Unlocking Opportunities for Children in Israel

Report

5 May 2026

4. Child well-being in Israel

Copy link to 4. Child well-being in Israel

Abstract

This chapter analyses child well-being in Israel and its implications for intergenerational social mobility, using a comparative OECD perspective. Grounded in the OECD Child Well-being Measurement Framework, it examines four key dimensions: Material conditions, health, education, and social and emotional well-being, alongside adverse childhood experiences. The chapter finds that child well-being in Israel is highly unequal across population groups. Child poverty is both widespread and persistent, particularly among Haredi and Israeli-Arab children, and the tax-benefit system has limited impact in reducing it. While overall health outcomes are relatively strong, significant disparities persist, especially for Israeli-Arab children. In education, Israel combines below-average performance with wide inequalities, with disadvantaged groups facing poorer outcomes and more difficult school-to-work transitions. Early childhood education participation is high but marked by access and quality challenges. Despite these issues, Israeli children report high life satisfaction, though mental health concerns – especially among girls – are increasing. Overall, the chapter highlights that inequalities in childhood conditions are a key driver of limited social mobility, underscoring the importance of investing in child well-being to improve long-term outcomes and equality of opportunity.

4.1. Introduction

Copy link to 4.1. Introduction

Child well-being is central to social mobility. Childhood is a critical period in life with many of the things that children think, feel, learn and do shaping their development and their prospects and outcomes as adults. It is during childhood that people begin to develop the (cognitive and non-cognitive) skills important for the labour market, for instance, as well the skills and behaviours important for future health, for social connections, and for a range of other well-being outcomes. However, not all children have the opportunity to experience a positive childhood or to develop in ways that prepare them well for adulthood. Sustained support from families, schools, and communities is essential to be able to flourish and thrive. Without it, inequalities in childhood well-being can persist into adulthood.

Child well-being itself is multifaceted and multidimensional (OECD, 2021[1]). It includes many aspects of children’s lives, stretching from the things they have and own to the things they think and feel. Recent work by the OECD set out a multilevel or “ecological” framework for measuring child well-being (The OECD Child Well-being Measurement Framework) (OECD, 2021[1]). At the centre of this framework are children’s well-being outcomes, split into four (interconnected) core areas: material outcomes, health outcomes, cognitive and educational outcomes, and social and emotional outcomes. Each of these areas are interconnected and frequently interact, with functioning and outcomes in one often influencing functioning and outcomes in others (OECD, 2021[1]).

This chapter examines child well-being in Israel and how it compares to other OECD countries. Built largely on data from OECD databases and domestic Israeli sources, it explores how Israel compares on child well-being and how child well-being differs across population groups within Israel. The chapter is structured around the OECD Child Well-being Measurement Framework’s four key outcome areas, starting first with child income poverty and material well-being (Section 4.2), before exploring child health (4.3), education and learning (4.4), and social and emotional well-being (4.5). Section 4.6 focusses on adverse childhood experiences and at-risk children.

The key findings from this chapter are as follows:

Child poverty is high in Israel, especially among the Haredi and Israeli-Arab communities. At 20%, Israel’s child income poverty rate is higher than the OECD average (12%) and one of the highest in the OECD. Children in the Haredi and Israeli-Arab communities are particularly exposed: According to Israel’s National Insurance Institute, which uses slightly different data to the OECD, almost half of Haredi and Israeli-Arab children live in relative income poverty. Poverty risks remain high for Haredi and Israeli-Arab children even when their parents are in paid work: for very young children under age four, 39% of Haredi- and 21% of Israeli-Arab children with two working parents also live in income poverty, compared to 4% of similar-age non-Haredi Jewish children with two working parents. Mirroring their greater exposure to poverty, Israeli-Arab children tend to have access to far fewer material goods and resources than children from the Jewish majority, and are likely to live in more crowded housing.
Israeli tax and transfer policy could do more to reduce income poverty. Israel’s after-tax and transfer child poverty rate is just 3 percentage points (p.p.) lower than its before‑tax and transfer rate (22% and 25%, respectively), much lower than the OECD average difference (7 p.p.). In some other OECD countries with market child poverty rates comparable to Israel (e.g. France, Ireland) tax and transfer policy reduces child poverty by as much as 15‑17 p.p. Israeli tax and transfer poverty is particularly ineffective at reducing poverty in the Israeli-Arab community.
Children’s health outcomes are generally good in Israel, but again differ between population groups. Birth outcomes (e.g. low weight births, infant mortality) have improved markedly in recent decades and in several cases are better than in many other OECD countries. For example, in 2021, infant mortality stood at 2.8 deaths per 1 000 live births, well below the OECD average (4.0 per 1 000). The overweight and obesity rate for adolescents (23%) is similar to the OECD average (22%). However, Israeli-Arab children in particular often fare worse than their Jewish peers. Infant mortality rates for Israeli-Arab children (5.0 per 1 000 live births) are almost three times higher than for Israeli-Jews (1.8 per 1 000), for instance. Overweight and obesity rates are also higher for Israeli-Arab children, especially Israeli-Arab boys (32% at school grades 7‑12, compared to 25% among Jewish boys of the same age).
Participation in early childhood education is high in Israel but the sector faces several challenges, including around staffing. Services for 3‑ to 5‑year‑olds are compulsory and provided free of charge, with enrolment close to 100%. Enrolment rates are lower for 0‑ to 2‑year‑olds (57%) but are still well above the OECD average (36%). As in many OECD countries, participation is lower among children from disadvantaged backgrounds, particularly Israeli-Arab children, in part because Israeli-Arab mothers are less likely to work and subsidies and access are tied to parental employment. Indeed, many Israeli-Arab families struggle to access Isreal’s ECEC fee subsidies, with estimates suggesting just 6% of the subsidy budget goes to Israeli-Arab households. The Israeli Government has taken steps to address the challenges facing ECEC, including through the Ministry of Education’s recently-published five‑year plan. However, several issues remain. Workforce recruitment and retention remains a particularly important challenge, with many services (especially public services) reporting staff shortages, while affordability is also an important issue for many less affluent families.
Israel faces challenges in education, especially concerning Israeli-Arab children. Israel is a below-average performer on international student assessments at both primary and secondary level, and inequalities in education performance are wider in Israel than in almost all other OECD countries. Israeli-Arab children in particular perform poorly: On the OECD PISA test, for example, more than half of Arabic-speaking students are low performers in reading, mathematics, and science, meaning they lack a “basic level of ability” across all three core subjects. This poor performance translates into weaker educational progression and attainment for Israeli-Arab students – 50% of students in Arab-system schools pass the school leaving exam and meet the standard for university entrance, compared to 75% in non-Haredi education – and is reflected in later transitions from school to work: In 2022, 45% of 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds Israeli-Arabs women and 31% of Israeli-Arabs men were NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training), compared to 13% and 17% among their Jewish counterparts. Students in Haredi schools also struggle with educational attainment, with as few as 10% meeting university entrance standards.
Israeli children express some of the strongest subjective well-being in the OECD. While many children in Israel face challenges to their well-being, results from multiple data collections suggest that they are more likely than their peers in many other OECD countries to express happiness and satisfaction with their lives. In 2021-2022, according to data from the Health Behaviour in School-age Children (HBSC) study, 43% of Israeli adolescents expressed high satisfaction with their life at present, the highest share of any participating OECD country, with the rate as high as 41% even among Israeli children from comparatively low socio‑economic status backgrounds. However, in Israel as in other OECD countries, there are growing concerns about the mental health of many young people, especially girls and young women. In 2021-2022, more than two‑thirds of adolescent girls in Israel reported multiple subjective health complaints like headaches, stomach aches, and difficulties getting to sleep – psychosomatic health complaints that can impair functioning and are often used as a non-clinical measure of mental health. This is up from half in both 2013-2014 and 2017-2018.

The overarching main finding from this chapter is that child well-being differs widely between population groups in Israel, with children from the Haredi and especially Israeli-Arab communities falling behind their peers in the non-Haredi majority in almost all well-being areas. This gap in well-being matters for these children now, and it matters for their prospects in later life. As documented in past work by the OECD (OECD, 2018[2]; Clarke et al., 2023[3]), and as discussed throughout this chapter, poor well-being in childhood hampers development and shapes children’s opportunities and outcomes for the rest of their lives. For example, children who grow up in poverty or socio‑economic disadvantage do less well in education and go on to experience weaker employment outcomes, including weaker earnings, as adults (see Section 4.2), as do those who grow up in poor health (Section 4.3). Poor social and emotional development, itself often linked to poor socio‑economic well-being, can have similar lifelong effects, including in shaping later educational, labour market, and health outcomes (Section 4.4). The implication is that poor well-being among children from Israel’s Haredi and Israeli-Arabs communities is likely to be a major driver behind the relatively weak mobility seen among these same groups, and by extension an important factor behind Israel’s comparatively moderate level of intergenerational mobility overall (Chapter 2). Doing more to promote good well-being for all children in Israel, regardless of ethno-religious background, is central to promoting a more mobile society.

Box 4.1. Israel has a large and diverse child population

Copy link to Box 4.1. Israel has a large and diverse child population

Children stand at the centre of life in Israel. Compared to other OECD countries, Israel has a disproportionately young population. It is one of only two OECD countries with a median population age (29) below 30 (United Nations Population Division, 2024[4]), the other being Mexico, and has a larger share of under‑15‑year‑olds in the population (28%) than any other OECD country (OECD, 2023[5]). Indeed, at 2.6 million, Israel has roughly twice as many under‑15‑year‑olds as countries like Austria, Greece and Switzerland (all 1.3 million) despite similar size total populations (9.4 million in Israel, compared to 9.1 million in Austria, 10.0 million in Greece, and 8.9 million in Switzerland) (United Nations Population Division, 2024[4]).

Israel’s child population is diverse, reflecting the diversity of the country as a whole. The majority (73%) of the child (0‑ to 14‑year‑old) population are Jewish (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 2.3). Roughly 20% of the child population live in the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) community, and about 50% in non-Haredi Jewish communities. Just under one‑quarter (24%) of the 0‑ to 14‑year‑old population are Israeli-Arab, slightly higher the Arab share of the total population (21%). The large majority (90%) of the Israeli-Arab child population are Muslim, with small Druze (6%) and Christian (5%) minorities.

Israel’s comparatively young population is the product of sustained high fertility from across its population groups. In 2021, Israel’s total fertility rate – the number of children expected to be born to a woman over her lifetime – stood at 3.0 children per woman. This was almost twice the OECD average for the same year (1.6 children per woman) (OECD, 2024[7]). Fertility has historically been higher for women in the Israeli-Arab communities than for Jewish Israelis, but this gap has closed and even reversed slightly in recent years: in 2022, the total fertility rate for Israeli-Jews stood at 3.03, compared to 2.75 among Israeli-Arabs (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2023[8]). Much of the increase in fertility in the Jewish communities has been driven by exceptionally high fertility among the Haredim. The total fertility rate for Haredi women has remained close to 7 children per woman since the 1980s, with recent estimates placing it at 6.4 children per woman in 2020-2022 (Weinreb, Chernichovsky and Brill, 2018[9]; IDI, 2023[10]).

While there have been changes in recent decades, traditional family structures remain more common in Israel than in many other OECD countries (Sorek and Konstantinov, 2021[11]). Fewer than 10% of children are born outside of marriage (OECD, 2024[7]), compared to 42% on average across OECD countries, and single parenthood, while growing, remains comparatively rare. In 2022, just under 90% of children in Israel lived in two‑parent families (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 2.69). Families are also much larger in Israel than in many OECD countries, with slightly under two‑thirds of children (63%) living in households with three or more children (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 2.69). Like the majority of OECD countries, most households are one‑family households, both in the Jewish (97%) and the Israeli-Arab communities (94%), see Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 2.69.

4.2. Child income poverty and material well-being

Copy link to 4.2. Child income poverty and material well-being

Income and material resources play a crucial role in helping children flourish and thrive. While far from all that is needed for development, children who grow up in poverty or socio‑economic disadvantage tend to fare worse than their more affluent peers in practically all areas of well-being (Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]). Children from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to do worse in education. For instance, they often score lower on cognitive and non-cognitive skills tests and frequently leave education earlier than their better-off peers (OECD, 2023[13]; Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]). They also experience poorer health (Patton et al., 2016[14]) and poorer social and emotional well-being, among other gaps (Inchley, 2018[15]; OECD, 2019[16]; Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]).

These early inequalities shape children’s opportunities and outcomes for the rest of their lives. Due in part to its impact on early health and skill development, child poverty and disadvantage puts limits on the social and economic pathways open to children and increases the likelihood of adverse outcomes through adulthood. Indeed, the literature on intergenerational mobility shows how frequently adults who grew up in disadvantaged households end up in disadvantaged positions themselves (see Chapter 2). Adult outcomes potentially affected by early poverty and disadvantage include employment and earnings, health, and the transition to adulthood (Box 4.2).

Child poverty is high in Israel, especially in the Haredi and Israeli-Arab communities

Israel is a comparatively wealthy society but inequality and poverty are high (OECD, 2024[17]; Endeweld et al., 2023[18]). Despite having fallen slightly through the mid- to late‑2010s, child income poverty remains common, especially when compared to other OECD countries. In 2022, 22% of children (0‑ to 17‑year‑olds) in Israel were living in relative income poverty – down slightly from a peak of 26% in 2015 but still well above the OECD average (12%), and more than four times the rate in the OECD’s best performers like Denmark (5%) and Finland (4%), see Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1. Many children in Israel grow up in income poverty
Copy link to Figure 4.1. Many children in Israel grow up in income poverty

Child (0‑ to 17‑year‑old) relative income poverty rates, OECD countries, 2022 or latest available year

Box 4.2. Child poverty leaves its mark on later employment, health and social outcomes

Copy link to Box 4.2. Child poverty leaves its mark on later employment, health and social outcomes

Labour market outcomes are one area in which childhood poverty and disadvantage can leave long-lasting scars. Numerous studies document how children who grow up in poverty or in disadvantaged households go on to experience weaker employment outcomes, including weaker earnings, as adults (Blanden, Hansen and Machin, 2008[20]; Blanden, Hansen and Machin, 2010[21]; Duncan et al., 2011[22]; Lesner, 2017[23]; Bellani and Bia, 2018[24]; Clarke et al., 2023[3]). Notably, Flores et al. (2020[25]) find that the negative association between childhood socio-economic disadvantage and labour market outcomes strengthens over the life cycle, as any advantage gained from leaving education and entering work earlier by those from disadvantaged backgrounds is increasingly negated by higher unemployment risks and weaker career and earnings progression.

Data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), a multi-country survey covering populations aged 50 and over, show that adults who grew up in disadvantaged households are substantially less likely to attain high-skill employment during their “prime” working years than those who had more advantaged childhoods (Figure 4.2). In Israel, the gap in the likelihood of attaining high-skill employment (13 p.p.) is well below the OECD‑22 average (27 p.p.). This is due in large part to exceptionally strong high-skill attainment among non-Israeli-Arabs who had disadvantaged childhoods (53%). Israeli-Arabs who had disadvantaged childhoods are substantially less likely to attain high-skill employment over their prime working years (32%).

Figure 4.2. Adults who had disadvantaged childhoods are less likely ever to attain high-skill employment
Copy link to Figure 4.2. Adults who had disadvantaged childhoods are less likely ever to attain high-skill employment

Percentage ever attaining high-skill employment by childhood socio‑economic status, 55+ year-olds, OECD and OECD accession countries, 2017

Health is another area in which early disadvantage can have long-run effects. Many studies show that adults who grew up in poor or socio‑economically disadvantaged households frequently experience worse health than those from more advantaged backgrounds (Case, Lubotsky and Paxson, 2002[26]; Case, Fertig and Paxson, 2005[27]; Flores and Kalwij, 2014[28]; Flores and Wolfe, 2023[29]; Arpino, Gumà and Julià, 2018[30]). Recent work by the OECD, drawing on multi-country data from Europe, suggests that working-age adults who experienced socio‑economic disadvantage in childhood report worse health equivalent on average to a two‑week per year reduction in time lived in full health without limitation (Clarke et al., 2023[3]). Notably, links between childhood socio‑economic status and later health are often stronger for women than for men (Flores and Kalwij, 2014[28]; Clarke et al., 2023[3]).

Childhood poverty and disadvantage can leave its mark on a range of other adult outcomes. Early disadvantage may affect the pace and timing of transitions to adulthood, for example, including moving away from the parental home, into partnerships, and into parenthood (Vauhkonen et al., 2017[31]; Billari, Hiekel and Liefbroer, 2019[32]; Lesner, 2017[23]). Some authors also point to links between child poverty and later anti-social outcomes, including, for instance crime in the United States (McLaughlin and Rank, 2018[33]), although others (e.g. Duncan et al. (2011[22])) suggest links are less clear cut once after adjusting for other factors, including birth cohort, sex, race, and a range of family and parent characteristics.

Poverty risks differ sharply across Israel’s population groups (Shay, 2022[34]; Navon and Bowers, 2023[35]; Endeweld et al., 2023[18]), mirroring differences in their prospects in education and employment (Chapter 2). According to data from Israel’s National Insurance Institute (NII), 47% of Haredi children and 48% of Israeli-Arab children live in relative income poverty, compared to 13% in the non-Haredi majority (Figure 4.1). Poverty is also deeper for poor Israeli-Arab children than for poor Haredim and non-Haredi Jew children, in that their incomes are on average further from the poverty line (Navon and Bowers, 2023[35]). Child poverty is particularly high in Arab-majority East Jerusalem (Kosher, 2015[36]).

As in other OECD countries (OECD, 2024[7]), having one and especially two working parents helps protect children against poverty (Endeweld et al., 2023[18]), but less so in the Haredi and Israeli-Arab communities. Among very young children under age four, 39% of Haredi- and 21% of Israeli-Arab children with two working parents are also living in income poverty, compared to 4% of non-Haredi Jewish children of the same age. Haredi and Israeli-Arab children are also at greater risk of poverty than non-Haredi children when they have only one working parent (Navon and Bowers, 2023[35]). This likely reflects the lower wages commanded in the labour market by Haredi and Israeli-Arab men and women relative to their non-Haredi peers (Fuchs and Weiss, 2018[37]).

Also as in other OECD countries, children in larger households are at greater risk of poverty than children in smaller households (Endeweld et al., 2023[18]; Navon and Bowers, 2023[35]). Larger households have more members to support than smaller ones and despite (assumed) economies of scale they more often struggle to provide all members with above‑poverty-level resources. Data from the NII suggest that almost half (45%) of Israeli children in families with four or more children are living in income poverty, compared to 17% of children in families with one to three children (Endeweld et al., 2023[18]). Family size is likely one factor contributing to heightened poverty risks for children in the Haredi community: focussing on very young children under age five, Navon and Bowers (2023[35]) find that together with household employment status and household education status, the number of children in the household is one of the main factors explaining the gap in the likelihood of poverty between Haredi and non-Haredi children.

Child income poverty reflects both the distribution of market income and the extent to which public tax and transfer policy redistributes that income. Compared to many other OECD countries, Israeli tax and transfer policy does relatively little to protect children from poverty: Israel’s after-tax and transfer child poverty rate is 3 p.p. lower than its before‑tax and transfer (market) rate (22% and 25%, respectively), compared to an OECD average difference of 7 p.p. (Figure 4.3). Several other OECD countries with similar or higher market poverty rates do much more to reduce child poverty, including New Zealand (a reduction of 11 p.p., from 24% to 14%), Ireland (a reduction of 17 p.p., from 25% to 8%) and the United Kingdom (a reduction of 18 p.p., from 31% to 14%). All three of these countries operate strongly targeted (often means-tested) social benefit systems that direct a disproportionate share of public cash transfers towards households at the bottom end of the income distribution (OECD, 2024[38]). Israel’s benefit system, in contrast, provides relatively similar supports to households across the income distribution.

Figure 4.3. Israeli tax and transfer policy does relatively little to protect children from poverty
Copy link to Figure 4.3. Israeli tax and transfer policy does relatively little to protect children from poverty

Child relative income poverty rates (%), before and after tax and transfer, 0‑ to 17‑year‑olds, 2022 or latest available

Israeli tax and transfer policy is moreover not equally effective at reducing poverty across population groups (Lewin and Stier, 2002[39]; Shalev and Lazarus, 2016[40]). Looking at all households generally (rather than children specifically), data from the NII suggest that in 2021, poverty rates for non-Haredi households almost halved (‑49%) following receipt of taxes and transfers, while rates for Haredi households fell by only slightly more than a third (‑38%) and for Israeli-Arab households by less than a quarter (‑23%) (Endeweld et al., 2023[18]). In proportional terms, Israeli tax and transfer policy is more than twice as effective at tackling poverty among non-Haredi households than among Israeli-Arab households. Navon and Bowers (2023[35]) find similar disparities when looking at pre‑ and post-tax and transfer poverty risks for very young children under age four. Household size is one reason why tax and transfer policy is more effective for some population groups than for others, especially for the Haredim: the large size of many Haredi households means that benefits and transfers often have to split between a greater number of people (Shalev and Lazarus, 2016[40]; Navon and Bowers, 2023[35]).

Despite high income poverty, Israel performs similar to the OECD average at ensuring children have access to material goods and resources, albeit again with large differences between population groups. The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment’s (OECD PISA) Home Possessions Scale is an aggregate scale measuring 15‑year‑old students’ access to material goods based on their responses to questions about items in their home (Figure 4.4). Scores across the Israeli sample as a whole are similar to the OECD average, and even towards the bottom of the distribution (the 10th percentile) students in Israel have access to only slightly fewer resources than the average across OECD countries. Findings from a similar scale in the Children’s Worlds (ISCIWeB) survey point in the same direction: on average, children in Israel have access to a similar number of material items as children in Finland, and access to more items than children in countries including Belgium, Germany, Italy and Spain (Savahl, Lee and Casas, 2022[41]). However, as with income poverty, Israeli-Arab children tend to be at a substantial disadvantage compared to children in the Jewish majority. Results based on the OECD PISA Home Possessions Scale suggest that Hebrew-speaking 15‑year‑olds in Israel tend to have access to substantially more material resources than Arabic-speaking 15‑year‑olds, especially at the bottom end of their respective distributions (Figure 4.2). Jewish households tend also to be less crowded than Arab ones: in 2022, 83% of Jewish households had one person per room or fewer, compared to only 44% of Arab households (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 20.14).

Figure 4.4. Despite high poverty, Israel does relatively well in ensuring most children have access to material goods and resources
Copy link to Figure 4.4. Despite high poverty, Israel does relatively well in ensuring most children have access to material goods and resources

PISA home possessions scale, 15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, by main language spoken at home (Israel only), 2022

4.3. Child health

Copy link to 4.3. Child health

Child health, like child poverty, can have important and long-lasting effects on many aspects of children’s lives. Most immediately, child health shares a clear link with later adult health. People who experienced poor health in childhood are more likely to also experience poor health in adulthood (Blackwell, Hayward and Crimmins, 2001[42]; Case, Fertig and Paxson, 2005[27]; Currie et al., 2010[43]; Flores and Wolfe, 2023[29]), in part because many health conditions have precursors that commonly emerge in childhood (Forrest and Riley, 2004[44]). Indeed, some adult health conditions can be predicted by child health status as early as at birth (Risnes et al., 2011[45]). Data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) suggest that current 55+ year-olds are considerably more likely to report having experienced multiple periods of ill health over their adult lifetime if they also had poor health in childhood (Figure 4.5). In Israel, 55+ year-olds who experienced poor health in childhood (8.2%) are approximately three times as likely as those who experienced strong health in childhood (2.8%) to report multiple periods of ill health over their adult lifetime. This gap is a larger gap than the OECD‑22 average (6.4% and 2.8%, respectively).

Figure 4.5. People who experience poor health as children are more likely to experience poor health as adults
Copy link to Figure 4.5. People who experience poor health as children are more likely to experience poor health as adults

Percentage having ever had at least two periods of ill health by childhood health status, 55+ year-olds, OECD and OECD accession countries, 2017

In part because of its links with later health (Currie et al., 2010[43]), child health can also impact a range of other later social and economic outcomes, including education, employment, and earnings. Children who experience poor health go on to perform less well in education (Case, Fertig and Paxson, 2005[27]; Currie et al., 2010[43]) and less well in the labour market as adults (Currie, 2016[46]; Flores and Wolfe, 2022[47]). Again, these links are present even when child health is measured as early as at birth (Currie et al., 2010[43]; Currie, 2016[46]). Flores and Wolfe (2022[47]) find that the labour market impact of adverse early health is often greater for men than for women and that men with childhood mental health problems are at particular risk of poor later labour market outcomes.

All children regardless of background can experience poor health but children from disadvantaged socio‑economic backgrounds are at particular risk (Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]). Inequalities in child health develop as early as pregnancy and are compounded by poorer health resources across childhood. The prevalence of some infectious diseases, for example, is related to household living conditions, environmental health, hygiene and nutrition behaviours, all of which can be linked to family socio‑economic status (Spencer et al., 2019[48]). Similarly, there can be geographic disparities in health status and determinants, sometimes linked to the spatial and/or community-level concentration of disadvantage. Socio‑economic disadvantage also weakens families’ capacities to tackle and mitigate child poor health, should it occur. For example, at least for women, Flores and Wolfe (2022[47]) find that higher parental socio‑economic status can help buffer children from the impact of poor child health and later labour market outcomes. In other words, socio‑economic advantage may not only protect children from poor health but also help them overcome it where it occurs.

Child health outcomes are good in Israel but again vary across population groups

Israel performs comparatively well on infant and child health, albeit again with considerable differences between population groups.

Birth outcomes have improved markedly in Israel in recent decades (Kosher, 2015[36]) and in several cases are better than in many other OECD countries (Kosher, 2015[36]; Rubin et al., 2017[49]). In 2021, infant mortality stood at 2.8 deaths per 1 000 live births, well below the OECD average (4.0 per 1 000), see Figure 4.6. At 7.0%, the share of births that are low weight was slightly higher than the OECD average (6.4%) but lower than in several other major economies, including France (7.3%), Japan (9.4%), and the United States (8.5%) (OECD, 2024[50]). However, differences between population groups remain large (Figure 4.6). Outcomes for children in the Jewish majority are very good: at 1.8 deaths per 1 000 live births in 2020‑2021, infant mortality rates for Israeli-Jews are close to the OECD’s best performers, Japan and Norway (1.7). While still better than the OECD’s poorest performers, infant mortality rates for Israeli-Arabs are far higher at 5.0 deaths per 1 000 live births. Rubin et al. (2017[49])suggest the difference is driven by higher rates of congenital malformations and inherited diseases among Arab infants.

Figure 4.6. Infant mortality is low in Israel but varies across groups
Copy link to Figure 4.6. Infant mortality is low in Israel but varies across groups

Infant mortality rates, by population group (Israel only), OECD countries, 2021 or latest available

Similar to many other OECD countries (OECD, 2019[16]), overweight and obesity represents an increasingly important public health concern for Israeli children. In 2023, just under three‑quarters (22.7%) of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑olds in Israel were overweight or obese based on self-reported height and weight, slightly above the OECD average (22.3%), see OECD (2024[51]), indicator HTH_OVWT. Rates of overweight tend to be higher among children from disadvantaged backgrounds (Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]), and Israel is no exception. In Israel, prevalence is highest among Israeli-Arabs with gaps visible as early as age 7: in 2022, approximately 10% of Israeli-Arab 7‑year‑olds were obese, compared to 9% of non-Haredi 7‑year‑olds, and 6% of Haredi 7‑year‑olds (Margalit, 2024[52]). By age 14‑15, rates for Israeli-Arabs had risen to 20% for boys and 13% for girls, compared to 13% and 11% for non-Haredi boys and girls, respectively (Margalit, 2024[52]). Children in some population groups are also disproportionately likely to experience nutritional deficiencies. Rubin et al. (2017[49]) point out that despite progress, stunting remains particularly prevalent among the Bedouin-Arab population in southern Israel.

Overweight and obesity can be linked in part to regular exercise. In 2021‑2022, as few as 12.8% of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑olds in Israel reported engaging in at least 60 minutes of daily moderate‑to-vigorous physical activity (OECD (2024[51]), indicator HTH_DEXE) – the WHO-recommended daily activity for children in middle childhood and adolescence (WHO, 2024[53]). This was the third lowest share among OECD countries with available data, after only Italy and Lithuania. As in many other OECD countries, Israeli children from disadvantaged background were particularly unlikely to meet the WHO-recommended level of daily activity (OECD (2024[51]), indicator HTH_DEXE).

Self-rated health is a self-reported summary measure that reflects how children think and feel about their health as a whole. Isreal compares well on self-rated health: in 2023, just over half (52%) of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑olds in Israel rated their own health as “excellent”, the highest share in the OECD (OECD (2024[51]), indicator HTH_SRHLA). Israeli boys (56%) are more likely than Israeli girls (48%) to rate their health as “excellent”, mirroring similar gender differences in most other OECD countries. Notably, children in Israeli-Arab communities were also more likely than children in Jewish communities to report excellent self-rated health: in 2019, 64% of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑old Israeli-Arabs rated their health as “excellent”, compared to 52% of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑old Israeli-Jews, with the share of Israeli-Arab children self-reporting excellent health increasing over time (Harel-Fisch et al., 2020[54]).

4.4. Education and learning

Copy link to 4.4. Education and learning

Education plays a strong role in shaping children’s outcomes and opportunities in life. The things that children learn and achieve at school and the skills they develop throughout childhood strongly affect their later opportunities in the labour market. Children who do better in education go on to enjoy greater employment stability and higher earnings (Oreopoulos and Salvanes, 2011[55]; OECD, 2024[38]), possibly to an increasing extent over time on account of widening skill differentials in wages (Gunderson and Oreopolous, 2020[56]). However, the benefits of education extend far beyond just the labour market. Better education is associated with other beneficial outcomes including lower crime perpetration (Lochner, 2011[57]), better health (Oreopoulos and Salvanes, 2011[55]; Raghupathi and Raghupathi, 2020[58]), lower probability of separation or divorce (Oreopoulos and Salvanes, 2011[55]), greater social trust (Helliwell and Putnam, 1999[59]), and greater civic participation (Dee, 2020[60]), among other things.

As with many areas of child well-being, family background plays a key role in shaping children’s chances in education (Blanden, Doepke and Stuhler, 2022[61]; Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]). Gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged children are apparent in (emergent) cognitive skills even before children start compulsory school (OECD, 2020[62]) and persist as they move through the education system (Mullis et al., 2023[63]; OECD, 2023[13]). Similar socio‑economic gaps are visible in non-cognitive skills too, including creative thinking (OECD, 2024[64]). Mechanisms are multiple but include the greater parental investments (in time and money), better-quality schooling, and more favourable peer and neighbourhood environments typically enjoyed by children from more advantaged backgrounds (Blanden, Doepke and Stuhler, 2022[61]).

Participation in early childhood education is high in Israel but the sector faces several challenges, particularly around staffing

Like many OECD countries, Israel operates a split early childhood education and care (ECEC) system with separate facilities catering to very young children under three and slightly older children between three and school age. All children aged 3‑5 are legally entitled to a place in pre‑primary education (kindergarten) for a minimum of 35 hours per week. Attendance is free of charge and has been compulsory since 2012. Children between 3 months and 3 years of age also hold a legal entitlement to ECEC, with admission to over-subscribed services assessed against priority criteria. Provision for children under three is dominated by supervised daycare centres, with a minority receiving care in recognised home care settings (Shay, 2022[34]). Services may be publicly or privately organised. Parents pay fees but can receive means-tested support that varies with child age, household composition, family income, and parent’s work hours (OECD, 2024[65]). Both parents must work at least 24 hours per week or be studying to receive any support. The overall cost of childcare is moderate by OECD standards as long as parents can access supervised services and fee supports: for low-earning working families, as a proportion of the average wage, the net out-of-pocket cost for two children (age 2 and 3) in Israel (11%) is similar to the OECD average (11%) but higher than the OECD’s better performers like Germany (1%) and Sweden (5%) (OECD, 2023[66]).

Participation in ECEC is comparatively high in Israel, especially among children between 3 and 5 years old (Figure 4.7). Enrolment rates for 3‑ to 5‑year‑olds are close to 100%. Estimates for younger children are uncertain because of the use of informal or unsupervised settings, but rates are likely well above the OECD average (Figure 4.7). According to data collected for OECD Education at a Glance (OECD, 2024[67]), in 2020, 57% of 0‑ to 2‑year‑olds in Israel were enrolled in ECEC settings, compared to an OECD average of 36%.

As is common in OECD countries (OECD, 2023[66]), ECEC participation rates are lower among children from disadvantaged socio‑economic backgrounds. Precise estimates are again uncertain but participation is likely particularly low for Israeli-Arab children: according to data collated by the Taub Center, 0‑ to 2‑year‑olds living in Israeli-Arab municipalities are approximately two‑thirds as likely to attend supervised settings as those living in non-Haredi municipalities (Shay, 2022[34]). Israeli-Arab children also report spending fewer years in ECEC settings than Israeli-Jewish children, in large part because they join at a later age (Shay, 2022[34]). One major reason is that only a minority of Israel-Arab households are entitled to fee support, in part because support is tied to having two parents either in paid work or study and parental employment (especially maternal employment) is comparatively low in Israeli-Arab families. Estimates by Gabriel Gordon (Gordon, 2024[68]) suggests that just 26% of Israel-Arab households with children under three are eligible for support, compared to 28% of non-Haredi households, who are more often excluded due to high income, and 70% of Haredi households, who often qualify by having one parent engaged in paid work and one in study. Even when they do work sufficient hours to qualify, low earnings among Israeli-Arab parents mean that many may struggle to afford fees even after receipt of government support (Shay, 2022[34]). Moreover, supply shortages in Israeli-Arab communities means that only 18% of eligible Israeli-Arab households have children in state‑supervised centres, compared to 38% of eligible Haredi households and 52% of eligible non-Haredi households (Gordon, 2024[68]). In total, Gordon estimates that just 6% of the total fee support budget goes to Israeli-Arab households, with 39% going to non-Haredi households and 55% to Haredi households.

Figure 4.7. ECEC participation rates are high in Israel, especially for children aged 3‑5
Copy link to Figure 4.7. ECEC participation rates are high in Israel, especially for children aged 3‑5

Percent of children aged between 0 and 2 enrolled in ECEC services and per cent of children aged between 3 and 5 enrolled pre‑primary education and primary schools, 2020 or latest available

Similar to many OECD countries (OECD, 2019[69]), Israeli ECEC services face challenges in workforce recruitment and retention (Blank and Silverman, 2023[70]). Like elsewhere, low wages, a lack of status and public recognition, and limited opportunities for professional development mean that careers in ECEC are often seen as unattractive. In Israel, workforce shortages are particularly acute in (but not isolated to) public services, where wages are lower than in private centres (Blank and Silverman, 2023[70]). Although not fully representative, data collected through snowball methods by Blank and Silverman suggest that more than half of private centre workers and three‑quarters of public service workers may work in centres that are short on staff at least one day per week (Blank and Silverman, 2023[70]). Demand for ECEC staff is likely to only sharpen going forward, given Israel’s large and growing child population and strong ECEC participation rates.

Partly for reasons relating to staffing and recruitment, some commentators also express concern about the quality of Israel’s ECEC services (Vaknin, 2020[71]; Vaknin and Shavit, 2021[72]; Blank and Silverman, 2023[70]). This applies to services for children from both Jewish and Israeli-Arab backgrounds. OECD work on quality in ECEC stresses both structural quality (e.g. staff qualifications, group size) and process quality (e.g. pedagogy, child-staff interactions) as central to children’s learning and development (OECD, 2021[73]). Evidence from the OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) Starting Strong 2018 suggests that relative to several other OECD countries, ECEC services in Israel perform only moderately on several indicators of structural quality, including child-to-staff ratios and staff qualifications (OECD, 2019[74]). Staff in daycare centres for children under age 3 are particularly likely to hold only low-level qualifications.

The Israeli Government has taken steps to address several of the challenges facing ECEC. As a share of GDP, public spending on ECEC has increased by just under 10% in the last decade (OECD Family Database), and since 2014, the government has invested well over NIS 1.3 billion (USD 360 million) in the construction of daycare settings (Shay, 2022[34]). In January 2022, supervisory responsibility for daycare centres was transferred from the Ministry of Welfare and Social Affairs to the Ministry of Education, and in 2023 the ministry issued a five‑year ECEC plan to improve the availability, affordability and quality of ECEC services. Measures outlined in the plan include a new tax credit for working parents with children under age three, the allocation of a further NIS 2.2 billion (USD 610 million) for the construction of public daycare centres, and various measures aimed at improving structure and process quality, including staff training programmes and a reduction in child-to-staff ratios. While positive steps, some commentators suggest government action on ECEC could go further (Blank and Silverman, 2023[70]). In particular, as Blank and Silverman point out, the five‑year plan contains only limited measures to attract and retain workers and address workforce shortages.

Education performance is poor in Israel, especially for disadvantaged groups

Israel faces challenges in education (OECD, 2018[75]). Relative to other OECD countries, Israeli students perform comparatively poorly on international student assessments both at primary and secondary level. Israel scores below almost all other participating OECD countries on the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), which assesses student performance on reading and mathematics respectively at around age 10, and is a bottom-half performer on the three core subjects (reading, mathematics, and science) covered by the OECD PISA assessments of 15‑year‑olds system (Mullis et al., 2023[63]; OECD, 2023[13]). On the 2022 OECD PISA reading assessment, for example, Israel students achieve an average score of 474, just below the OECD average (476), see Figure 4.8. In earlier rounds, it had been well below the average. Moreover, PISA scores for Israel potentially overestimate actual average student ability as Haredi boy students, who often spend less time studying maths and science, only partially participate in the PISA tests.

Figure 4.8. On the PISA reading test, Hebrew-speaking students perform at levels comparable to the OECD’s best and Arabic-speaking students at levels lower than the OECD’s weakest
Copy link to Figure 4.8. On the PISA reading test, Hebrew-speaking students perform at levels comparable to the OECD’s best and Arabic-speaking students at levels lower than the OECD’s weakest

Mean performance on the OECD PISA reading test, 15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, by main language spoken at home (Israel only), 2022

Behind Israel’s overall performance lies large performance differences between students. Some students in the Israeli system perform well on the OECD PISA tests: in 2022, 15% of Israeli students were “top performers” (students proficient at Level 5 or 6 of the assessment) in at least one of the three core PISA subjects (reading, mathematics, and science), slightly above the OECD average (14%) (OECD, 2023[13]). However, as many as 45% were “low performers” (students proficient at Level 1 or below) in at least one of the three subjects, and 21% low performers in all three, compared to OECD averages of 39% and 16%, respectively (Annex Figure 4.A.1). Overall, inequalities in education performance are wider in Israel than in almost all other OECD countries, both at primary and secondary education levels (UNICEF Office of Research, 2018[76]). On the OECD PISA reading test, Israel sees student performance vary more widely than anywhere else in the OECD (Figure 4.8). Variation is similarly high in Israeli student performance on both the PISA mathematics and science assessments.

One major driver of educational inequality in Israel is a wide performance gap between Hebrew- and Arabic-speaking students. Israel’s school system is segregated along ethno-religious lines (Box 4.3) and student performance differs sharply between streams. On the OECD PISA reading test, for instance, Hebrew-speaking students perform on average at levels comparable to the OECD’s leaders, while Arabic-speaking students perform at levels lower than the OECD’s weakest (Figure 4.9). Indeed, exceptionally large numbers of Arabic-speaking students fail to perform at even basic levels on the OECD PISA tests: three‑quarters of Arabic-speaking students are “low performers” in at least one of the three core PISA subjects (reading, mathematics, and science), and almost half (48%) are low performers in all three (Annex Figure 4.A.1). They are also considerably more likely to be low performers on the PISA tests than disadvantaged minorities in other OECD countries (Box 4.4).

Figure 4.9. Israeli student performance on the OECD PISA reading test varies more widely than in any other OECD country
Copy link to Figure 4.9. Israeli student performance on the OECD PISA reading test varies more widely than in any other OECD country

Coefficient of variation in scores on the OECD PISA reading test, 15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, 2022

Performance gaps between ethno-religious groups translate into important gaps in educational progression and attainment. As covered in Chapter 2, both Israeli-Arabs and the Haredim continue to fall behind in educational attainment, even if the former in particular have made considerable progress in recent decades (Fuchs, 2017[77]). In any given year, students in the Arab education system are approximately twice as likely to drop out of the education system between grades 7 and 12 (2.2%) as students in non-Haredi Hebrew schools (1.1%), see Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.26. Those in the Haredi system are more likely to drop out still (4.5%), with many making their way to Yeshivot (Jewish religious education). Among those who finish secondary education, students in Arabic and Haredi schools are considerably less likely than students in non-Haredi Hebrew schools to pass the school leaving exam: in 2021, 86% of grade 12 students in non-Haredi education were entitled to a school-leaving (matriculation) certificate, and 75% met the standard for university entrance, compared to 72% and 50% of students in Arabic education schools, and 16% and 10% of students in Haredi schools (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.19).

In Israel, more than in most other OECD countries, differences between schools are important in explaining variation in student performance (UNICEF Office of Research, 2018[76]). For example, in Israel, differences between schools account for the equivalent of more than half (58%) of OECD‑wide total variation in scores on the OECD PISA reading test – the second highest level of between-school variation in the OECD after the Netherlands, and well above the OECD average (29%), see Annex Figure 4.A.2. Much of this between-school variation in performance can be explained by gaps between schools in the Hebrew- and the Arabic-speaking systems: if schools with and without a majority of Arab-speaking students are treated separately, between-school variation in PISA test performance falls sharply to levels similar to the OECD average (Annex Figure 4.A.2). In other words, while there remains variation across schools within both the Hebrew- and the Arabic-speaking systems, a major component of Israel’s high level of between-school variation in student performance seems to stem from differences between the two systems.

Box 4.3. The schooling system in Israel

Copy link to Box 4.3. The schooling system in Israel

Israel operates a school system that is segregated largely along ethno-religious lines. There are four main streams: one for Arabic speakers and three for the Hebrew-speaking community, including state‑secular, state‑religious, and Haredi schools, a growing minority of which are themselves are under state supervision. The (slight) majority of children attend either state‑secular (43%) or state‑religious (14%) schools, with a fast-growing minority attending Haredi schools (20%), see Figure 4.10. Twenty three per cent attend Arab-system schools.

Figure 4.10. Just under one‑quarter of students in Israel attend Arab-system schools, and one‑fifth Haredi schools
Copy link to Figure 4.10. Just under one‑quarter of students in Israel attend Arab-system schools, and one‑fifth Haredi schools

Distribution of primary and secondary students by education sector, Israel, 1970-2023

The four streams differ in their supervision, curricula, and language of instruction, with each aiming to cater to the specific needs, values and religious affiliations of its respective community. State‑religious schools balance core secular subjects (e.g. mathematics, science) with religious studies (Torah, Talmud, Jewish law) and place greater emphasis on Jewish religious identity, ethics, and traditions than state‑secular schools. Haredi schools go further, putting heavy emphasis on religious studies, with secular subjects often minimised or excluded entirely, particularly for boys in higher grades. Arab-system schools focus on core secular subjects alongside classes on Arabic and Palestinian history and identity. Hebrew and Jewish history are also taught in Arab-system schools, and Arabic is taught in Hebrew-speaking schools. State‑secular, state‑religious and Arab-system schools are supervised by the Ministry of Education, while much of the Haredi system operates more independently under religious leadership.

Per-student education spending in Israel is below average for an OECD country, especially at secondary level (OECD, 2024[67]), and schools in disadvantaged areas are often less well-funded than schools in more affluent areas, in part because of additional financing from parents and the municipalities for schools in better-off areas (OECD, 2018[75]; Ben-Arieh et al., 2022[78]). Funding is often particularly low for schools in the Arab system: for example, while the gap has closed slightly over the past decade, spending per student on Arab-system high schools (USD 8 500 in 2022) remains lower than on high schools in the state‑secular (USD 10 200) and state‑religious systems (USD 12 100) (Blass and Bleikh, 2024[79]). Blass and Bleikh (2024[79]) examine budget differences across schools, including between Arab-system and state‑secular and state‑religious schools, finding that gaps are largely consistent with allocation rules as written and can be explained by factors with an educational rationale (e.g. school size, school specialisms, etc.). However, they also question whether student socio‑economic disadvantage could be given greater weight in the budget allocation process. The Ministry of Education is trialling a new “differential budgeting” approach for high schools, which has already helped push more funding towards disadvantaged students in Israeli primary schools and middle schools (Moshe, 2021[80]; Blass and Bleikh, 2024[79]).

Despite ongoing funding differences between streams, Israel has made progress in ensuring that Arab-system schools compare well on learnings resources and school climate, that is, the overall atmosphere and quality of life within the school environment. Teachers are now well-qualified in both (non-Haredi) Hebrew- and Arab-system schools, with the large majority (92% and 96%, respectively) holding university degrees and, especially in the Arab-system, close to half (42% and 48%, respectively) holding Masters degrees (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.32).1 Data from OECD PISA also suggest that Arabic-speaking students attend schools where, according to school principals, learning is less likely to be hindered by a lack of education staff, by a shortage of education material, or by either student or teacher behaviour (Annex Table 4.A.1). However, there is still room for improvement in the characteristics and climate of Arab-system schools. Despite progress, student-teacher ratios remain larger in Arab-system schools (e.g. 10.8:1 in upper-secondary) than in state‑secular and especially state‑religious schools (9.9:1 and 7.9:1 in upper secondary), see Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.43, and OECD PISA data suggest that Arabic-speaking students attend schools with poorer discipline during mathematics lessons and where problem behaviours (e.g. profanity, vandalism) are more likely to contribute to a negative school climate (Annex Table 4.A.1).

1. The frequency of Masters-educated teachers in Arab-system schools potentially reflects the comparative attractiveness of teaching as a profession in the Israeli-Arab community. Average wages for teachers in Arab-system schools are marginally lower than in state‑secular and state‑religious schools (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.45) but represent a far higher share of the wages commanded by Israeli-Arabs in the wider labour market (Debowy, Epstein and Weiss, 2022[81]). Indeed, Fuchs (2017[77]) there is a growing surplus of mainly Israeli-Arab women pursuing careers in teaching.

Inequalities in education are reflected in inequalities in the transition from school to work. At 17%, Israel’s NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training) rate for 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds is higher than the OECD average (14%) and well above the OECD’s best performers, like Norway (6%) and the Netherlands (5%) (OECD, 2024[67]). This is driven in part by high NEET rates among Israeli-Arabs (38% of 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds in 2022), especially Israeli-Arab women: in 2022, 45% of 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds Israeli-Arab women were neither in employment nor education or training, compared to 13% of 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds Jewish women (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 9.31). NEET rates for Israeli-Arab men (31% of 18‑ to 24‑year‑olds in 2022) are also well above those for their Jewish counterparts (17% in 2022).

Education inequalities are similarly reflected in progression to higher education. In 2020-2021, Israeli-Arabs made up just 16% of graduates from higher education institutions, including only 13% of those from universities (Central Bureau of Statistics (2023[6]), Table 4.81). Students from the Haredi education system similarly struggle to access and progress through higher education (Batz and Geva, 2024[82]). Low upper-secondary attainment rates mean that most male Haredi students (74%) looking to access higher education are required to take additional preparatory programmes. Of those that do or are able to enter higher education directly, less than half (43%) graduate within six years, compared to two‑thirds (65%) for non-Haredi men. Much of this attainment and progression gap can be attributed to limited curriculum studied in Haredi schools (Box 3.3), which creates significant challenges for students who later attempt to pursue higher education or integrate into the workforce (Batz and Geva, 2024[82]).

Despite gaps in performance, attainment and progression, Israeli-Arab students express educational aspirations that are similar on average to their Hebrew-speaking peers. Israeli students in general have strong educational aspirations, with 78% of 15‑year‑old students expecting to attain tertiary education (Figure 4.11). This is a higher share than the OECD average (74%). The shares expected to attain tertiary education are effectively identical (at 79%) among both the Hebrew- and Arabic-speaking student populations. While the ambition of Israeli-Arab students is commendable and important for driving progress, Israel must ensure alternative opportunities are available for those who wish to attain tertiary education but fail to meet the standard for university admission.

Figure 4.11. Arabic-speaking students are just as likely as Hebrew-speaking students to expect to complete tertiary education
Copy link to Figure 4.11. Arabic-speaking students are just as likely as Hebrew-speaking students to expect to complete tertiary education

Percentage who expect to attain tertiary education, by main language spoken at home (Israel only), 15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, 2022

Box 4.4. Israeli-Arabs students perform worse on the OECD PISA tests than disadvantaged minorities in other OECD countries, like New Zealand and the United States

Copy link to Box 4.4. Israeli-Arabs students perform worse on the OECD PISA tests than disadvantaged minorities in other OECD countries, like New Zealand and the United States

Israel is not the only OECD country where education performance differs across population groups. The international PISA reports do not provide results disaggregated by ethnic or racial identity status; indeed, in several OECD countries, the collection of ethnic and racial diversity data is prohibited on equality grounds (Balestra and Fleischer, 2018[83]). Nonetheless, national analyses of PISA data illustrate how disadvantaged minority groups often perform worse on average than their peers in more advantaged social positions. In the United States, for example, Black and Hispanic students tend to perform worse on the PISA tests than White and Asian students (NCES, 2024[84]). Similarly, in New Zealand, Māori students tend to perform worse than many of their non-Māori peers (Ranson, 2023[85]). In many (but not all) OECD countries, students with an immigrant background (a commonly-used if imperfect proxy for minority status (Balestra and Fleischer, 2018[83]) perform worse on the PISA tests than non-immigrant students, at least before controlling for socio‑economic status (OECD, 2023[13]).

Cross-country comparisons of minority performance on the PISA tests are complicated by factors including differences in the histories, composition, and specificity of the identified groups, but cautious comparison suggests that Arabic-speaking students in Israel often perform worse on the tests than many disadvantaged minorities elsewhere. Figure 4.12, for example, shows the percentage of students that are low performers on the OECD PISA reading test (Panel A) and mathematics test (Panel B), by population group, for Israel, New Zealand and the United States. On the reading test, Arabic-speaking Israeli students are, at 63%, about twice as likely to be low performers as Māori students in New Zealand (32%) or Black (31%) or Hispanic (25%) students in the United States (Figure 4.12, Panel A). Put a different way, relative to the overall totals in their respective countries, Arabic-speaking students are roughly twice as likely (2.1 times) as Israeli students in general to be low performers in reading, whereas Māori students in New Zealand and Black and Hispanic students in the United States are all roughly 1‑1.5 times as likely to be low performers. Differences are smaller in mathematics, but Arabic-speaking Israeli students are still more likely to be low performers (65%) than Māori students in New Zealand (47%) and Black (57%) or Hispanic (43%) students in the United States (Figure 4.12, Panel B). Overall, while students from disadvantaged minorities trail their more advantaged peers in all three countries, differences seem larger and poor performance more frequent for Arabic-speaking students in Israel.

Figure 4.12. Arabic-speaking students in Israel are more likely to be low performers on the OECD PISA tests than disadvantaged minorities in New Zealand and the United States
Copy link to Figure 4.12. Arabic-speaking students in Israel are more likely to be low performers on the OECD PISA tests than disadvantaged minorities in New Zealand and the United States

Percentage that are low performers in reading and mathematics by population group, Israel, New Zealand and the United States, 15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, 2022

4.5. Social and emotional well-being

Copy link to 4.5. Social and emotional well-being

Social and emotional well-being is central to overall well-being. Revolving around children’s emotions, behaviours, and their relationships with themselves and others, it includes factors such as children’s mental health, subjective well-being, and social-emotional skills (e.g. creativity, self-control, persistence). These skills are closely linked to cognitive abilities and are increasingly recognised as playing a crucial role in shaping later educational, labour market, and health outcomes (OECD, 2021[1]; Kautz et al., 2014[86]; Duncan et al., 2023[87]).

Children’s social and emotional well-being is influenced by a range of factors. As with other areas of well-being, income and family background likely play an important role. Children who grow up in low-income or disadvantaged households have weaker socio‑economic skills (OECD, 2024[88]), are more likely to report symptoms of poor mental health (Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]), and (in at least some studies) report poorer life satisfaction (Clarke and Thévenon, 2022[12]) and subjective well-being (Main, 2014[89]; Main, 2018[90]). However, other factors matter too. Parenting behaviours and the safety, security, and stability of the family and home environment – factors that are themselves at least partly influenced by income – are likely to be particularly important for social and emotional development (OECD, 2021[1]; Duncan et al., 2023[87]), as are the neighbourhoods and communities in which children grow up (McCoy, Roy and Raver, 2015[91]; Christian et al., 2015[92]).

Despite improvements in recent years, internationally comparable data on child social and emotional well-being remain unfortunately limited (OECD, 2021[1]). For Israel, there is a particular lack of comparable on children’s social and emotional skills. Limited comparable data exist on child mental health and subjective well-being.

Subjective well-being

Despite the challenges faced by many children in Israel, Israeli children express some of the strongest subjective well-being in the OECD. Indeed, results from various data collections point to comparatively high levels of subjective well-being in Israel even among children from relatively disadvantaged backgrounds (OECD, 2024[51]; Helliwell et al., 2024[93]; Savahl, Lee and Casas, 2022[41]).

Israeli children’s life satisfaction provides one example. Self-reported life satisfaction is a core indicator of subjective well-being (OECD, 2025[94]) and for some experts comes closer than any other measure to providing a global summary measure of well-being as a whole (Layard, 2016[95]; Fritjers et al., 2020[96]). Data from the Health Behaviour in School-age Children (HBSC) study suggests that life satisfaction is very high among children in Israel, especially (but not only) for children from comparatively low socio‑economic positions (Figure 4.13). In 2021‑2022, 43% of children in Israel expressed high life satisfaction, defined as recording a 9 or 10 when asked to rate their life at the moment on a scale from 0 to 10, the highest share of any OECD country with comparable data. Even among Israeli children from comparatively low socio‑economic status backgrounds, as many as 41% express high life satisfaction. The HBSC data cannot differentiate by ethno-religious group but given differences in material well-being, it is likely that many children from low socio‑economic status backgrounds (as measured by the HBSC Family Affluence Scale) come from the Haredi and Israeli-Arab communities.

Figure 4.13. Subjective well-being is high in Israel, even among children from disadvantaged backgrounds
Copy link to Figure 4.13. Subjective well-being is high in Israel, even among children from disadvantaged backgrounds

11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑old school children who report high satisfaction with their life at present, by socio‑economic status, 2021-2022

Data from other sources also point to strong subjective well-being among children in Israel. Children’s Worlds (an international survey of children’s well-being) finds that Israel ranks highly on self-reported happiness and on the CW-SWBS5 (Children’s Worlds Subjective Well-Being Scale 5‑items version) – a multi‑item psychometric scale that aims to measure children’s overall subjective well-being (Savahl, Lee and Casas, 2022[41]). The World Happiness Report, using data from Gallup World Poll, finds that self-reported youth (15‑ to 24‑year‑old) life satisfaction is higher in Israel than in any other country with available comparable data (Helliwell et al., 2024[93]).

However, in Israel as in other OECD countries, there are growing concerns about the mental well-being of many young people, especially girls and young women. Girls in Israel are comparatively likely to report multiple subjective health complaints like headaches, stomach aches, and difficulties getting to sleep – psychosomatic health complaints that can impair functioning and are often used as a non-clinical measure of mental health. In 2021-2022, more than two‑thirds (67%) of 11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑old girls in Israel reported experiencing at least two subjective health complaints more than once a week, compared to 48% among similarly aged boys and an OECD average of 58% (Figure 4.14). This is up from half (50%) in both 2013-2014 and 2017-2018 (OECD (2024[51]), indicator SEC_MSHC). As in many other OECD countries, girls and young women in Israel are also comparatively more likely than boys and young men to have depression and anxiety disorders (OECD (2024[51]), indicators SEC_DDEP and SEC_DANX), although they are less likely to suffer from mental disorders in general (OECD (2024[51]), indicator SEC_DMEN).

Figure 4.14. Girls in Israel are comparatively likely to report multiple subjective health complaints
Copy link to Figure 4.14. Girls in Israel are comparatively likely to report multiple subjective health complaints

11‑, 13‑ and 15‑year‑old school children who report multiple subjective health complaints, by sex, 2021-2022

Box 4.5. How did Israel perform on the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) 2023?

Copy link to Box 4.5. How did Israel perform on the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) 2023?

The things that we learn and the ways we develop in childhood translate into the things we can do in adulthood. The OECD Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) offers unique comparative data on adults’ literacy, numeracy, and problem-solving skills – foundational skills that are important for both personal and societal success. The most recent round of PIAAC assessment, conducted in 2022-2023, covered adults aged 16 to 65 in 31 countries and economies, including Israel (OECD, 2024[97]). Israel was participating for the second time, having already taken part in PIAAC in 2014-2015.

Results from PIAAC suggest that skills level in Israel are well below those in most other OECD countries. In 2023, Israeli participants scored below the OECD average in all three main skills areas, with a comparatively high share – 36% in literacy, 34% in numeracy, and 40% in problem solving – classified as “low performers” (proficiency at or below level 1) (OECD, 2024[97]). Only a small share reached the top levels (7% in literacy, 8% in numeracy, and 3% in problem solving). Average literacy scores in Israel were down on 2014-2015, driven by a rise in low performers, while numeracy remained stable. Across skills areas, young adults (16‑ to 24‑year‑olds) performed on average just as well as their slightly older counterparts (25‑ to 34‑year‑olds and 35‑ to 44‑year‑olds), and better than those age 45 and above (45‑ to 54‑year‑olds and 55‑ to 65‑year‑olds) (OECD, 2024[97]).

As might be expected given differences in educational performance and attainment (Section 4.4), Israeli-Arabs performed worse on PIAAC than Jewish Israelis. In 2023, Israeli-Arabs attained an average literacy skill score of 199, compared to 259 for the Jewish Israeli population, with similar if slightly smaller gaps visible in numeracy skills (215 for Israeli-Arabs, compared to 256 for Jewish Israelis) and problem solving (206 and 247) (CBS, 2024[98]). Seventy per cent of Israeli-Arabs were low performers in literacy, compared to 25% of Jewish Israelis (CBS, 2024[98]). Moreover, in literacy, the gap between Arabic- and Jewish Israelis widened (rather than closed) between rounds: the 2023 gap in literacy skills (60 points) is an increase of more than 21 points on the 2014-2015 gap (39 points).

More so than in many other OECD countries, skills in Israel remain strongly associated with socio‑economic background, particularly parental education (OECD, 2024[97]). In 2023, 61% of Israelis whose parents had less than upper secondary education scored at or below Level 1 in literacy, well above the OECD average (43%). For adults with tertiary-educated parents, the rate falls to 20% (OECD, 2024[97]). Similar gaps are again visible in numeracy and problem solving.

4.6. Adverse childhood experiences and at-risk children

Copy link to 4.6. Adverse childhood experiences and at-risk children

In Israel, as in many OECD countries, too many children find themselves exposed to potential harm and maltreatment. In 2021, just under 60 000 children (about 1.9%) in Israel were referred to child protection services under the terms of Israel’s Youth (Care and Supervision) Law (NCC, 2023[99]). The most common reasons for referral were physical abuse (22%), neglect (18%), and sexual abuse (10%) (NCC, 2023[99]), with neglect most frequent for very young children (0‑ to 5‑year‑olds) and sexual abuse and attempted suicide more common for older children (Kosher, 2015[36]). In 2022, as many as 685 000 0‑ to 18‑year‑old children (21%) were considered “at risk” more broadly, for reasons including disability (152 000), poverty (92 000), dropping out of education (17 000), or being considered at risk of dropping out and placed under the care of Regular Visiting Officer (KBAS) (72 000) (CBS, 2025[100]).

Low-income children are often at increased risk of maltreatment (Pelton, 2015[101]) and the frequency and concentration of poverty in Israel means children from some communities – especially the Israeli-Arab community – are at greater risk than those from others. Analysis based on data from the 360° National Program for Children and Youth at Risk (see Box 4.5) suggests that 23% of children in Israeli-Arab communities can be considered at risk, compared to 19% of children in all communities covered by the programme (Szabo-Lael, 2017[102]). Indeed, Israeli-Arab children make up as much as one‑third of all at-risk children in Israel (CBS, 2025[100]), despite composing about one‑quarter of the child population. However, as Szabo-Lael (2017[102]) reports, at-risk children in the Israeli-Arab community are less likely to be receiving services than at-risk Jewish children.

Despite their high exposure to poverty, children from the Haredi community are less likely than the general child population to be considered at risk (Szabo-Lael, 2017[102]). Data from the 360° National Program suggest that Haredi children make up about 12% of all at-risk children, despite representing roughly 20% of all children. However, it is possible that potential maltreatment may be under-reported within the Haredi community and/or that the comparative seclusion of the Haredi community may limit the ability of professionals to identify at-risk children (Szabo-Lael, 2017[102]).

In combination with low income, several other factors are associated with exposure to risk. Children with disabilities are particularly likely to be at risk, with 20% of referrals to child protection services involving a child with a disability (NCC, 2023[99]). Children from large families (4+ children), from single‑parent families, and from jobless families are also over-represented (Szabo-Lael, 2017[102]). Overall “at-risk” rates increase with age, from 6% for 0‑year‑olds to 31% for 16‑ to 17‑year‑olds, are higher for boys (23%) than for girls (19%), and decrease with parental education, with 36% of children with less-than-upper-secondary-educated mothers considered at risk, compared to 11% of children with university-educated mothers (CBS, 2025[100]). At-risk rates are particularly high when at least one parent has a record of addiction (80%), has a criminal record (85%), or has a disability (91%) (CBS, 2025[100]).

Box 4.6. The Israeli 360° National Program for Children and Youth at Risk

Copy link to Box 4.6. The Israeli 360° National Program for Children and Youth at Risk

The Israeli National Program for Children and Youth at Risk, also known as the 360° Program, is a comprehensive policy initiative launched by the Israeli Government in 2007 to address the needs of vulnerable children and youth across the country. The programme was developed as a response to the 2006 Schmidt review (Schmid, 2007[103]) of children and youth at risk, which recommended increased investment in the prevention of maltreatment and a more co‑ordinated, locally-oriented policy approach for at-risk children.

The 360° Program is an inter-ministerial programme led by the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs and Services (MOLSA) in co‑operation with the ministries of Education, Health, Integration and Public Security. Its aims to address the needs of at-risk children through integrated community-based solutions. Built around an agreed definition of risk, the programme encourages local authorities to develop family and child services tailored to the unique needs of children in their community. These services are intended to complement rather than replace existing services, and in practice often help serve the needs of marginalised communities (Rubin et al., 2017[49]). Many are integrated into or delivered through existing service settings, such as schools and maternal and child health clinics (Rubin et al., 2017[49]; Gottfried and Ben-Arieh, 2018[104]). Implemented first in Israel’s most disadvantaged localities, the programme now operates in over 185 local authority areas of low- and medium- socio‑economic status.

Local implementation of the 360° Program follows a systematic multi-stage process. The first step is the establishment of a local inter-organisational decision making committee, including representatives from the participating ministries and the public. Following a survey of at-risk children and youth in the locality and existing services and resources for these children and youth, and supported by a flexible, multi-year discretionary budget allocation, this committee is tasked with developing a culturally appropriate programme of services shaped around the needs of the localities’ at-risk population. Implementation is followed by ongoing monitoring and programme evaluation and the continual update and refinement of services delivered.

Reports on the 360° Program commissioned and funded by the Program itself point to several potential successes as well as areas for improvement (Szabo-Lael and Zadka, 2015[105]). Szabo-Lael and Zadka find that the Program has likely helped increase access to services for at-risk children, especially young children under school age. Approximately 39% of preschoolers identified as at risk received services through the programme (Szabo-Lael and Zadka, 2015[105]). However, the Program may have been less successful at providing (additional) services to children with the most severe or complex risks who may be receiving supports from elsewhere (Szabo-Lael and Zadka, 2015[105]). External commentators (Gottfried and Ben-Arieh, 2018[104]) suggest that despite progress, including through the 360° Program, Israel’s child protection system still suffers gaps, in part due to inadequate resourcing.

References

[19] Alfandari, Y. (2022), The Impact of Social Transfers in Kind (STIK), in Education and Health on Gender Inequality, The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, https://iariw.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Alfandari_IARIW-2022.pdf.

[30] Arpino, B., J. Gumà and A. Julià (2018), “Early-life conditions and health at older ages: The mediating role of educational attainment, family and employment trajectories”, PLOS ONE, Vol. 13/4, p. e0195320, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195320.

[83] Balestra, C. and L. Fleischer (2018), “Diversity statistics in the OECD: How do OECD countries collect data on ethnic, racial and indigenous identity?”, OECD Statistics Working Papers, No. 2018/09, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/89bae654-en.

[82] Batz, K. and A. Geva (2024), On the effectiveness of the Haredi education system for boys (in Hebrew), Israeli Ministry of Finance, https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/dynamiccollectorresultitem/periodic-review-27052024/he/weekly_economic_review_periodic-review-27052024.pdf.

[24] Bellani, L. and M. Bia (2018), “The Long-Run Effect of Childhood Poverty and The Mediating Role of Education”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, Vol. 182/1, pp. 37-68, https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12388.

[78] Ben-Arieh, A. et al. (2022), Children’s Worlds National Report: Israel.

[32] Billari, F., N. Hiekel and A. Liefbroer (2019), “The Social Stratification of Choice in the Transition to Adulthood”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 35/5, pp. 599-615, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcz025.

[42] Blackwell, D., M. Hayward and E. Crimmins (2001), “Does childhood health affect chronic morbidity in later life?”, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 52/8, pp. 1269-1284, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00230-6.

[61] Blanden, J., M. Doepke and J. Stuhler (2022), “Educational Inequality”, SSRN Electronic Journal, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4114801.

[21] Blanden, J., K. Hansen and S. Machin (2010), “The Economic Cost of Growing Up Poor: Estimating the GDP Loss Associated with Child Poverty*”, Fiscal Studies, Vol. 31/3, pp. 289-311, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2010.00116.x.

[20] Blanden, J., K. Hansen and S. Machin (2008), The GDP cost of the lost earning potential of adults who grew up in poverty, https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/gdp-cost-lost-earning-potential-adults-who-grew-poverty.

[70] Blank, C. and S. Silverman (2023), Early Childhood Education and Care in Israel: An Overview, https://www.taubcenter.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Early-Childhood-2023-ENG-1.pdf.

[79] Blass, N. and H. Bleikh (2024), Expenditure per Student in High Schools in Israel.

[27] Case, A., A. Fertig and C. Paxson (2005), “The lasting impact of childhood health and circumstance”, Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 24/2, pp. 365-389, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2004.09.008.

[26] Case, A., D. Lubotsky and C. Paxson (2002), “Economic Status and Health in Childhood: The Origins of the Gradient”, American Economic Review, Vol. 92/5, pp. 1308-1334, https://doi.org/10.1257/000282802762024520.

[100] CBS (2025), At-Risk Children Custom Data Extract, State of Israel Central Bureau of Statistics.

[98] CBS (2024), Preliminary findings from the Israeli Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), 2022–2023 (2023-2022 (PIAAC) ממצאים ראשונים מתוך סקר מיומנויות) (in Hebrew), https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/mediarelease/DocLib/2024/389/06_24_389b.pdf.

[8] Central Bureau of Statistics (2023), Live Births - Main Indicators, 2002-2022, https://www.cbs.gov.il/en/subjects/Pages/Live-Births.aspx.

[6] Central Bureau of Statistics (2023), Statistical Abstract of Israel 2023 - No.74, https://www.cbs.gov.il/en/publications/Pages/2023/Statistical-Abstract-of-Israel-2023-No-74.aspx.

[92] Christian, H. et al. (2015), “The influence of the neighborhood physical environment on early child health and development: A review and call for research”, Health & Place, Vol. 33, pp. 25-36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.01.005.

[3] Clarke, C. et al. (2023), “What are the economic costs of childhood socio-economic disadvantage? Evidence from a pathway analysis for 27 European countries”, The Journal of Economic Inequality, Vol. 22/2, pp. 473-494, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-023-09603-8.

[12] Clarke, C. and O. Thévenon (2022), “Starting unequal: How’s life for disadvantaged children?”, OECD Papers on Well-being and Inequalities, No. 06, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a0ec330c-en.

[46] Currie, J. (2016), The long-term consequences of children’s health and circumstance.

[43] Currie, J. et al. (2010), “Child Health and Young Adult Outcomes”, Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 45/3, pp. 517-548, https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.45.3.517.

[81] Debowy, M., G. Epstein and A. Weiss (2022), The Labor Market in Israel: An Overview, The Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel.

[60] Dee, T. (2020), “Education and civic engagement”, in The Economics of Education, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-815391-8.00008-2.

[87] Duncan, G. et al. (2023), “Investing in early childhood development in preschool and at home”, in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hesedu.2022.11.005.

[22] Duncan, G. et al. (2011), “The Importance of Early Childhood Poverty”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 108/1, pp. 87-98, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9867-9.

[18] Endeweld, M. et al. (2023), Poverty and Income Inequality - 2021, The National Insurance Institute, https://www.btl.gov.il/English%20Homepage/Publications/Poverty_Report/Documents/dohahoni2021.pdf.

[25] Flores, M., P. García-Gómez and A. Kalwij (2020), “Early life circumstances and labor market outcomes over the life cycle”, The Journal of Economic Inequality, Vol. 18/4, pp. 449-468, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-020-09446-7.

[28] Flores, M. and A. Kalwij (2014), “The associations between early life circumstances and later life health and employment in Europe”, Empirical Economics, Vol. 47/4, pp. 1251-1282, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0785-3.

[29] Flores, M. and B. Wolfe (2023), “The Influence of Early-Life Health Conditions on Life Course Health”, Demography, Vol. 60/2, pp. 431-459, https://doi.org/10.1215/00703370-10579184.

[47] Flores, M. and B. Wolfe (2022), “Childhood Health Conditions and Lifetime Labor Market Outcomes”, American Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 8/4, pp. 506-533, https://doi.org/10.1086/721573.

[44] Forrest, C. and A. Riley (2004), “Childhood Origins Of Adult Health: A Basis For Life-Course Health Policy”, Health Affairs, Vol. 23/5, pp. 155-164, https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.23.5.155.

[96] Fritjers, P. et al. (2020), “A happy choice: wellbeing as the goal of government”, Behavioural Public Policy, Vol. 4/2, pp. 126-165, https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2019.39.

[77] Fuchs, H. (2017), Education and Employment Among Young Arab Israelis, Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel.

[37] Fuchs, H. and A. Weiss (2018), Israel’s Labor Market: An Overview, Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel.

[68] Gordon, G. (2024), Early Childhood Daycare Subsidies in Israel in Different Sectors: A Discussion of Subsidy Scenarios in the Context of Haredi Conscription, https://en.idi.org.il/articles/56417.

[104] Gottfried, R. and A. Ben-Arieh (2018), “The Israeli Child Protection System”, in Child Maltreatment, National Systems of Child Protection, Springer International Publishing, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93348-1_8.

[56] Gunderson, M. and P. Oreopolous (2020), “Returns to education in developed countries”, in The Economics of Education, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-815391-8.00003-3.

[54] Harel-Fisch, Y. et al. (2020), Youth in Israel: Health, Mental and Social Well-being and Risk Behavior Patterns among Youth in Israel: Summary of HBSC Israel Research Findings for 2019 Analysis of Trends Between 1994-2019 and International Comparison.

[93] Helliwell, J. et al. (2024), World Happiness Report 2024.

[10] IDI (2023), Statistical Report on Ultra-Orthodox Society in Israel.

[15] Inchley, J. (2018), Spotlight on adolescent health and well-being: Findings from the 2017/2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) survey in Europe and Canada international report, https://hbsc.org/publications/.

[86] Kautz, T. et al. (2014), Fostering and Measuring Skills: Improving Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Skills to Promote Lifetime Success, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, https://doi.org/10.3386/w20749.

[36] Kosher, H. (2015), The State of Children in Israel 2015.

[95] Layard, R. (2016), Measuring wellbeing and cost-effectiveness analysis using subjective wellbeing, https://whatworkswellbeing.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/common-currency-measuring- wellbeing-series-1-dec-2016v3.pdf.

[23] Lesner, R. (2017), “The long-term effect of childhood poverty”, Journal of Population Economics, Vol. 31/3, pp. 969-1004, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-017-0674-8.

[39] Lewin, A. and H. Stier (2002), “Who Benefits the Most? The Unequal Allocation of Transfers in the Israeli Welfare State”, Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 83/2, pp. 488-503, https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6237.00096.

[57] Lochner, L. (2011), Nonproduction Benefits of Education: Crime, Health, and Good Citizenship, Elsevier, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B978044453444600002X.

[90] Main, G. (2018), “Money Matters: a Nuanced Approach to Understanding the Relationship between Household Income and Child Subjective Well-Being”, Child Indicators Research, Vol. 12/4, pp. 1125-1145, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9574-z.

[89] Main, G. (2014), “Child Poverty and Children’s Subjective Well-Being”, Child Indicators Research, Vol. 7/3, pp. 451-472, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-014-9237-7.

[52] Margalit, R. (2024), Health gap indicators (מדדי פערים בבריאות) (in Hebrew).

[91] McCoy, D., A. Roy and C. Raver (2015), “Neighborhood crime as a predictor of individual differences in emotional processing and regulation”, Developmental Science, Vol. 19/1, pp. 164-174, https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12287.

[33] McLaughlin, M. and M. Rank (2018), “Estimating the Economic Cost of Childhood Poverty in the United States”, Social Work Research, Vol. 42/2, pp. 73-83, https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svy007.

[80] Moshe, N. (2021), Description and analysis of the Ministry of Education Budget for 2021 and 2022 (תיאור וניתוח הצעת תקציב משרד החינוך לשנים 2021- 2022) (in Hebrew).

[63] Mullis, I. et al. (2023), PIRLS 2021 International Results in Reading.

[35] Navon, Y. and L. Bowers (2023), Young Children Living Below the Poverty Line.

[99] NCC (2023), Children in Israel 2022: Israel National Council for the Child Statistical Yearbook (in Hebrew), https://www.children.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/לקט-נתונים-ילדים-בישראל-2022.pdf.

[84] NCES (2024), Highlights of U.S. PISA 2022 Results Web Report, https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2022/.

[94] OECD (2025), OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being (2025 Update), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9203632a-en.

[97] OECD (2024), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.

[67] OECD (2024), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.

[51] OECD (2024), OECD Child Well-being data portal, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-child-well-being-data-portal.html.

[7] OECD (2024), OECD Family Database, https://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm.

[50] OECD (2024), OECD Health Statistics 2024, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-health-statistics.html.

[17] OECD (2024), OECD Income (IDD) and Wealth (WDD) Distribution Databases, https://www.oecd.org/social/income-distribution-database.htm.

[65] OECD (2024), OECD TaxBEN Policy Descriptions, https://www.oecd.org/social/benefits-and-wages/.

[64] OECD (2024), PISA 2022 Results (Volume III): Creative Minds, Creative Schools, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/765ee8c2-en.

[88] OECD (2024), Social and Emotional Skills for Better Lives: Findings from the OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/35ca7b7c-en.

[38] OECD (2024), Society at a Glance 2024: OECD Social Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/918d8db3-en.

[5] OECD (2023), Historical Population Data, https://data-explorer.oecd.org/vis?lc=en&tm=DF_POP_HIST&pg=0&snb=1&vw=ov&df[ds]=dsDisseminateFinalDMZ&df[id]=DSD_POPULATION%40DF_POP_HIST&df[ag]=OECD.ELS.SAE&df[vs]=&pd=2010%2C2022&dq=AUS..PS._T..&to[TIME_PERIOD]=false&ly[cl]=TIME_PERIOD&ly[rw]=AGE.

[66] OECD (2023), Joining Forces for Gender Equality: What is Holding us Back?, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/67d48024-en.

[13] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en.

[1] OECD (2021), Measuring What Matters for Child Well-being and Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e82fded1-en.

[73] OECD (2021), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.

[62] OECD (2020), Early Learning and Child Well-being: A Study of Five-year-Olds in England, Estonia, and the United States, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3990407f-en.

[69] OECD (2019), Good Practice for Good Jobs in Early Childhood Education and Care, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/64562be6-en.

[74] OECD (2019), Providing Quality Early Childhood Education and Care: Results from the Starting Strong Survey 2018, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/301005d1-en.

[16] OECD (2019), The Heavy Burden of Obesity: The Economics of Prevention, OECD Health Policy Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/67450d67-en.

[2] OECD (2018), A Broken Social Elevator? How to Promote Social Mobility, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301085-en.

[75] OECD (2018), OECD Economic Surveys: Israel 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-isr-2018-en.

[55] Oreopoulos, P. and K. Salvanes (2011), “Priceless: The Nonpecuniary Benefits of Schooling”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 25/1, pp. 159-184, https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.25.1.159.

[14] Patton, G. et al. (2016), “Our future: a Lancet commission on adolescent health and wellbeing”, The Lancet, Vol. 387/10036, pp. 2423-2478, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00579-1.

[101] Pelton, L. (2015), “The continuing role of material factors in child maltreatment and placement”, Child Abuse & Neglect, Vol. 41, pp. 30-39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.08.001.

[58] Raghupathi, V. and W. Raghupathi (2020), “The influence of education on health: an empirical assessment of OECD countries for the period 1995–2015”, Archives of Public Health, Vol. 78/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-020-00402-5.

[85] Ranson, C. (2023), PISA 2022: Ākonga Māori Summary, https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/224604/PISA-2022-Akonga-Maori-Summary.pdf.

[45] Risnes, K. et al. (2011), “Birthweight and mortality in adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 40/3, pp. 647-661, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyq267.

[49] Rubin, L. et al. (2017), “Maternal and child health in Israel: building lives”, The Lancet, Vol. 389/10088, pp. 2514-2530, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30929-7.

[41] Savahl, S., B. Lee and F. Casas (2022), , Children’s Worlds Project (ISCWeB).

[103] Schmid, H. (2007), “Children and youth at risk in Israel: Findings and recommendations to improve their well-being”, Children and Youth Services Review, Vol. 29/8, pp. 1114-1128, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.03.001.

[40] Shalev, M. and A. Lazarus (2016), “Horizontal Inequality in Israel’s Welfare State: Do Arab Citizens Receive Fewer Transfer Payments?”, in Socioeconomic Inequality in Israel, Palgrave Macmillan US, New York, https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137544810_11.

[34] Shay, D. (2022), Early Childhood in Israel: Selected Research Findings, 2022.

[11] Sorek, Y. and V. Konstantinov (2021), Changes in Family Structure: Trends, Issues, and the Implications for the Welfare System.

[48] Spencer, N. et al. (2019), “Addressing inequities in child health and development: towards social justice”, BMJ Paediatrics Open, Vol. 3/1, p. e000503, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2019-000503.

[102] Szabo-Lael, R. (2017), Children and Youth at Risk in Israel, http://brookdale.jdc.org.il/.

[105] Szabo-Lael, R. and H. Zadka (2015), 360° – The National Program for Children and Youth at Risk: The Needs of the Participants and the Services Received, http://www.jdc.org.il/brookdale.

[76] UNICEF Office of Research (2018), An Unfair Start: Inequality in Children’s Education in Rich Countries.

[4] United Nations Population Division (2024), World Population Prospects 2024, https://population.un.org/wpp/.

[71] Vaknin, D. (2020), Early Childhood Education and Care in Israel Compared to the OECD: Enrollment Rates, Employment Rates of Mothers, Quality Indices, and Future Achievement, https://www.taubcenter.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/earlychildhood2020en.pdf.

[72] Vaknin, H. and Y. Shavit (2021), Preschool Attendance to Age 3 and Its Impact on Academic Achievement in Grade 4, https://www.taubcenter.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/PreschoolAttendancethroughAge3Eng.pdf.

[31] Vauhkonen, T. et al. (2017), “Intergenerational accumulation of social disadvantages across generations in young adulthood”, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, Vol. 48, pp. 42-52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2017.02.001.

[9] Weinreb, A., D. Chernichovsky and A. Brill (2018), Israel’s Exceptional Fertility.

[53] WHO (2024), Physical activity, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/physical-activity.

Annex 4.A. Additional tables and figures

Copy link to Annex 4.A. Additional tables and figures

Annex Figure 4.A.1. Percentage of students that are low performers on the OECD PISA reading, mathematics and science tests
Copy link to Annex Figure 4.A.1. Percentage of students that are low performers on the OECD PISA reading, mathematics and science tests

15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, by main language spoken at home (Israel only), 2022

Annex Figure 4.A.2. Variation in PISA reading performance within and between schools
Copy link to Annex Figure 4.A.2. Variation in PISA reading performance within and between schools

15‑year‑old students, OECD countries, 2022

		Shortage of educational staff	Shortage of educational material	Student-related factors affecting school climate	Teacher-related factors affecting school climate	Problem behaviours leading to negative school climate	Disciplinary climate in mathematics classes
Australia	AUS	‑0.06	‑0.69	‑0.02	0.17	0.21	‑0.24
Austria	AUT	‑0.08	‑0.47	0.32	‑0.16	‑0.04	0.36
Belgium	BEL	0.00	‑0.20	0.00	0.71	0.50	‑0.12
Canada	CAN	0.00	‑0.74	0.56	0.25	0.36	‑0.08
Chile	CHL	0.23	‑0.28	0.46	0.45	0.29	‑0.32
Colombia	COL	0.38	0.70	0.35	0.22	0.28	‑0.01
Costa Rica	CRI	1.05	1.26	1.01	0.67	0.67	‑0.07
Czechia	CZE	0.16	‑0.14	‑0.15	‑0.11	‑0.10	‑0.03
Denmark	DNK	‑0.47	‑0.80	‑0.58	‑0.34	‑0.22	0.03
Estonia	EST	0.00	‑0.13	0.35	0.38	0.12	0.14
Finland	FIN	0.22	‑0.57	0.24	‑0.14	0.12	‑0.22
France	FRA	0.61	‑0.40	0.28	0.47	0.04	‑0.23
Germany	DEU	0.43	‑0.07	0.04	0.21	0.00	‑0.02
Greece	GRC	0.43	0.64	‑0.05	‑0.34	0.01	‑0.27
Hungary	HUN	0.34	0.31	‑0.71	‑0.47	‑0.48	0.05
Iceland	ISL	‑0.11	‑0.52	‑0.11	0.10	0.31	‑0.11
Ireland	IRL	0.12	‑0.66	‑0.40	‑0.01	‑0.38	0.18
Israel	ISR	0.49	0.23	0.11	0.01	‑0.18	0.05
Italy	ITA	0.53	‑0.21	‑0.25	0.28	‑0.17	‑0.09
Japan	JPN	0.00	0.59	‑0.65	0.46	0.00	1.09
Korea	KOR	0.00	0.06	‑0.11	‑0.15	0.71	0.84
Latvia	LVA	0.31	0.28	0.23	‑0.23	0.09	‑0.03
Lithuania	LTU	‑0.28	‑0.27	‑0.44	‑0.55	‑0.48	0.21
Luxembourg	LUX	..	..	..	..	..	..
Mexico	MEX	0.10	0.34	0.39	‑0.14	‑0.36	0.21
Netherlands	NLD	0.49	‑0.52	0.65	0.86	0.26	‑0.15
New Zealand	NZL	0.20	‑0.51	0.35	0.19	0.43	‑0.33
Norway	NOR	0.15	0.06	0.36	0.10	0.42	‑0.08
Poland	POL	‑0.52	‑0.37	‑0.09	‑0.44	‑0.19	‑0.05
Portugal	PRT	0.84	0.24	0.18	0.36	‑0.01	0.03
Slovak Republic	SVK	0.00	0.12	‑0.38	‑0.34	0.51	0.06
Slovenia	SVN	‑0.01	‑0.39	‑0.26	‑0.08	‑0.28	0.07
Spain	ESP	‑0.08	‑0.29	‑0.21	‑0.22	0.00	‑0.08
Sweden	SWE	0.47	‑0.62	0.07	0.14	0.54	‑0.32
Switzerland	CHE	‑0.40	‑0.80	0.02	‑0.14	0.03	0.11
Türkiye	TUR	0.13	‑0.57	0.00	‑0.34	‑0.16	‑0.05
United Kingdom	GBR	0.30	‑0.32	‑0.21	‑0.05	0.20	0.10
United States	USA	‑0.05	‑0.66	0.12	0.08	0.10	0.24
OECD average	OECD	0.19	‑0.17	0.04	0.05	0.09	0.02
Israel: Hebrew		0.65	0.28	0.19	0.03	‑0.24	0.00
Israel: Arabic		‑0.10	0.03	‑0.32	‑0.12	‑0.05	0.22

Note: Shortage of educational staff: School principals were about the extent to which instruction is hindered by a shortage of educational staff in their school (e.g. “A lack of teaching staff”, “Inadequate or poorly qualified assisting staff”). The four response categories for the four items in the scale were “Not at all”, “Very little”, “To some extent”, and “A lot”. Higher scale score values indicate that the school is impacted by a shortage of educational staff to a greater extent. Shortage of educational material: School principals were asked about the extent to which instruction is hindered by a shortage of educational materials in their school (e.g. “A lack of educational material (e.g., textbooks, IT equipment, library or laboratory material)”, “Inadequate or poor quality educational material (e.g. textbooks, IT equipment, library or laboratory material)”). The four response categories for the four items in the scale were “Not at all”, “Very little”, “To some extent”, and “A lot”. Higher scale score values indicate that the school is impacted by a shortage of educational materials to a greater extent. Student-related factors affecting school climate: School principals were asked about the extent to which student learning is hindered by student behaviours (e.g. “Student truancy”, “Student use of alcohol or illegal drugs”). The four response categories for the six items in the scale were “Not at all”, “Very little”, “To some extent”, and “A lot”. Higher scale score values indicate that students’ learning is hindered to a greater extent by negative student behaviours. Teacher-related factors affecting school climate: School principals were asked about the extent to which student learning is hindered by teacher behaviours (e.g. “Teacher absenteeism”, “Staff resisting change”). The four response categories for the five items in the scale were “Not at all”, “Very little”, “To some extent”, and “A lot”. Higher scale score values indicate that students’ learning is hindered to a greater extent by negative teacher behaviours. Problem behaviours leading to negative school climate: School principals were asked about the extent of problem behaviours that contribute to a negative school climate in their school (e.g. “Profanity”, “Vandalism”). The four response categories for the six items in the scale were “Not at all”, “Small extent”, “Moderate extent”, and “Large extent”. Higher scale score values indicate that problem behaviours contribute to a negative school climate to a greater extent. Disciplinary climate in mathematics classes: Students’ frequency ratings of how often a range of situations occurred in their mathematics lessons (e.g. “Students do not listen to what the teacher said.”, “Students get distracted by using <digital resources> (e.g., smartphones, websites, apps).”) were scaled into the index of “Disciplinary climate in mathematics”. Each of the seven items included in this scale had four response options (“Every lesson”, “Most lessons”, “Some lessons”, “Never or almost never”). “Israel: Hebrew” and “Israel: Arabic” refer to those choosing Hebrew and Arabic respectively as their first response to the question “What language do you speak at home most of the time?”. Those responding with any other language (e.g. English, Russian) are not included.

Source: OECD estimates based on the PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/.

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment

Governance

Health

Industry, business and entrepreneurship

Regional, rural and urban development

Science, technology and innovation

Society

Taxation

Trade

Energy

Nuclear energy

Transport

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment

Governance

Health

Industry, business and entrepreneurship

Regional, rural and urban development

Science, technology and innovation

Society

Taxation

Trade

Energy

Nuclear energy

Transport

Countries A - C

Countries D - I

Countries J - M

Countries N - R

Countries S - T

Countries U - Z

Regional and global engagement

Countries

Countries A - C

Countries D - I

Countries J - M

Countries N - R

Countries S - T

Countries U - Z

Regional and global engagement

Publications

Publications

Featured publications

Data

Data

Featured data

News & events

News & events

Featured events

About OECD

About

Engage with us

Work with us

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment