Australia site →
Global tax-deductible giving →
Addressing the Learning Crisis Keeping Millions of Children Trapped in Poverty
According to the World Bank, up to nine in ten children in the world's poorest countries turn ten unable to read a simple sentence, a problem researchers call learning poverty. This report shows where the crisis is worst, what actually works to address it, and where your donation can make the greatest difference.
TL;DR
Scale: Learning poverty is overwhelmingly concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, where it approaches or exceeds 90% in the poorest countries. Critically, for most affected countries the dominant failure is one of quality rather than access: the majority of children are enrolled but leave school without foundational reading and numeracy skills.
Neglectedness: Basic and primary education in low-income countries, the level most directly linked to foundational learning, is both the most underfunded relative to need and the most exposed to the current wave of aid reductions. Philanthropy cannot substitute for official development assistance at scale, but it can catalyze rigorously evaluated, under-resourced approaches.
Solvability: These challenges are solvable. The evidence base is strongest for foundational learning interventions: structured pedagogy and targeted instruction consistently deliver large learning gains and are the most cost-effective interventions available.
Expert Consultation: Consulted education specialists across Sub-Saharan Africa converged on primary education and early childhood development as top funding priorities, and on structured pedagogy, sustained teacher coaching, and targeted instruction as the interventions worth backing most. Data systems and broader systems strengthening were also highlighted as high-value investment areas, alongside a call for respectful philanthropy: funding should align with governments' own national education priorities rather than external agendas.
Portfolio & Growth: Our current portfolio already centers on evidence-based interventions like structured pedagogy and targeted instruction, delivered through organizations embedded in government systems. Early childhood development and pre-primary, and non-formal education for older youth remain under-covered relative to need and are active areas for growth through 2028, contingent on identifying interventions that meet our evidence and cost-effectiveness thresholds. We will also monitor developments in technology-enabled education, both as an access lever and a learning accelerator.
Access is Not Enough. Many Children Are Enrolled in School But Not Learning.
For decades, international progress on education was measured primarily through enrollment and completion rates. Between 2000 and 2015, developing countries registered dramatic increases in primary enrollment, yet learning outcomes barely improved.
Learning poverty, instead, focuses on education outcomes. Reading is used as the proxy skill because it is the foundational competency on which all subsequent learning depends: a child who cannot read with comprehension by age 10 is at substantially higher risk of dropping out before completing secondary school and of entering adulthood without the skills needed for productive employment.
The consequences of learning poverty reach well beyond literacy. The Life You Can Save treats poverty as multidimensional, and education sits at its center: each additional year of schooling raises earnings by roughly 9%; improving how much children learn has six times the GDP impact of simply expanding enrollment; and maternal literacy is linked to a 67% reduction in child mortality across more than 50 low- and middle-income countries.
For most children across Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia today, the real problem is not whether they are enrolled, but whether school translates into a skill that lasts. We investigated both the access crisis, in which children never reach a classroom, and the quality crisis, in which children are enrolled yet leave without basic literacy. For most countries covered in our research, the quality crisis is by far the larger one.
In Low-Income Countries, an estimated 90% of Children are in Learning Poverty
Learning poverty is the World Bank and UNESCO's measure of children who cannot read and understand a simple text by age ten, whether because they are enrolled but not learning, or out of school entirely. It is the clearest lens available for seeing past enrollment numbers to what is actually happening in classrooms.
A crisis that is heavily concentrated in the world's poorest countries and was made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic
Before the pandemic, 90.4% of children in low-income countries could not read with comprehension by age ten, against just 8.6% in high-income countries. Post-pandemic estimates point to a deterioration of the indicator across all income levels. Lower-middle-income countries saw the steepest rise of any group, climbing more than 15 percentage points to roughly 77%.
These are 2022 simulations built on a 2019 baseline; no more recent globally comparable measurement is currently available, so the real 2026 picture may be better or worse than what is shown here.
Learning poverty rate by income group
Out-of-school rates are highest in the poorest countries, and compound the picture
In low-income countries, around 20% of primary-age children are out of school entirely, rising to 33% at lower-secondary age and 48% at upper-secondary age. Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia together account for 75% of the world's out-of-school population.
Overview on out-of-school population by region and education level
Where the crisis is worst
Sub-Saharan Africa carries the heaviest burden of any region, with a pre-pandemic learning poverty rate of roughly 86%, estimated to have risen to around 89% since. The report's country-by-country typology makes a sharper point than the regional averages alone: for most countries, the dominant failure is a quality crisis, not an access one. A smaller number, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Niger, Mali, and Chad, face a severe combined access-and-quality crisis, where large numbers of children never reach a classroom at all.
Wealth and geography as education exclusion predictors within the countries
National averages also obscure who is hit hardest. Wealth is the single strongest predictor of educational exclusion: in low-income countries, for every 100 children from the richest households who complete upper secondary school, only 13 children from the poorest households do. Geography compounds this further: for every 100 urban youth who complete upper secondary school, only 30 rural youth do.
For every 100 children from the richest households who complete upper secondary school, only 13 from the poorest households do
Boys and girls experience learning poverty differently
Gender adds a further layer: boys are, on average, somewhat more learning-poor, but girls face a steeper access gap later on, especially at the transition into secondary school. In fragile and conflict-affected settings, girls are 2.5 times more likely than boys to be out of school, driven by early marriage, household labor, and safety concerns.
- Because most affected children are already enrolled, the highest-value place for philanthropic funding is inside the school systems that already exist, in proven instructional approaches.
- Rural children, the poorest households, and girls approaching the secondary transition in fragile settings are the ones a national-level funding strategy alone is most likely to miss.
A $97 Billion Gap, and International Aid Is Being Cut Further
The annual financing gap to meet global education goals, Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4), in low- and lower-middle-income countries stands at $97 billion. Sub-Saharan Africa alone accounts for $70 billion of that. Official aid covered only around 13% of the gap in 2024, and that share has fallen further since.
The education aid cuts continue, and domestic budgets cannot make up for them
International aid to education fell 12% in 2024, with a further 14% cut projected by 2027. Three donor countries, Germany, France, and the United States, accounted for 65% of all bilateral education aid in 2023, and announced U.S. cuts are reshaping the landscape. If fully realized, UNICEF estimates 6 million additional children will be out of school by the end of 2026, equivalent to closing every primary school in Germany and Italy combined.
Domestic governments cannot fill this gap. Global education spending has risen steadily over the past decade, but that growth has not translated into meaningful gains per child, especially in poorer countries with growing populations.
Government education spending itself starts from very different bases. Low-income countries spend an average of just $55 per child a year, compared to $8,532 in high-income countries, 155 times more.
Global education aid since 2016 by education level and projections
Funders have a bias towards higher education
The degree of neglect affecting learning poverty is greater than funding figures alone imply, because most of the funding that exists is not targeting primary education. Between 2020 and 2023, higher education absorbed $20 billion in aid compared to $8 billion for primary education, despite primary being where learning poverty is concentrated. A 2023 review found that most major global education funders could not identify a single program demonstrably improving literacy at scale.
Top education sub-sectors targeted by philanthropy and ODA (2020–2023)
Philanthropy cannot replace disappearing aid. It is an order of magnitude smaller than the cuts now underway. What it can do is direct capital toward the specific, evidenced approaches mainstream funding has left underfunded. As the OECD puts it, philanthropy is "not a substitute for ODA, but it can make smaller volumes of public or private resources go further by catalyzing innovation, leveraging additional resources, and promoting locally led solutions." – (OECD, 2026c, p. 167).
Two Extra Years of Learning for Every $100 Spent
Foundational literacy and numeracy is where the education evidence base is strongest. Two families of intervention stand out: structured pedagogy and targeted instruction (most widely implemented as Teaching at the Right Level, TaRL). They are best seen as a continuum. Structured pedagogy is typically most effective in the earliest grades, when children are first learning to read and do basic mathematics, while targeted instruction is especially valuable for children in later grades who have fallen behind the curriculum.
Structured pedagogy
Targeted instruction
The evidence extends further
Beyond structured pedagogy and targeted instruction, four other approaches also show strong results in improving education outcomes:
- 1
Early childhood development and pre-primary programs build the foundation later learning depends on, though the evidence base is less deep than for primary grades.
- 2
Technology-enabled and adaptive learning improves outcomes only when paired with teacher support: EIDU, part of our own portfolio, showed a 0.53 standard deviation gain over 13 months.
- 3
Beyond the classroom, systems-level investments in accountability, community engagement, and data infrastructure are harder to evaluate but widely considered the most durable route to sustainability.
- 4
Finally, access and equity interventions, reaching out-of-school children and keeping marginalized children enrolled, remain essential in fragile settings and for adolescent girls, even where access is not the primary challenge.
Local Experts Reinforce the Case for Foundational Learning
Between May and July 2026, The Life You Can Save's research team surveyed and interviewed 17 education specialists across Sub-Saharan Africa to identify where funding gaps are widest and where philanthropic capital can add the most value. Given the small sample, the findings are qualitative rather than statistically representative, a strong starting point for our own prioritization rather than a broader consensus on education funding.
Primary education ranked highest, chosen by 11 of 13 survey respondents, followed by early childhood development and pre-primary, chosen by 9.
Education sub-sectors with greatest philanthropic added value
On specific interventions, three converged at the top: structured pedagogy, teacher coaching, and targeted instruction. Coaching stood out further in the interviews, described not as a standalone program but as the mechanism that makes the other two actually work: as one interviewee put it, "No effective intervention lacks a solid teacher coaching element." The experts' instincts are borne out independently by the evidence, too: the other two are also the most rigorously tested, cost-effective approaches in the global education evidence base.
Intervention types with greatest philanthropic added value
Philanthropy should work through the systems governments already run, not build parallel structures alongside them. Funding should follow governments' own national priorities rather than an externally set agenda.
A Portfolio Built Around What the Evidence Shows Works
Our current recommendations already include high-impact organizations implementing evidence-based and cost-effective education interventions such as structured pedagogy and targeted instruction. A strength of our portfolio is that all recommended organizations work through or alongside government systems.
| Area | COVERAGE (NO. OF CHARITIES) | Growth Priority |
|---|---|---|
| Foundational Learning | ||
| Level-appropriate instruction (TaRL) | Four | Continue funding foundational learning, with closer monitoring of fidelity and teacher support as programs scale. Early childhood development and pre-primary remain under-covered relative to primary and are a medium priority for expansion. |
| Structured pedagogy | Three | |
| Early childhood / pre-primary | Two | |
| Access & Equity | ||
| Access / Girls education and retention / Out-of-school children | Four | The expert consultation flagged the scale of out-of-school populations as a gap foundational-learning programming alone doesn't reach. Future evaluation of girls' programming should weigh these transition-specific barriers. Technology enabled learning is an area with growth potential in our portfolio, both as an access lever in low-connectivity or teacher-scarce settings, and as a way to accelerate learning where technology genuinely supports rather than substitutes for teaching. No current recommendation covers non-formal education or technical/vocational training for older youth, an active area for growth. School feeding remains a lower priority for expansion. |
| Technology-enabled / adaptive learning | One | |
| School feeding | One | |
| Systems Strengthening | ||
| Government integration & data systems | Seven | A core strength of the portfolio, and the single broadest point of agreement in the expert consultation: philanthropy should work through the systems governments already run. Continue to favor embedded models, and monitor the evidence on what most effectively strengthens data systems. |
Early childhood development and pre-primary are under-covered relative to primary education. No current recommendation covers non-formal education or technical/vocational training for older youth, a gap experts flagged as reflecting historically low funder attention rather than weaker need. Both are active areas of research for 2026–2028.
Our Priorities for 2026-2028
Continue funding foundational learning, and raise the bar on fidelity.
Prioritize organizations embedded in government systems, with a coherent transition plan and data systems.
Monitor the evidence base in ECD, EdTech and AI, and non-formal education/TVET, and expand recommendations where it proves strong.
Your Giving Could Help Save a Child's Future
By supporting organizations recommended by The Life You Can Save, you can ensure that your donation builds systems that can outlast the funding, promotes the development of foundational skills essential for later academic and economic success, and reaches more children in the classroom.
You can give directly to any of these organizations, to our Education Fund, allocated specifically among our recommended education organizations, or to the Maximize Your Impact Fund, which directs capital to wherever our research finds the need and evidence strongest. Since 2013, giving through The Life You Can Save has directed over $140 million to high-impact charities.
Ready to give where it matters most?
For Those Who Want the Complete Picture
This page summarizes the key findings of our education sector strategy review. The full document includes the complete evidence review with citations, funding gap mapping, expert consultation methodology and results, portfolio analysis, and future strategy.