The Government’s 2016 Education white paper says that every school must be an Academy (or on the way to converting) by 2020. In press releases and the mutterings of Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, the reasons for this change seem to be this:
- Inefficiency of two parallel systems – academies and maintained schools
- School leadership needs to be higher skilled
- Put the Heads and teachers in control
But there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the system as it stands. Granted, a few schools may need some improvement, but the vast majority are, in Ofsted’s judgement (for all of that system’s flaws), either outstanding or good.
Critics of the proposals identify many objections:
- Questionable capacity of the DfE to manage the conversions
- Lack of national budget to fund the conversions
- Parents may have no involvement in the running of schools
- The lack of local accountability – complaints have to be made to the DfE
- Schools are being turned into corporations
- Privatisation of public assets
- Reliance on private sector support services at higher cost than current County / LEA support services
- Small rural schools will be at greater risk of closure – but by unaccountable Boards as opposed to elected County Councillors
But despite the political debate, school governors are having to consider their next step. Refusing to cooperate is, possibly, an option but not many are likely to take it. So what do they do?
Becoming a freestanding academy is no longer an option – the Government deems these to be orphans without the capacity to deliver both the savings and the improvements required. So schools have to join together either in Multi-Academy Trusts (MAT) or by joining one of the chains of operators.
The school where I am a Governor is faced with the option of either joining an existing MAT, forming one with an existing Academy, or forming a new one with schools that are not (yet) Academies. Whichever the option there are many questions we have to ask ourselves:
1. Form Follows Function: Decide what you want to achieve and then decide what structure will best secure and deliver your aims.
2. Benefits: What are the expected benefits of converting to a MAT? Is conversion the only and the best way of securing those benefits?
3. Who to partner with? Do you know and trust the schools and individuals you’ll be pairing with? Explore all options.
4. Control and Protection: Who will be in control of the MAT? How will those individuals be appointed? What protection will there be against other parties (e.g. an aggressive chain) taking control?
5. Accountability: To whom? How will accountability work in practice? What role should parents have?
6. Subsidiarity: Should everything be done at the lowest (most local) possible level?
7. Process: Be clear about the application process is and who needs to do what by when. Rushing things is not wise. Take time and do it properly.
8. Legal Structure: Need full and open discussion about the options and the preferred structure. DfE website provides only two options (ordinary and cooperative) – are there others?
9. Business Plan: Before committing to particular partners and a particular structure there needs to be a full business planning exercise to establish all the costs that you will have to bear and how these will be funded. Projections for the first five years need to be shown with commentary on all assumptions, their sensitivity and your confidence levels. The business plan needs to reference back to costs currently incurred so that it is clear where additional expenditure or savings will be made under a MAT structure. The business plan needs to show projections for the MAT itself and for the individual schools.
10. Funding per school: You need to understand how funds are divided by the MAT between the schools. What is taken into account? Will funding account for age of buildings, local deprivation etc? What happens if one school already has a budget deficit – will the others have to pay it off?
11. Risk Analysis: Before committing you need a full risk analysis – identifying short and long term risks and showing how they will be mitigated.
12. Due Diligence – each member of the MAT should commission its own independent assessment of the proposals and the other partners to ensure that there are no hidden risks etc.
13. Eject Button / Exit Strategy – in case things do not go the way you want, you should retain the power to withdraw.