An evaluation of Rishi Sunak’s £270 million Multiply programme found it successfully engaged thousands of adults who were anxious about maths – but was unable to determine whether their numeracy skills improved. The adult numeracy scheme, launched in 2022, funded maths courses across England that aimed to boost adults’ numeracy skills and earnings prospects. An evaluation published yesterday suggested Multiply was successful at helping 210,000 learners – many new to adult education – overcome their “anxiety about numeracy”. However, the report also admitted that researchers were “unable” to assess how much learners’ numeracy skills improved due to a mid-programme “change in focus” from delivering qualifications to unaccredited learning. It revealed that officials scrapped plans to test some learners before and after courses due to “very low buy-in” from training providers and participating adults. Over the three years the programme ran, the Department for Education (DfE) spent £1.3 million on the evaluation carried out by Verian and the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). It spent a further £5.7 million on a set of six randomised control trials that piloted approaches to adult numeracy teaching, some of which related to Multiply-style courses. Only one of these, aimed at parents with primary school-age children, found a “statistically significant” impact. The evaluation findings came more than a year after the three-year numeracy programme was scrapped by the Labour government in March 2025. DfE officials produced four “internal” interim reports on the programme since 2023, but have refused to share copies with FE Week. The evaluations also come in the same week as the launch of a national adult numeracy campaign by the Richmond Project, a charity set up by Sunak and his wife, Akshata Murty. Positive self-reporting Evaluators found that of the 290,000 total enrolments from the 210,000 learners, 85 per cent would not have happened without the programme. Surveyed learners said they were attracted to the “flexible nature” of the courses, which included embedded numeracy into topics relevant to learners’ work or daily lives such as cooking. Most reported benefits for their confidence, well-being, and employment prospects. A third of learners also reported going on to take another numeracy course and a further 25 per cent a non-numeracy course, with 83 per cent of learners saying their Multiply experience “positively influenced” their decision to continue studying. However, researchers admitted that a “limitation” of their evaluation was the “lack of objective measure” of whether maths skills improved. Objectives changed mid-programme Evaluators blamed the lack of direct evidence of learners getting better at maths on the “change of focus” from qualifications up to level 2 to “short, informal and unintimidating” courses that helped address anxiety about numeracy. This was a “deliberate decision” based on feedback from providers about what was needed to engage new learners. The evaluation was originally supposed to collect data on learners’ progress through short numeracy assessments at the start and end of their course. But these tests reportedly had “very low” buy-in from providers and learners due to the “negative impact” on delivery. Evaluators tried to offer learners incentives directly but decided that the “administrative and monetary cost” of trying to collect this data was not “value for money”. ‘Change people’s lives’ Announcing the programme while chancellor in 2021, Sunak claimed it would “change people’s lives” by addressing what he called “poor” adult maths skills. He allocated £560 million for the UK-wide programme, with £270 million reserved for England. However, its launch suffered a six-month delay to the release of funding in the first year, contributing to a 16 per cent, or £44 million, underspend over the three years. The £94 million website that was supposed to promote the programme, offer learner “diagnostic” and tuition was scrapped, with less than £300,000 spent. Lack of clarity The evaluation also found that employers were “difficult to engage” with the programme. Local areas were positive about the shift towards informal training and tended to feel that the programme was “good value for money” that complemented existing adult education budget provision. However, areas including the Greater London Authority and North East Combined Authority complained about an “absence” of a national communications campaign to promote the programme. Most authorities involved also had major concerns about a “lack of clarity” around funding beyond March 2025, which impacted planning and staff retention. “There was a strong consensus that demand for community-based numeracy support remains high, and that future funding should build on Multiply’s successes rather than allow them to dissipate,” evaluators concluded. Former civil servant Andrew Otty, who worked on the early design of Multiply, said: “Multiply’s goals were to improve adult progression towards level 2 maths achievement, to establish an online platform as an unparalleled resource to engage and support adults with numeracy, and to run a series of randomised controlled trials to test whether the local pockets of existing good practice in adult maths delivery as of 2021 could have been scaled up and replicated nationally. “This evaluation has been published years after the decision was already taken to scrap Multiply and half a decade after the necessary baselining should have taken place. “It consequently sidesteps the most important question around the impact on maths achievement, glosses over the gross failure of civil servants around the online platform, and – along with DfE – misunderstands the original purpose of the RCTs. “It is fantastic to see that local areas and colleges innovated successfully to engage learners and build confidence in maths, but they did so in spite of DfE blockers, and this evaluation provides nothing in the way of transparency and accountability.” The DfE and Rishi Sunak were approached for comment.