Reflection on the 2024-25 DfE Autumn & Spring Absence Data
The latest data from the Department for Education (DfE) on pupil absence in England’s state-funded schools for the combined autumn and spring terms of 2024-25 was published on 23 October 2025.
The figures present a mixed picture. Whilst the overall absence rate and the proportion of pupils who are persistently absent (missing 10 % or more of possible sessions) have improved, the number of severely absent pupils (missing 50 % or more sessions) has increased, signalling a concerning issue.
Importantly, for those working in safeguarding, attendance improvement, and whole-school culture, this dual picture demands attention. Whilst the improvements are encouraging, the ongoing high absence among the most vulnerable pupils presents a serious risk to achievement, well-being and safeguarding.
The key findings of the report reveal:
Overall absence across the two terms was 6.63 % of possible sessions in 2024-25, down from 6.93 % in the same period in 2023-24. However, it should be noted that this rate remains well above pre-pandemic norms (which were consistently under 5 %).
Whilst persistent absence (10 %+ of sessions missed) fell to 17.63 % in 2024-25, a drop from 19.23 % the previous year, severe absence (50 %+ of sessions missed) rose to 2.26 % in 2024-25, up from 2.14 % in 2023-24.
The most common reason for absence remains illness, accounting for 3.38 % of possible sessions in the combined terms.
In alternative provision settings (state-funded alternative provision), absence remains extremely high: around 42.04 % of sessions missed in those settings in 2024-25.
Disparities persist across recorded pupil groups. For example, pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) and those with special educational needs (SEN) continue to have significantly higher absence rates than their peers.
Regionally, the overall absence rate decreased in all regions except London, which recorded a very slight increase; however, London still had the lowest rate overall.
Interpretation: what this means for schools
The reduction in overall absence and persistent absence is a welcome sign. For school leaders, attendance teams and safeguarding leads, it suggests that effort and focus may be translating into improved everyday attendance.
However, the rise in severe absence is a red flag: when pupils are missing half or more of their possible sessions, the risk to their educational progress, emotional well-being and safeguarding increases markedly.
The substantially higher absence rates among disadvantaged and vulnerable groups (FSM, SEN, special schools, alternative provision) underline that attendance remains an equity issue.
The high levels in alternative provision and the growing gap mean schools and local systems must keep a dual focus: improving attendance generally and intervening intensively for the most excluded children.
From a safeguarding perspective, absence is never just a matter of missed lessons. A pupil who is persistently absent or severely absent may be experiencing: underlying health issues, unmet SEN or mental health needs; family or caring responsibilities; exclusion from school culture; or risk factors such as exploitation, neglect or disengagement.
As the severe absence rate rises, the likelihood that these realities lie behind those figures increases. Schools must therefore treat absence data as a trigger for inquiry and support, not only as a performance statistic.
Implications for strategy
Schools should continue to reinforce universal attendance culture (clear communication, parental engagement, early monitoring) as gains in overall attendance and persistent absence show that this works. However, they must implement targeted strategies for those at the highest risk of severe absence, including bespoke support plans, mentoring, flexible pathways, multi-agency work, health/safeguarding monitoring.
Given the high absence in alternative provision (AP), systems working with AP should review entry points, transitions, timetabling, reintegration and attendance frameworks there.
Within policy and planning, schools must ensure that attendance improvement, safeguarding risk assessment and pastoral/well-being support are integrated rather than siloed. Monitoring should track not just attendance rates, but include absence reasons (illness, medical appointments, lateness, holiday (authorised/unauthorised) and patterns (term-on-term changes, transitions, e.g., Year 6 to Year 7, primary to secondary). The data show seasonal and phase patterns: e.g., absence rises from autumn to spring, and increases with age.
Considerations
Given SSS Learning’s work with schools and training practitioners, here are some of our practical reflections and suggestions:
Training: Emphasise the link between attendance and safeguarding. In your courses (e.g., for DSLs, attendance leads, governors), include a module on ‘absence as a safeguarding red-flag’ and explore how to go from data to inquiry.
Governance: For governors /SLT, the data offer a rich context for monitoring: ensure absence figures are reviewed termly with attention to persistent and severe absence, subgroup (FSM, SEN) trends, and how the school’s attendance strategy aligns with safeguarding policy.
Resource design: In producing toolkits or frameworks, include layered tiers of response: universal (whole school strategies), targeted (those with emerging risk) and intensive (at risk of or already severely absent). Use the new data to illustrate risk thresholds.
Equity focus: Resource packages should highlight the disproportionate impact of absence on disadvantaged pupils (FSM, SEN) and encourage staff to embed attendance improvement within inclusion/equity strategies.
Data interpretation training: Provide support for staff to interpret the absence statistics (including reasons, school type differences, and regional variation), and to map them against their own cohorts.
Termly & seasonal planning: The pattern of increasing absence from autumn to spring suggests attendance plans should ramp up or change approach after Christmas/into spring. Workshops or training modules can help staff anticipate and respond to this pattern.
The new DfE figures present both a cause for cautious optimism and a reminder that the attendance challenge remains acute, especially for the most vulnerable pupils. For the education and safeguarding professionals the message is clear.
Continue to embed a strong attendance culture and universal practice, but sharpen focus and capacity for intervention at the point when absence moves from persistent to severe. What is clear from this data is that the front line of attendance improvement is shifting. Whilst fewer pupils miss just a little schooling, more are missing a lot. Our systems must shift accordingly.
SSS Learning
12 November 2025