Evolution of the Academies Programme: A three-phase journey

Phase 1 (2000-2009): Targeted intervention

The Academies Programme began as a government initiative to improve underperforming schools, with the primary aim to “improve pupil performance and break the cycle of low expectations” in schools with a history of failure. The aim was to foster innovation and raise educational standards by giving schools greater autonomy over their curriculum, finances and staffing.

Initially known as “city academies”, these schools were taken out of local authority control and managed by independent sponsors, such as businesses, universities and charities. 

Academies also received significant initial funding from government, with contributions from sponsors capped at £2m. Sponsors usually enjoyed significant influence through governance arrangements and set the founding vision for a new school. 

The legal model at this stage involved closing a school and opening a brand-new school, including new school buildings and uniform.

By 2010, there were approximately 200 academies across England, establishing the foundation for what would become a sector-wide transformation.

Phase 2 (2010-2015): Rapid expansion and innovation

In 2010, the Academies Act marked the beginning of a period of rapid expansion of the academies programme. By January 2015, the number of academies had risen to more than 4,500.

The act introduced the concept of convertor academies, marking a pivotal shift. Initially, “outstanding” schools were allowed to apply to “convert” to academy status so they could access academy freedoms. These freedoms included:

• Independence from local authority control.
• Freedom on setting pay and conditions.
• Removal of the requirement to follow the national curriculum.
• Freedom to set the school day and term times.

Unlike the early academies, convertor academies involved a new “conversion” process that did not involve closing a school and opening a new school. This meant the process was far quicker and typically took three to six months from approval.

The conversion provided financial support to ensure schools could be supported with both the process, as well as the “start-up” costs of forming as separate entities. 

Financial incentives were substantial. Schools that applied would receive a grant of £25,000 to help fund the conversion process. This included a calculation of the Local Authority Central Spend Equivalent Grant (LACSEG) to partially cover costs of services the academies had to secure for themselves, which had typically been provided by the local authority. 

For a secondary school in 2011, it could expect to receive significant additional funding (the amount would depend on the size of school and local authority but would typically run to the hundreds of thousands). This grant was eventually phased out.

As the number of academies increased, the DfE expanded access to the programme to “good” schools. It also introduced requirements for convertor schools to support other schools and policy initiatives to sponsor failing schools to convert. 

While these sponsor academies were similar to the early academies, there was no longer the requirement for the £2m contribution and a marked shift in the nature of academy sponsors. Now, the vast majority of academy sponsors are MATs set up by successful convertor schools.

There were three different ways that schools could support failing schools:

• Multi-academy trusts: Schools could become MATs and formally sponsor a school, with the failing school converting into the MAT, supported by generous grants for school improvement activities (though less generous than phase one grants).
• Umbrella trusts: Schools could create umbrella trusts where each school maintained its own academy trust under a parent charity. Over time, these arrangements were seen to allow schools to convert with "friendly" local schools while remaining largely independent, and so fell out of favour with the DfE due to concerns around performance and oversight.
• Collaborative partnerships: These were intended as strong collaborative arrangements between schools. In practice, the strength of the arrangements varied.

Phase 3 (2016-present): Consolidation and maturation

From 2016 onwards, the Academies Programme has continued to evolve. The focus has been on consolidating the gains made during the rapid expansion phase and addressing challenges that have emerged.

In the first part of this phase, the DfE provided grant funding to encourage the creation of school groups but the strategy evolved once the DfE felt there were sufficient academies and it did not need to "pump-prime" the creation of new groups, and so the level of funding decreased.

The DfE's re-brokering programme, in which the government moved academies between trusts, also emerged during this period. About 250 academies move trust each year. Some of these will be voluntary (driven by a clear strategic imperative), while others are transfers where the DfE intervenes, as well as academies voluntarily moving before being formally re-brokered. 

Today, there are approximately 11,600 academies. A quarter (24%) of these are sponsored academies. More than 80% of secondary schools are academies and 47% of primaries are academies. Some universities have sponsored academy trusts and will also be involved in university technical colleges (UTCs) as well as maths free schools, which are also set up under the Academies Programme. 

Legal and governance framework: A blueprint for universities

Corporate structure

MATs are single legal entities responsible for multiple schools. MATs are established as private companies limited by guarantee. Their governing document, which must be agreed with the DfE (using its model document) to secure a funding agreement, is the Articles of Association, which outlines the trust's charitable purpose and governance structure.

While they are education charities, academy trusts are classified as "exempt charities". This status means they are not directly regulated by the Charity Commission. Instead, the Secretary of State for Education acts as the principal regulator, with the DfE carrying out the day-to-day regulatory function. This mirrors the exempt charitable status of universities, which are principally regulated by the Office for Students. 

Three-tier governance model

The governance of a multi academy trust is typically structured in three layers: members, trustees and local governors (although many different names are used for this last layer).

Members: Similar to shareholders in a company (albeit with fiduciary duties towards the trust), members have ultimate control over the academy trust. Members have a distinct but limited role. It is, however, an important one. Their powers include appointing some of the trustees and amending the trust's Articles of Association. In summary, they act as the “guardian” for the effective operation of the trust, assuring themselves that the board is exercising effective leadership and governance of the organisation.

Trustees: Also referred to as directors, trustees sit on the trust board and are registered as company directors at Companies House. They are responsible for the three core functions of governance: setting the strategic direction, holding executive leaders to account and ensuring financial probity.

Local governance: A third tier of governance often exists at school level. The terminology will vary from trust to trust, but they are often referred to as local governing bodies or academy councils. However, the ultimate responsibility and accountability for all schools within the trust lies with the board of trustees. Some of the larger trusts have experimented with either federating at local level (where a governing body is set up to act for two or more schools) or creating regional hubs.

Regulatory and contractual obligations

The relationship between a MAT and the government is formalised through several key documents and regulations:

• Funding agreement: This is a legally-binding contract between the trust and Secretary of State for Education. It sets out the conditions under which the trust must operate to receive public funding.

• Academy trust handbook: This document, published annually by the DfE, details the financial management, governance and oversight requirements that all trusts must follow. Compliance with the handbook is a condition of the funding agreement.

• Articles of Association: The DfE provides model articles to which they only allow minor variations.

• Academy Trust Governance Code: This is a voluntary, sector-led code that outlines principles and best practices for effective governance, drawing on the Charity Governance Code.