Academy Trust CEO Salary

[EdithGrantham]

I've recently found out that my DDs prospective primary school is in consultation to be taken over by a multi-academy trust rather than being run by the LA, I'm a teacher myself so have my own thoughts on academies in general but one thing I'm not clear on is where the money comes from for paying the CEOs and higher-ups?

Thanks, bit of a ‘bed blocker’ here. School buildings are near ready, one special school has been awaiting a trust for four years so isn't open.

The DfE (under Labour) may move the opening of these new schools back into LA hands, but it hasn't happened yet.

I haven't judged the OP’s school’s acedmisation proposal. I have shared examples of my experiences and knowledge.

"The DfE (under Labour) may move the opening of these new schools back into LA hands, but it hasn't happened yet."

@EmLaJae That may have been a theme in Jeremy Corbyn's manifesto but it certainly wasn't in Keir Starmer's: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/labour-manifesto-2024-all-the-schools-policies/

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-quietly-ditches-pledge-to-publish-academy-scandal-investigations/

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/lilac-sky-8-years-2-banned-heads-3m-improper-spending-but-no-report/

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/esfa-reviews-academy-investigation-policy-as-cases-stack-up/

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-report-delays-let-academy-trust-bosses-get-away-with-it/

The DfE and its agencies lack the capacity (and possibly the competence) to hold MATs to account in any meaningful way. This is known across the sector, and it is naive to think this doesn’t boost the attractiveness of MAT CEO roles. There is no link with any kind of local democratic process and nowhere near the same transparency in recruitment processes, which is why so many MAT boards are stuffed full of the CEO’s mates.

The OP’s question related to where the money went. The answer is that an awful lot of it goes in salaries and there is insufficient scrutiny to ensure that further expenditure is not going to suppliers linked to senior people within the MAT.

Oh but @partystress , you could say exactly the same about scrutiny of LA finances and will find similar stories if you look for them. All public bodies are struggling, after years of austerity, and things do fall through the cracks, in every sector. By using this to prejudge and politicise your answer to the OP's question, you are exploiting her naivety. If she mouths off in an academy consultation armed with political prejudice and not much else, she will look like a fool.

Oh but could you find some examples then? Of actual corruption and of salaries anywhere in an LA, let alone education, in excess of the top MAT salaries.

I think if anyone here is naive, it’s you if you think that austerity and the weaknesses in service provision that result from it are in any way analogous to jobs for the boys and contracts for the spouse.

Interesting. I have just left a single academy trust and the Head was on over £100k. No sign of that being on the website. And someone mentioned stress levels. None for this Head. They didn't even teach which surprised me.

@partystress , 42.7% of primary schools are now academies or free schools, accounting for 44.2% of the primary school population. 81.9% of secondary schools are academies or free schools, accounting for 81.7% of secondary school pupils. You might be angry about this, but the horse has most definitely bolted.

There will always be scope to improve scrutiny of any system, and the current Government has pledged to introduce inspection of MATs. The OP needs to be looking at the details of her individual school's proposal, not trying to fight a system that is now well established and here to stay.

Primary Heads of 2 form entry schools re now on that- so not remarkable. The range is up to 24 but 29 is not unusual

@wunderfull Yes I agree I don't know what the MAT is in the OP.

In my experience there cases of MATs who have an extra teirs of management, funds are diverted to different schools depending upon the priority of the MAT not the individual school or pupils. The MATs in some cases prescribe what is to be taught on what day and at what time - no individuality.

I am not a teacher but have extensive experience and knowledge as to what happens in some MATs. The whole idea was that when schools became grant maintained they would manage their own budget and have control - what has happened instead is that the large MATs have become more prescriptive than an old LEA. There is not the scrutiny.

Often Private Eye is the best place to look for any skulduggery.

I’m well aware that the project to fracture state funded education has gone so far that there is no prospect of a return to LEAs.

Inspection of MATs is likely to be gamed in the same way as is the case for individual schools within MATs:

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/revealed-how-academy-trusts-parachute-central-teams-into-ofsted-inspections/

The OP asked a question about salaries in MATs and you’ve leapt on to evangelise for them. I don’t know what your interest is in minimising genuine financial improprieties or educational deception, but I do notice that although you accuse others of being politically motivated, you are the one with no evidence for your arguments.

@partystress , the only thing I'm evangelising for is objectivity. I'm well aware there are some dodgy MATs out there. I have no agenda other than to provide some balance to the thread.

There are many negative writings about academies and about LA-run schools, but tit-for-tat article posting is not evidence of one system being better than another.

I have met headteachers and academy board members (many also former SLT or governors) who are very glad to be well shot of LA's of the past, and others working closely with enlightened LA's who have facilitated their academisation. The overall picture is very nuanced, and the only way forward for any school is to make the best of whatever opportunities arise in their area.

The requirement is for the number of staff earning over £100k to be stated on the trust's website, not the names of those involved or their actual salaries. A single academy trust will often publish its accounts on its website, with the relevant numbers in there.

The average secondary school head is paid over £95k, so salaries of over £100k are common.

I am unclear why you think being head was not a stressful job in this academy. Many heads don't teach, but it is rated as one of the most stressful jobs you can have.

It's silly to make a fuss about the principle of academisation - academies are now widespread and here to stay. Instead, focus on whether this trust is the right one for your school.

Do we have robust evidence they drive up standards? That they make schools more cost efficient? I’ve never seen any analysis and I’d be interested. I’ve already noticed that I get additional information and newsletters from the trust of my kid’s school on top of what the school itself will send and it does feel a layer has been added and it’s unclear what the benefits are.

Research shows that leaders of academy trusts running sometimes only 15 schools are earning much more money than the leaders of LEAs that are running more schools. Furthermore, the academies are getting slightly worse results and worse Ofsted ratings so the additional costs spent on leaders is not leading to better outcomes.

The articles below show the research comparing how much money is spend on the leaders of MATs compared to LEAs and how this is not leading to better school performance. There is also an article on how the leader of the Harris Academy is now earning £500,000. In my opinion, there should be a cap on how much public money can be spent on leaders of public services. In the past when LEAs ran at least 100 schools in my area, the leader never earned anywhere near this figure.

https://www.educationuncovered.co.uk/news/164366/academy-trusts-wasting-millions-of-pounds-on-highlypaid-managers.thtml

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/aug/03/council-maintained-schools-in-england-outperforming-academies-in-ofsted-ratings

https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2023/08/are-la-schools-more-likely-to-get-top-ofsted-ratings-than-academies/

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/highest-earning-academy-chiefs-annual-pay-nears-500k/#respond

No, there's no evidence that they drive up standards overall.

However, many academies do extremely well, and parents are happy with them, therefore they are nothing to be scared of. Every academisation decision needs to be looked at objectively. They are all done for a reason, and the reason isn't usually "the principle" of academisation. It is usually either to a) boost their finances, or b) move them under new leadership because they are performing badly. The latter option will obviously only improve their performance if the new leadership is better than the old leadership. You need to listen to what school governors have to say on this. If they have chosen a particular trust, then it's worth taking the time to understand their rationale, not just go into "academies are bad" mode and close your ears.