MPs warn not enough evidence for expansion of 'unaccountable' multi-academy trusts

Education leaders express fears independently-run academy trusts are not being held accountable for poor results and high expenditures

Parents told the board the MATs were not sufficiently accountable to their local community and that they felt disconnected from decision making within the schools (Getty)

Evidence that academy chains can improve pupils’ results is “limited and varied”, MPs have warned, raising “significant concerns” over the accountability of the independently-run trusts.

A new report published by the House of Commons Education Select Committee highlights stark contrasts in the performances of multi-academy trusts (MATs), prompting committee members to argue there is not enough evidence to support their costly expansion.

While some trusts are producing good results, committee members said others are failing to improve and languishing at the bottom of league tables.

​MATs are the organisations responsible for running groups of academies – schools that are free from local council control and have freedom over areas such as the curriculum and staff pay, but are funded directly by the Government.

Concerns have been raised in recent months over their apparent lack of accountability in terms of inspections and published evidence of trust leaders' high salary increases.

In their report, the cross-party group of MPs said some MATs have expanded too quickly, in turn causing the performance of their schools to suffer.

MPs reiterated concerns that more must be done to ensure MATs can be properly held to account by Ofsted and local communities.

It was also said that despite “a range of proactive and reactive measures taken”, the Department for Education (DfE) “has a long way to go in order to demonstrate that public money disbursed to academies is being used effectively”.

The number of schools joining MATs has grown significantly over the past five years and the Government predicts even further growth within the next five.

It is now expected that most schools which take on academy status will join a trust, however “evidence of their ability to raise pupil performance is limited and varied,“ the committee said.

“The picture across England is very mixed with academies in trusts at both the top and bottom of recent league tables.

“Some of the earliest trusts expanded too quickly over wide geographic regions and the performance of their schools suffered as a result.”

Members added: “We were told by parents that MATs are not sufficiently accountable to their local community and they feel disconnected from decision making at trustee board level.”

Kevin Courtney, General Secretary, National Union of Teachers said the report would make for “uncomfortable reading” for the Government.

“No other advanced economy has deregulated education to the extent that the Government has cut loose schools in England,” he said. “It is clear that this is negatively impacting on children’s education and that public money is being wasted.

‘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,” he added, “they should, however, be free to open up their own schools not forced to open MATs, as the Select Committee has suggested.”

The committee said while it is encouraging that a MAT “growth check” is being developed, the group urges the government to use this to ensure that trusts are only allowed to take on more schools when they are ready.

The report adds that there are gaps in how trusts are inspected and Ofsted should be given powers to conduct full inspections of them and they must engage more with parents.

It also notes that more academy sponsors are needed as certain areas are struggling to attract new ones.

Committee chair Neil Carmichael 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.“

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 local authority 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."