Does deprivation predict school results in London? We ran the numbers
It's one of the most common assumptions in school choice: schools in poorer areas get worse results. We tested it against the data — every London primary school that publishes both a Key Stage 2 result and a free school meals (FSM) figure. FSM eligibility is the standard proxy for deprivation in English education data, and KS2 "expected standard in reading, writing and maths" is the headline attainment measure for primaries. The relationship is real. It is also weaker than most parents assume — and the exceptions are the most interesting schools in London.
What the correlation actually says
Across the schools analysed, the correlation between a school's FSM percentage and its KS2 pass rate is -0.30 — negative, meaning higher deprivation is indeed associated with lower attainment on average. But a correlation of this size explains only 9% of the variation between schools. Put plainly: most of the difference between London primary schools' results is not explained by how deprived their intake is. Leadership, teaching, stability and curriculum account for the rest — which is why two schools a few streets apart, serving similar communities, can post results twenty percentage points apart.
London is also a special case nationally. The capital's schools have, for two decades, achieved better results for disadvantaged pupils than the rest of England — the legacy of sustained investment and improvement programmes in the 2000s. The borough table below shows how that plays out today.
Borough by borough: deprivation and results
Read the two columns against each other and the story is more textured than "rich boroughs win." Several boroughs with well-above-average deprivation post KS2 averages at or above the London mean — the pattern that made "the London effect" famous in education research. Meanwhile some leafier boroughs sit lower in the table than their demographics would predict. The borough you live in constrains your options far less than the specific school does.
The schools breaking the pattern
The strongest version of the argument is individual schools. The list below shows London primaries where at least 40% of pupils are FSM-eligible — roughly double the national rate — and where 80% or more of pupils reached the expected standard in reading, writing and maths combined, comfortably above the national average. These schools are doing something the raw demographics say shouldn't happen.
How to use this when choosing a school
Three practical takeaways. First, don't screen schools by area demographics — the school-level data is free and specific, and the spread within every borough dwarfs the differences between boroughs. Second, look at progress scores alongside attainment: a school with average attainment and strongly positive progress scores is adding more value than a school with high attainment and negative progress. Every school profile on this site shows both. Third, treat single-year percentages with humility — a one-form-entry primary's KS2 figure rests on about 30 children, so small gaps between schools are noise. What you're looking for is a consistent pattern across attainment, progress, and the most recent inspection.
Explore the underlying data yourself: filter any borough by FSM in the school explorer, browse Beating the Odds, or read what FSM and KS2 mean in our glossary.