Roma	33	2,024
Irish Traveller	31	591
White other	64	45,606
Other	62	12,037

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity Summary

This data shows that:

• overall, 70% of pupils met the expected standard in development in the early years foundation stage in 2017/18
• pupils from the Indian ethnic group were most likely to meet the expected standard at 77%
• Travellers of Irish Heritage pupils were least likely to meet the expected standard at 31%
• pupils performing better than the national average of 70% include those from the Chinese group (76%), Mixed White and Asian, and White Irish ethnic groups (both at 74%); and those from White British, Mixed White and Black African and Other Mixed backgrounds (all at 72%)

3. By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development by ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals (FSM)

	All other pupils		FSM eligible
Ethnicity	All other pupils %	All other pupils Pupils	FSM eligible %	FSM eligible Pupils
All	73	565,159	55	87,190
Asian
Bangladeshi	67	8,802	59	1,469
Indian	77	19,484	63	706
Pakistani	63	23,730	58	3,346
Asian other	70	10,427	61	1,190
Black
Black African	70	17,743	63	4,356
Black Caribbean	69	4,144	64	1,515
Black other	68	3,654	60	930
Chinese	77	3,092	62	186
Mixed
Mixed White/Asian	77	8,958	59	1,330
Mixed White/Black African	74	4,534	61	1,149
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	73	7,012	58	2,961
Mixed other	74	13,144	63	2,533
White
White British	75	365,721	53	58,458
White Irish	78	1,383	44	215
Gypsy/Roma	34	1,462	32	562
Irish Traveller	37	301	24	290
White other	65	42,933	55	2,673
Other	63	9,817	56	2,220

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals Summary

In 2017/18 there were 87,190 pupils eligible for FSM in early years foundation stage (13% of pupils).

Eligibility for free school meals (FSM) is used as an indicator of deprivation by the Department for Education. For more about who qualifies for FSM, see Methodology.

This data shows that:

• overall, 55% of pupils who were eligible for free school meals (FSM-eligible) met the expected standard in 2017/18 compared with 73% of non-eligible pupils (a gap of 18 percentage points)
• attainment was lower for FSM-eligible pupils than for non-eligible pupils in all ethnic groups
• Traveller of Irish heritage pupils had the lowest attainment of all FSM-eligible pupils, at 24%
• Black Caribbean pupils had the highest attainment of all FSM-eligible pupils, at 64%
• 44% of White Irish pupils eligible for FSM met the expected standard, compared with 78% of White Irish pupils who were not eligible – a gap of 34 percentage points, the largest of all ethnic groups
• 32% of Gypsy/Roma pupils eligible for FSM met the expected standard compared with 34% of Gypsy/Roma pupils who were not eligible – a gap of 2 percentage points, the smallest of all ethnic groups
• attainment of FSM-eligible pupils was lower than the national average in these groups: White British (53%), White Irish (44%), Gypsy/Roma (32%) and Traveller of Irish Heritage (24%)

4. By ethnicity and area

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development by ethnicity and local authority

Local authority	All	Asian	Black	Chinese	Mixed	White
	Value	Value	Value	Value	Value	Value
All! England	70	68	68	76	72	71
Barking and Dagenham	69	72	70	100	69	67
Barnet	73	78	65	84	75	76
Barnsley	69	82	57		63	70
Bath and North East Somerset	71	63	64		72	72
Bedford	67	63	65	44	67	70
Bexley	75	78	75	77	77	75
Birmingham	66	65	65	60	69	68
Blackburn with Darwen	64	63	73	57	60	66
Blackpool	67	69	50		67	67
Bolton	66	66	54	61	63	68
Bournemouth	76	81			74	77
Bracknell Forest	75	79	75	100	85	74
Bradford	65	64	64		63	67
Brent	69	74	67	100	73	69
Brighton and Hove	72	52	63		71	74
Bristol, City of	68	57	56	71	68	71
Bromley	77	83	69	89	77	77
Buckinghamshire	73	62	67	69	70	76
Bury	70	64	57		74	71
Calderdale	69	57	79	73	74	71
Cambridgeshire	69	68	58	75	69	69
Camden	70	66	61	85	72	74
Central Bedfordshire	72	71	65	100	72	73
Cheshire East	71	71	75	63	70	71
Cheshire West and Chester	71	56	72	38	75	71
City of London	79	75				70
Cornwall	67	56		60	71	67
Coventry	67	70	72	71	63	66
Croydon	72	72	68	71	76	74
Cumbria	69	62		63	70	69
Darlington	71	76	43	100	78	70
Derby	68	67	73	79	74	69
Derbyshire	69	67	81	68	69	70
Devon	71	65		81	67	71
Doncaster	69	68	61	62	72	70
Dorset	70	47	48	50	66	70
Dudley	64	59	43	73	62	66
Durham	71	68		70	74	71
Ealing	71	73	67		78	74
East Riding of Yorkshire	72				73	73
East Sussex	76	71	81	61	77	76
Enfield	68	76	66	76	75	66
Essex	73	74	69	73	76	73
Gateshead	69	75	80	100	63	70
Gloucestershire	68	61	56		65	69
Greenwich	77	77	81	84	79	76
Hackney	69	75	73		82	78
Halton	63				68	63
Hammersmith and Fulham	74	75	71	100	76	80
Hampshire	76	70	77	83	75	77
Haringey	75	72	76	77	77	76
Harrow	72	79	59	74	73	69
Hartlepool	68	65			58	68
Havering	71	74	68		70	71
Herefordshire	74	71			68	75
Hertfordshire	72	69	63	85	75	72
Hillingdon	72	77	69	100	79	69
Hounslow	70	75	66	81	72	70
Isle of Wight	72	79			67	72
Isles of Scilly
Islington	68	68	67		70	69
Kensington and Chelsea	69	61	66		68	75
Kent	74	74	79	83	78	75
Kingston Upon Hull, City of	61	56	67		64	62
Kingston upon Thames	76	68	64	89	80	79
Kirklees	68	62	71	53	66	71
Knowsley	67	52		100	66	68
Lambeth	70	71	67	84	68	76
Lancashire	68	59	63	59	67	70
Leeds	64	59	60	68	66	67
Leicester	64	71	63	65	69	61
Leicestershire	70	73	69	74	71	70
Lewisham	77	74	73	79	81	82
Lincolnshire	68	78	76	70	70	68
Liverpool	65	62	60	65	65	66
Luton	66	68	72	56	68	64
Manchester	65	63	67	71	67	67
Medway	71	69	72	73	70	72
Merton	73	71	67	83	75	74
Middlesbrough	62	60	66	100	64	64
Milton Keynes	72	75	67	77	77	73
Newcastle upon Tyne	70	64	57	85	70	72
Newham	74	75	74	84	78	74
Norfolk	70	69	62	75	68	71
North East Lincolnshire	69	70			69	70
North Lincolnshire	69	71	64		75	69
North Somerset	75	77	43		69	76
North Tyneside	71	66		60	67	72
North Yorkshire	71	64	52		75	72
Northamptonshire	69	66	68	70	71	70
Northumberland	74	73		77	84	74
Nottingham	65	65	68	71	66	66
Nottinghamshire	68	66	69	80	71	69
Oldham	61	52	67	63	62	68
Oxfordshire	72	63	69	83	73	74
Peterborough	63	62	59		68	65
Plymouth	67	72	69	53	68	68
Poole	74	79			72	74
Portsmouth	70	69	64	81	72	71
Reading	69	71	70	100	69	70
Redbridge	74	78	66	70	74	70
Redcar and Cleveland	70	56			81	70
Richmond upon Thames	80	74	61	77	81	83
Rochdale	64	62	58	60	67	66
Rotherham	72	69	63		71	73
Rutland	72	100			70	73
Salford	65	62	68	50	71	68
Sandwell	64	63	63	54	67	66
Sefton	70	59	67		64	70
Sheffield	70	67	73	86	67	71
Shropshire	69	50		55	69	70
Slough	72	76	73		74	64
Solihull	70	69	65	68	61	72
Somerset	71	67	59	60	75	72
South Gloucestershire	76	78	80	83	76	77
South Tyneside	71	51	57	100	73	72
Southampton	70	73	67	83	73	70
Southend!on!Sea	73	76	73	63	71	74
Southwark	74	75	71	84	74	79
St- Helens	68	68			75	68
Staffordshire	74	68	71	72	70	74
Stockport	68	53	62	71	66	71
Stockton!on!Tees	69	56	59	54	70	70
Stoke!on!Trent	64	60	66	79	69	66
Suffolk	70	70	66		71	71
Sunderland	71	57	71	56	78	71
Surrey	78	75	65	86	80	79
Sutton	71	72	69	85	70	71
Swindon	69	72	72		70	69
Tameside	63	59	57	67	68	64
Telford and Wrekin	70	63	70		72	70
Thurrock	73	76	72		75	73
Torbay	70	45			63	70
Tower Hamlets	67	67	64	73	74	69
Trafford	74	68	62	77	77	76
Wakefield	68	57	66		72	68
Walsall	66	66	73		68	66
Waltham Forest	74	74	71	74	78	76
Wandsworth	76	69	69	74	77	81
Warrington	72	74	68	82	70	73
Warwickshire	71	68	68	81	72	72
West Berkshire	74	71	64		80	74
West Sussex	70	68	60	84	71	71
Westminster	71	71	68		77	76
Wigan	67	59	51	67	66	67
Wiltshire	71	68	76		68	72
Windsor and Maidenhead	73	73	65	100	72	75
Wirral	68	65	70	77	65	69
Wokingham	74	74	72	81	75	75
Wolverhampton	66	69	65	65	68	65
Worcestershire	70	57	65	50	69	71
York	74	78	43	57	69	75

Data not collected Data withheld to protect confidentiality

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity and area Summary

This data shows that:

• at local authority level, Asian pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in Rutland (100%) and least likely to meet the standard in Torbay (45%)
• Black pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in Greenwich, Derbyshire and East Sussex (81%) and least likely in Darlington, York, North Somerset and Dudley (43%)
• 100% of Chinese pupils met the expected standard in Middlesbrough, Darlington, Bracknell Forest, Reading, Windsor and Maidenhead, Central Bedfordshire, Knowsley, South Tyneside, Gateshead, Barking and Dagenham, Brent, Hammersmith and Fulham and Hillingdon – they were least likely to meet the standard in Cheshire West and Chester (38%)
• pupils of Mixed ethnicity were most likely to meet the expected standard in Bracknell Forest (85%) and least likely to in Hartlepool (58%)
• White pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in Richmond Upon Thames (83%) and least likely to in Leicester (61%)

5. By ethnicity and gender

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development, and total number of pupils, by ethnicity and gender

	Boys		Girls
Ethnicity	Boys %	Boys All pupils	Girls %	Girls All pupils
All	63	334,079	77	318,270
Asian
Bangladeshi	58	5,180	74	5,091
Indian	70	10,236	84	9,954
Pakistani	55	13,813	71	13,263
Asian other	61	5,930	76	5,687
Black
Black African	61	11,158	77	10,941
Black Caribbean	59	2,861	75	2,798
Black other	59	2,368	75	2,216
Chinese	69	1,683	83	1,595
Mixed
Mixed White/Asian	67	5,288	82	5,000
Mixed White/Black African	65	2,932	79	2,751
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	60	5,133	77	4,840
Mixed other	66	8,044	79	7,633
White
White British	65	217,461	79	206,718
White Irish	68	807	80	791
Gypsy/Roma	28	1,067	40	957
Irish Traveller	23	312	39	279
White other	58	23,487	71	22,119
Other	54	6,193	70	5,844

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity and gender Summary

This data shows that:

• overall, 77% of girls and 63% of boys met the expected standard in development in 2017/18 - a difference of 14 percentage points
• of all groups, Indian girls were most likely to meet the expected standard, at 84%
• Traveller of Irish heritage boys were least likely to meet the expected standard, at 23%
• White British girls (79%) did better than White British boys (65%) – a difference of 14 percentage points
• the smallest attainment gap between girls and boys was between Irish girls (80%) and Irish boys (68%) – a difference of 11 percentage points
• the largest gap in attainment between girls and boys (17 percentage points) was for Mixed White and Black Caribbean (77% of girls met the expected standard and 60% of boys)

6. By ethnicity, gender and eligibility for free school meals

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development by ethnicity, gender and eligibility for free school meals (FSM)

	Boys		Girls
Ethnicity	Boys FSM	Boys Non- FSM	Girls FSM	Girls Non- FSM
All	47	66	64	80
Asian	51	62	68	77
Bangladeshi	53	59	66	76
Indian	55	71	71	84
Pakistani	49	56	68	71
Asian other	52	62	70	77
Black	55	62	71	78
Black African	55	62	71	78
Black Caribbean	55	61	72	77
Black other	51	61	70	76
Chinese	54	70	71	84
Mixed	52	67	69	82
Mixed White/Asian	50	69	68	84
Mixed White/Black African	53	68	70	82
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	49	65	68	81
Mixed other	56	68	70	81
White	45	67	62	81
White British	45	69	62	82
White Irish	36	74	54	83
Gypsy/Roma	23	29	41	39
Irish Traveller	17	30	32	45
White other	49	58	62	72
Other	46	56	65	71

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity, gender and eligibility for free school meals Summary

Eligibility for free school meals (FSM) is used as an indicator of deprivation by the Department for Education. For more about who qualifies for FSM, see Methodology.

This data shows that, for FSM-eligible pupils:

• girls were more likely to meet the expected standard than boys in all ethnic groups
• 17% of boys of White Irish Traveller heritage met the expected standard – the lowest attainment of all eligible pupils
• girls of Black Caribbean ethnicities were most likely to meet the expected standard at 72% compared with all other groups
• the attainment gap between girls and boys was largest for pupils from the Other ethnic group, and Pakistani, and Mixed White and Black Caribbean pupils (19 percentage points), and smallest for Bangladeshi and Other White pupils (13 percentage points)
• 36% of White Irish boys met the expected standard compared with 74% of White Irish boys who were not eligible – a gap of 38 percentage points (larger than for any other group)
• 54% of White Irish girls met the expected standard compared with 83% of White Irish girls who were not eligible – a gap of 29 percentage points (larger than for any other group)
• girls and boys were less likely to meet the expected standard than pupils who were not eligible for free school meals across all ethnic groups, except for Gypsy/Roma girls

7. By ethnicity, gender and area

• Location: England
• Time period: 2017/18
• Source: Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Percentage of early years pupils who met the expected standard in development, by ethnicity, gender and local authority

	All		Asian		Black		Chinese		Mixed		White
Local Authority	All Girls	All Boys	Asian Girls	Asian Boys	Black Girls	Black Boys	Chinese Girls	Chinese Boys	Mixed Girls	Mixed Boys	White Girls	White Boys
North East	78	63	73	54	72	56	84	67	79	65	78	64
County Durham	78	64	83	50	100		75	63	77	73	78	64
Darlington	78	64	81	72				100			78	64
Gateshead	78	61	88	63	81	79	100	100	78	52	78	61
Hartlepool	75	61	71	56	100						76	61
Middlesbrough	73	52	74	46	74	50		100	78	56	73	55
Newcastle upon Tyne	76	64	67	62	69	48			76	63	78	66
North Tyneside	78	65	77	58					75	59	79	65
Northumberland	82	67	85	60			100	57	88	80	83	66
Redcar and Cleveland	78	62							83	78	78	62
South Tyneside	79	63	70	37					78	69	80	64
Stockton!on!Tees	78	61	78	37	70	43			77	65	79	63
Sunderland	77	65	67	51					84	71	77	66
North West	75	60	69	53	72	56	77	59	76	60	76	62
Blackburn with Darwen	72	57	72	55					67	54	74	59
Blackpool	74	60	67	72	50		100		76	57	74	60
Bolton	74	57	73	60	67	42	63	60	76	52	77	59
Bury	75	64	71	58	78	42		100	77	72	76	66
Cheshire East	77	66	78	62	100	57			70	70	77	66
Cheshire West and Chester	78	64	54	57					86	60	78	65
Cumbria	75	63	81	44					82	61	75	63
Halton	71	54							76	60	71	55
Knowsley	74	61				100			68	63	74	62
Lancashire	76	60	67	50	69	56	65	50	75	60	78	62
Liverpool	72	57	72	51	67	54	77	50	68	61	74	59
Manchester	73	57	73	54	75	60	85	59	78	58	73	61
Oldham	69	54	60	44	74	59	77	45	75	48	75	62
Rochdale	71	57	71	52	63	54			72	61	73	59
Salford	74	58	71	53	74	62			79	63	76	61
Sefton	77	63							78	54	77	64
St- Helens	76	60	60	75					81	70	76	60
Stockport	76	62	61	46	71	47			68	64	78	64
Tameside	71	56	62	56	70	43			75	60	72	56
Trafford	81	67	73	64	69	53			90	64	83	70
Warrington	78	66	75	73	73	64	100	57	79	59	79	66
Wigan	76	57	64	47	57	43			71	60	77	58
Wirral	77	60	72	55					76	54	78	60
Yorkshire and the Humber	75	61	71	55	73	56	81	61	76	59	77	62
Barnsley	77	62							80	48	78	62
Bradford	72	58	72	56	75	52			72	53	73	61
Calderdale	75	63	65	50					77	70	77	67
Doncaster	78	61	71	65	58	63			76	70	79	61
East Riding of Yorkshire	77	68		100					74	72	78	68
Kingston Upon Hull, City of	69	54	66	46	76	52			73	56	69	55
Kirklees	75	61	71	54	78	63			73	61	77	65
Leeds	72	57	68	52	68	52	81	55	76	56	74	60
North East Lincolnshire	76	62	80	58					83	60	76	63
North Lincolnshire	78	60	77	63					75	75	79	60
North Yorkshire	79	64	73	52	67	36		100	85	65	79	64
Rotherham	79	64	73	65	76	50			79	63	80	65
Sheffield	77	63	73	60	80	67			76	60	78	65
Wakefield	77	59	67	48	77	53			83	59	77	60
York	81	67	88	65		43			86	58	82	68
East Midlands	76	61	76	62	75	60	81	64	78	63	76	62
Derby	77	59	77	59	85	61			84	65	79	59
Derbyshire	77	61	77	55					76	61	78	62
Leicester	73	56	77	65	73	52			76	62	71	51
Leicestershire	77	64	84	64	78	62			81	62	76	64
Lincolnshire	75	61							74	66	75	61
Northamptonshire	77	62	71	60	75	60	69	71	79	64	78	62
Nottingham	71	59	71	59	74	62			74	60	70	61
Nottinghamshire	76	61	74	60	72	65			78	63	77	62
Rutland	76	69							100	50	78	69
West Midlands	76	61	74	58	74	58	75	58	77	59	77	63
Birmingham	73	59	73	58	74	57	67	55	75	63	75	61
Coventry	74	61	79	62	78	66	70	71	72	56	73	60
Dudley	73	56	69	51	53	33			76	50	75	59
Herefordshire	81	67							75	62	82	68
Sandwell	72	56	71	56	71	55	71	36	78	56	73	58
Shropshire	78	61	62	38					76	59	78	62
Solihull	78	63	77	64			73	64	73	50	79	64
Staffordshire	82	66	81	56	83	63	73	71	81	62	82	67
Stoke!on!Trent	73	56	73	48	77	56			81	54	74	59
Telford and Wrekin	77	63	70	57	71	69			80	63	78	64
Walsall	73	60	73	61	78	68			79	58	73	59
Warwickshire	78	64	81	58	73	63	86	67	82	62	79	65
Wolverhampton	73	59	76	63	74	57			76	62	72	58
Worcestershire	79	62	71	46	71	59			79	61	79	63
East of England	78	64	76	61	76	57	83	73	80	65	79	65
Bedford	73	62	67	58	77	51			79	56	75	66
Cambridgeshire	77	61	81	55	73	42			78	61	77	62
Central Bedfordshire	80	65	76	69	74	51			78	66	80	66
Essex	80	66	85	64	79	58	70	75	82	69	80	67
Hertfordshire	78	65	75	62	70	56	88	83	83	67	79	66
Luton	75	58	75	62	81	62			78	60	77	52
Norfolk	78	63	80	62	68	55			78	59	78	63
Peterborough	72	56	69	56	76	42	100		72	63	74	56
Southend!on!Sea	80	66	81	68	71	75			81	62	81	67
Suffolk	77	63	76	63	72	58			77	66	78	64
Thurrock	81	65	82	70	81	64	100		80	70	81	65
Inner London	79	66	79	64	79	62	84	81	82	69	83	72
Camden	77	63	74	58	73	51			85	55	77	71
City of London	89	65
Hackney	75	63	81	69	80	65		100	86	78	84	72
Hammersmith and Fulham	80	68	80	71	79	62			83	67	85	76
Haringey	82	68	80	62	84	68			86	69	82	71
Islington	76	61	77	60	78	54			77	64	76	63
Kensington and Chelsea	74	65	75	36	68	64			77	61	81	70
Lambeth	77	64	76	65	75	60			73	63	82	71
Lewisham	84	71	80	68	82	64	88	71	85	76	89	76
Newham	81	67	82	68	82	67			81	75	84	65
Southwark	81	67	84	66	79	63	82	87	84	65	84	75
Tower Hamlets	74	60	75	60	71	56	71	75	77	70	75	63
Wandsworth	81	70	75	63	77	61			82	72	86	76
Westminster	78	64	78	63	77	61	100		85	69	81	71
Outer London	80	66	82	69	78	62	89	77	83	69	80	67
Barking and Dagenham	76	62	79	65	78	63			73	66	74	60
Barnet	81	66	86	69	76	56	88	81	84	65	83	69
Bexley	83	68	86	71	84	67	87	68	78	76	83	68
Brent	75	63	81	68	74	61	100	100	78	69	76	62
Bromley	83	70	87	80	79	61	91	88	84	70	83	71
Croydon	80	64	81	64	77	60	84	50	83	67	83	65
Ealing	78	65	78	69	71	63	100		88	69	82	66
Enfield	76	61	82	70	78	57			82	70	74	59
Greenwich	84	71	83	71	87	75	88	81	86	71	82	70
Harrow	79	67	84	73	59	58			85	62	76	62
Havering	77	64	85	65	78	57			75	64	77	65
Hillingdon	80	64	84	69	77	60	100	100	86	73	78	61
Hounslow	77	63	83	67	77	54			79	67	76	63
Kingston upon Thames	81	72	69	66	61	66			85	76	84	74
Merton	79	66	78	65	74	59			82	68	80	68
Redbridge	81	67	85	72	75	59	67	71	84	65	76	65
Richmond upon Thames	86	75	81	66	73	52			89	71	87	79
Sutton	78	64	81	62	82	59	92	74	75	65	77	65
Waltham Forest	81	68	82	65	81	62	82	60	81	74	82	71
South East	81	67	78	64	78	63	91	74	82	68	81	68
Bracknell Forest	82	68	87	72	83	65	100	100	91	79	81	68
Brighton and Hove	79	64	63	44	63	63	100		78	63	82	66
Buckinghamshire	80	66	72	52	77	55	100	50	78	64	82	69
East Sussex	82	70	80	63	83	78	100	42	82	72	82	71
Hampshire	83	69	78	61	82	72	88	79	80	70	83	70
Isle of Wight	79	65							75	56	80	65
Kent	81	68	82	66	85	72			84	73	81	68
Medway	79	64	77	59	81	66			79	61	79	64
Milton Keynes	80	65	84	65	75	60			86	69	80	67
Oxfordshire	79	66	69	57	81	55	86	80	81	65	80	69
Portsmouth	77	63	75	62	67	59			84	64	78	64
Reading	77	60	78	63	79	62	100	100	80	58	78	61
Slough	79	65	83	70	86	59			79	69	72	57
Southampton	79	62	78	67	71	60	100	57	87	61	80	62
Surrey	84	72	81	69	70	60			86	73	85	73
West Berkshire	81	68	80	64					88	68	80	69
West Sussex	78	63	76	60	70	50			81	63	78	64
Windsor and Maidenhead	79	67	77	67					81	65	81	69
Wokingham	80	69	79	70	77	68			83	68	81	69
South West	77	63	75	58	70	53	80	71	77	63	78	64
Bath and North East Somerset	77	65	69	58				100	75	67	78	66
Bournemouth	84	68	91	69				100	78	71	85	70
Bristol, City of	74	62	66	46	64	50	69	72	72	63	77	66
Cornwall	75	59	50	63					74	68	75	60
Devon	79	64	80	52	100				76	60	79	64
Dorset	77	63	58	42	43	56			71	62	78	63
Gloucestershire	75	62	72	51	73	45			75	57	75	63
Isles of Scilly		100										100
North Somerset	80	69							74	65	81	70
Plymouth	74	60							85	51	74	61
Poole	81	67	84	74		100		100	85	64	81	67
Somerset	78	64	81	53	60	58			83	68	79	65
South Gloucestershire	82	71	81	75	89	71			80	72	82	71
Swindon	77	62	78	66	77	65	100		74	66	77	61
Torbay	78	62									78	63
Wiltshire	80	63	78	54	82	66			83	58	80	64

Data not collected Data withheld to protect confidentiality

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary of Attainment of development goals by children aged 4 to 5 years By ethnicity, gender and area Summary

Please note that the statistics quoted for all ethnic groups except White and Mixed are based on small numbers of pupils and are highly variable over time.

This data shows that:

• overall, girls were more likely to meet the expected standard than boys in every local authority
• White girls were more likely to meet the expected standard than White boys in all local authorities – the largest attainment gap was in Luton where 52% of boys and 77% of girls met the expected standard (a gap of 25 percentage points); the smallest gap (6 percentage points) was in Camden where 71% of boys and 77% of girls met the expected standard
• Asian girls did better than Asian boys in 133 out of 137 local authorities where data were available – the largest gap (41 percentage points) was in Stockton-on-Tees and the smallest gap was in Warrington (2 percentage points)
• Black girls did better than Black boys in 105 out of 110 local authorities where data were available – the largest gap (43 percentage points) was in Cheshire East and the smallest gap was in Brighton and Hove (no difference)
• Chinese girls did better than Chinese boys in 28 out of 40 local authorities where data were available – the largest gap (58 percentage points) was in East Sussex, and the smallest gap was in Bracknell Forest, Brent, Gateshead, Hillingdon and Reading (all no difference between boys and girls)
• girls of Mixed ethnicity did better than boys of Mixed ethnicity in 145 out of 147 local authorities where data were available – the largest gap (50 percentage points) was in Rutland and the smallest gap was in North Lincolnshire and Cheshire East (both no difference)

8. Methodology

The early years foundation stage profile (EYFSP) is an assessment by teachers of pupils’s development. Pupils are assessed at the end of the school year in which they turn 5.

The EYFSP dataset is a statutory annual collection of child-level data from all local authorities in England, which runs from June to the end of August.

In the 2017/18 EYFSP collection, valid results for 652,400 pupils were reported.

Ethnicity isn’t collected as part of the EYFSP collection so the EYFSP attainment data is matched to data on the National Pupil Database (NPD) to get information broken down by ethnic group. The NPD is linked to the school census, which provides information on ethnicity.

There were discrepancies between the two sets of data. Of the 652,400 pupils for whom valid results were reported in the EYFSP dataset, 652,349 were found in the NPD. Of these 652,349 pupils, ethnicity was not found for 19,919 pupils (3%).

A new profile was introduced in September 2012. The first assessments using the new profile took place in summer 2013, so comparisons cannot be made with profile results from before 2013.

Pupils are included in the figures for free school meals (FSM) if their families have claimed eligibility for FSM at the time of the annual spring school census. This FSM definition includes all who were eligible to receive FSM, not only those who actually received FSM. Pupils not eligible for FSM or unclassified pupils are described as ‘non-FSM’ or ‘all other pupils’.

Parents are able to claim FSM if they receive a qualifying benefit. FSM is used as an indicator of disadvantage, but when drawing conclusions, it should be remembered that not all eligible parents apply for FSM. Families who don’t quite reach the eligibility threshold for FSM may still be suffering deprivation.

Suppression rules and disclosure control

Values of 1 or 2 or percentages based on 1 or 2 pupils are suppressed. Where the publication of certain figures may lead to a suppressed figure being revealed, these figures will also be suppressed. This is consistent with DfE’s statistical policy statement on confidentiality (PDF opens in a new window or tab) (PDF) .

Regional eligible pupil figures are rounded to the nearest 10 so that it is not possible to derive figures for these local authorities by adding up the figures for the other local authorities in the region. The Code of Practice for Official Statistics requires DfE to take reasonable steps to ensure that their published or disseminated statistics protect confidentiality.

For more information about DfE’s disclosure control procedures for its statistical releases please see DfE’s statistical policy statement on confidentiality (PDF opens in a new window or tab) (PDF) .

Rounding

Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Related publications

Statistics: early years foundation stage profile – includes previous years' data.

Quality and methodology information

9. Data sources

Source

Early years foundation stage profile results: 2017 to 2018

Type of data

Administrative data

Type of statistic

National Statistics

Publisher

Department for Education

Publication frequency

Yearly

Purpose of data source

The early years foundation stage profile (EYFSP) supports pupils's transition to key stage 1 (KS1). It should improve professional dialogue between EYFS and KS1 teachers, helping teachers to plan an effective, responsive and appropriate curriculum to meet the needs of all pupils.

The profile also informs parents or carers about their child’s development against early learning goals.

10. Download the data

Early learning goals- national - Spreadsheet (csv) 23 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, gender, FSM eligibility, value and denominator.

Early learning goals- local authority - Spreadsheet (csv) 630 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, geography, gender, value, denominator, value notes and geography name.

Publication release date: 8 February 2019

Updated: 4 October 2019

full page history

1. 4 October 2019 Updated the symbology in the local authority data dimensions and download file to be consistent with our style guide
2. 14 May 2019 Some headings have been changed. No data or commentary has been updated.
3. 1 April 2019 Updated labels in the charts and tables, added description for search engines
4. 8 February 2019 Updated with new data

From: Department for Education

Previous edition:

1. 2 March 2018

---

Share this page

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn