MPs call for tighter restrictions on academy trusts

A new report on multi-academy trusts (MATs) by the House of Commons Education Committee, published today, urges the Government to place tighter restrictions on the growth of trusts as it says that a ‘considerable’ number are failing to improve and are consistently at the bottom of league tables.

The report is informed by a committee inquiry into the role of MATs, the ‘current landscape’, how expansion should be monitored, the balance of decision-making, the characteristics of high-performing MATs and how performance should be assessed.

Since the inquiry was launched on 18 March 2016, the Government has dropped its plan to force all schools to become academies.

Neil Carmichael, chair of the House of Commons Education Committee, said, ‘Since launching this inquiry there have been several changes to academy policy which have caused uncertainty and instability in the sector. 

'We have significant concerns about the performance, accountability and expansion of multi-academy trusts. While some MATs are producing excellent results and making a valuable contribution to our education system, a considerable number are failing to improve and are consistently at the bottom of league tables.

‘MATs have emerged from the Government’s plan to increase the number of academies but policy and oversight have been playing catch-up.

‘Only time will tell if MATs are more successful than local authorities in tackling under-performance and supporting high-performing schools. But if the Government is to pursue the goal of further academisation, it will need to work with local authorities and allow those councils with a track record of strong educational performance to use their expertise within their education department to create MATs.’

According to the Committee, the number of schools forming and joining MATS has risen ‘significantly’ over the last five years, and is expected to continue to grow. The Government believes that most schools which convert to academy status will join a MAT.

Figures from the DfE show that there were 1,121 'active' MATs in England in November 2016. Of the 21,525 state-funded schools, 1,618 of which were stand-alone academies and 4,140 schools were in MATs.

However, the committee says there remains a ‘high degree of uncertainty’ around their effectiveness. It claims that evidence of MATs’ ability to raise pupil performance is ‘limited’ and ‘varied’, and the picture across England is very mixed with academies in trusts at both the top and bottom of recent league tables.

The report outlines six characteristics that the committee believes trusts must possess in order to be successful. These include strong regional structures, robust financial controls, enhanced opportunities for career development and tangible accountability.

Expansion and development of Trusts

The committee’s report raises concern over the quick expansion of MATs and over wide geographical regions, that it says has meant schools have suffered. It also says that some schools have been coerced into joining without proper information.

Another concern is the growth of what it calls ‘untouchable’ schools, those that have received poor Ofsted ratings and/or are in financial trouble and that trusts refuse to take on, and the length of time it is taking for some to be re-brokered.

The committee of MPs says that the Government should give greater support for schools which are deemed unattractive to sponsors and play a more active role in re-brokering through Regional School Commissioners (RSA).

The report goes on to outline fears of the primary sector being left behind as secondary schools join or form MATs. According to the committee the MAT model is not attractive to small, rural primary schools, in particular, which leaves them in a vulnerable position.

Another problem is that RSAs are struggling to find or expand existing trust sponsors in rural areas of the country, which could mean the appointment of sponsors without a quality track record.

The committee says in order for the Government to pursue its goal of further academisation, it should allow local authorities with a track record of strong educational performance to set up their own MATs.

It welcomes the Department for Education’s (DfE) ‘growth check’ to assess whether a MAT should be allowed to take on more schools, but urges Government to place tighter restrictions on the growth of trusts. It also recommends the Government commission and publish independent, robust research on what the highest performing MATs are doing.

Accountability and inspection

The committee of MPs heard how there is a gap in assessing MATs, which neither Ofsted nor Regional Schools Commissioners fulfil. Also, that the current situation of Ofsted conducting ‘batched inspections’, where the inspectorate makes an overall judgement of MATs based on inspection of several schools within a trust, is not sustainable or sufficient as MATs expand over the next five-six years.

As such, the report calls for a new Ofsted framework for MAT inspections and the development of resources, skills and powers to allow for full inspections of trusts.

The committee also heard that there is a ‘lack of clarity’ over the roles and responsibilities of Ofsted and RSCs and ‘continuing cross-over’, which is confusing for trusts, individual schools and parents.

Two previous committee reports have recommended that the Government clarify the division of responsibilities between RSCs and Ofsted in a way that schools and parents can understand.

The committee concludes by saying the DfE has a long way to go to demonstrate that public money given to academies is being used effectively.

A Department for Education spokesperson said, 'Thanks to our reforms there are now almost 1.8 million more children being taught in schools rated good or outstanding schools than in 2010. The best multi-academy trusts are turning round struggling schools across the country and providing good school places for thousands of children.
 
'The oversight and accountability system for academies and MATs is more robust than LA maintained schools, allowing us to take swift action to deal with underperformance. Where an academy is failing to reach the standards we expect, action is taken including transferring schools to new trusts. We are already developing a "growth check" to ensure good trusts only take on new schools when they are ready and it will not impact on the education of the children they are already responsible for.
 
'Local authorities are already able to be part of a MAT with up to a fifth of its board having links to their local authority. We encourage all trusts to work collaboratively and the best already do so but maintaining their independence is a crucial part of encouraging the innovation that has driven up standards in so many schools.'

Kevin Courtney, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), said, ‘This thorough and thoughtful report from the Education Select Committee will make for uncomfortable reading for the Secretary of State for Education, her ministers and the Department.

‘Allowing MATs and trusts to expand without proper checks and balances is having damaging consequences for many children’s education. The report recognises the expertise that local authorities bring to the running of schools. They should, however, be free to open up their own schools not forced to open MATs, as the Select Committee has suggested.

‘The report further highlights the danger to primary schools and to rural schools by the rush to academisation within the secondary sector. Any responsible Government must have an education strategy that works for all schools. The one size fits all approach of mass academisation is clearly not an appropriate model.

‘We welcome the call by the Select Committee for MATs to engage more with the local community but ultimately the MAT structure is an undemocratic one. MATs are ultimately unaccountable institutions and will never substitute for the role of democratically elected and accountable local authorities in education.’

Councillor Richard Watts, chair of the Local Government Association’s (LGA) Children and Young People Board, said, ‘The LGA has long been concerned about the lack of local accountability, financial oversight and governance arrangements that exist for Multi-Academy Trusts.

'Schools should be given the freedom to choose, in partnership with parents and councils, whichever structure is most appropriate for local children and if that means councils setting up their own MATs then they should be able to do so.

‘Allowing local authorities to set up MATS would ensure the council and its directly elected councillors, who know their local schools and the communities they serve better than anyone else, will be able to step in and help.

'Councils also have vast experience in managing large budgets and have a reputation as being the most efficient, transparent and trusted part of the public sector. Running their own MATs would also allow councils to keep an eye on all local school spending.’