Governor trust in MATs at ‘all-time low’

Trust in the multi-academy trust system is at an “all-time low”, a survey of more than 3,000 trustees and governors has found.

Emma Balchin, chief executive of the National Governance Association (NGA), which carried out the survey, expressed surprise that levels of trust had fallen in 2026 after they had risen for several years.

She revealed the finding, ahead of the survey’s official publication next month, at a fringe event of the Labour Party conference in Liverpool yesterday on how to build a trust-led system that works for all.

“Trust in the trust system is at an all-time low,” she told attendees.

This was a “shocking statistic”, she said, because there had previously been a “steady upward trajectory”, with “people realising the benefits of being in a trust and really being part of a school community that is all working to the same end”.

Local accountability will be “pivotal” to improving levels of trust, along with a better articulation of what the benefits of being in a multi-academy trust are, she said.

Tes understands that the finding is based on a series of questions that the NGA has polled members on each year since 2019, including on the quality of trust communications, as well as an assessment of overall sentiment.

Controlling approach ‘fetishised’

In the same fringe session, Liz Robinson, director of education transformation at Oasis Community Learning (which has 58 schools), said it is important not to romanticise the system pre-academisation.

“It is absolutely wrong that we look back with some kind of halcyon glow about how brilliant local authorities were as a way of organising schools,” she said. “In my experience, they just weren’t.”

She pointed out that local authorities, like many trusts, took a “top slice” from their schools - but called it a central services charge.

And she said the financial scrutiny of MATs was “inordinately higher” than for local authority schools.

However, Ms Robinson said the “directive” approach of early so-called “superheads”, who had been sent in to turn around schools in crisis, had since been “fetishised” as an approach that should be used in non-emergencies.

“That very directive approach has continued as being a significant part of how MATs have grown, into the mental model about how directive they should be,” she said.

‘One-way ticket’

The perception that headteachers will lose their autonomy is one of the main reasons why some are reluctant to join trusts, according to Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the NAHT school leaders’ union.

“The counterpoint to that is you’ll get so much support from the central office, because you’ll have time to do your job,” he said, suggesting that the sector talked more about this.

Speaking at the same Labour conference fringe session, he also said the system needed to move away from it being a “one-way ticket” for schools that wanted to join a MAT but later found that it “didn’t suit the culture” of their school.