Child Poverty Strategic Partnerships

1 - The response meets elements of the partnership needs but raises concerns across several significant areas. There are reservations because the response shows:

Some misunderstandings of the partnership needs, and a low level of information and detail provided. It provides insufficient confidence that the potential partner’s proposal will meet and deliver the partnership needs.

2 - The response broadly meets what is expected for the partnership needs, but there are some areas of concern. The response therefore shows:

A reasonable understanding of the partnership needs with an acceptable level of information and detail provided. It provides reasonable confidence that the potential partner’s proposal will meet and deliver the partnership needs.

3 - The response meets what is expected for the partnership needs in all material respects, with no areas of concern. The response therefore shows:

A good understanding of the partnership needs, and a good level of information and detail provided. It provides good confidence that the potential partner’s proposal will meet and deliver the partnership needs.

4 - The response exceeds many aspects of the partnership needs. There are no areas of concern. The response therefore shows:

A very good understanding of the partnership needs, and very good level of information and detail provided. It provides a high degree of confidence that the potential partner’s proposal will meet and deliver the partnership needs. The response goes beyond partnership needs in some areas with evidence of added value beyond what was expected.

In addition, the following criteria will be considered when scoring responses:

Acceptability: Alignment with Child Poverty Strategy

Practicability: Feasibility of partnership

Effectiveness: Expected impact

Side effects / safety: Alignment with DHSC policy

Innovation: Level of ambition

Political alignment: Alignment with political priorities

Background and Scope

Child poverty in the UK has increased by 700,000 since 2010/11, with 4 million children now living in poverty and 1 million having used foodbanks within the last 12 months . Tackling child poverty is central to this government’s mission to remove barriers to opportunity and raise the healthiest generation of children ever. Our Children, Our Future: Tackling Child Poverty Strategy (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/our-children-our-future-tackling-child-poverty) sets out immediate actions to reduce poverty and the long-term foundations needed to change its trajectory. As part of the Strategy, DHSC has committed to explore how industry and government can better work together to address the health impacts of child poverty (page 92).

Scale of the problem:

Child poverty is a wider determinant of health and can be a risk factor for worse physical and mental health outcomes , Evidence shows that exposure to poverty during childhood is associated with worse physical and mental health outcomes .

These health inequalities may manifest differently throughout pregnancy, the early years, middle childhood and adolescence:

• Pregnancy: Health behaviours and risks often begin before pregnancy . Poverty increases the risk of low birth weight and infant mortality.
• Early years (0-5 years): At ages four and five years, obesity prevalence and tooth decay are strongly linked to deprivation. Children on free school meals are less likely to be school ready at age five years.
• Middle childhood (5-11 years): Children from less affluent families are least likely to be active . By age 10-11 years, children in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to be obese
• Adolescence (11-18 years): Risky health behaviours often begin during adolescence.

Poverty is usually measured at individual or household level whereas deprivation uses area-based measures (typically using the Index of Multiple Deprivation). Inequalities in health outcomes can be measured in different ways. In some cases, health and poverty metrics data are not measured

together, so other measures like area-based deprivation or the family’s socioeconomic status are used. While area-based deprivation metrics can help identify need, they do not capture all children experiencing poverty. This work therefore focuses on children living in poverty across England, regardless of location.

We have heard from young people, parents and wider stakeholders through early market engagement exercises that:

• Poverty has an impact on ability to access healthy food, affordable transport, housing quality and lack of outdoor spaces that support physical activity.
• Financial, job insecurity, and debt pressures can place additional stress on families experiencing poverty.
• There is limited access to learning opportunities and education for families in poverty, as well as low health literacy and awareness, which can act as barriers to health improvement.

We are looking for scalable solutions that address the wider determinants of health associated with child poverty. Solutions should focus on:

• Mitigating impacts of the cost-of-living crisis, to enable families to live healthy lives and make healthy choices. This includes equitable access to affordable and nutritious food, cooking equipment, leisure activities and transport.
• Adequate mental health, education and developmental support provision, including addressing stigma, raising awareness of existing support and eligibility. Educational and developmental support could include life skills such as cooking and diet, budgeting and financial literacy.

Following the market engagement event hosted by DHSC on Wednesday 15 April 2026, this notice is an invitation to submit a proposal to collaborate with DHSC and contribute to innovative, impactful solutions to improve the health of children living in poverty. Please complete questionnaire to submit a proposal: https://forms.office.com/e/SnUJi1QCJF

Whilst this engagement focuses specifically on the wider determinants of health associated with child poverty, opportunities to support the broader Children and Young People (CYP) health agenda are expected via the CYP Modern Service Framework (MSF), which is being developed by NHS England. The CYP MSF is intended to support the NHS and system partners, including public health and local government, to ensure all children receive timely, high-quality care and support when they need it, while improving performance and efficiency across the health system. Engagement relating to the CYP MSF will be conducted by NHSE and does not form part of this market engagement exercise.