Collaborative Working for Academy Trusts

Factors to be aware of when considering collaboration

The financial landscape, changes in education policy, workforce challenges and the drive for consistently high educational standards continue to encourage academy trusts and schools to look beyond operating in isolation. As in many areas, it can pay dividends to take a proactive approach to collaboration with others operating in similar sectors or locations.

This article explains what collaborative working means in the context of academies, explores the benefits and drawbacks, and highlights key governance risk areas trust leaders should consider.

What do we mean by collaboration?

Collaborative working is not a single model, but has varying degrees of formality, commitment and integration. Understanding where a proposed arrangement sits on that scale is critical to any cost benefit analysis and decision to proceed.

Collaboration generally begins with informal conversations and knowledge sharing. This might include headteachers’ forum, peer review or observation sessions, or sharing the costs of more formal training. These arrangements are usually non contractual, flexible and easy to exit. They rely heavily on relationships and goodwill rather than legal structure.

More formal contractual arrangements might include shared services agreements (HR, finance, IT, estates or safeguarding support), secondments or shared staffing arrangements, joint procurement or framework agreements, or school improvement or advisory contracts. Each academy trust remains legally independent, but rights and obligations are clearly documented. These arrangements can deliver efficiencies while preserving autonomy, but they introduce legal, financial and governance complexity.

Some trusts choose to collaborate through structured partnerships, such as hubs or federations, which tend to involve shared strategic planning and oversight, even where individual trusts retain their own boards and accounting officers. This can often (but not necessarily) be a precursor to a full merger, resulting in most cases in a single board of trustees, one set of members and one accounting officer. Autonomy at individual school level may be reduced, but governance, accountability and strategy are aligned and there are likely to be efficiencies of scale and opportunities for knowledge sharing.

Why consider collaborative working?

When entered into with intention, collaborative working can deliver significant advantages. It can be particularly useful for sharing specialist expertise (such as compliance, SEND, safeguarding or curriculum design) to which individual schools might not otherwise have access. It often brings strategic and financial resilience as well as expanding influence and bargaining power.

How can we mitigate the risks involved in collaborative working?

It is understandable for the trustees and senior leadership of academy trusts to have some reservations about entering into collaborative working arrangements, which are often not without cost or risk. They may fear a loss of autonomy or identity, particularly if cultural or strategic misalignments later come to light.
If following model documents, there is a strong likelihood that the objects of academy trusts will align, but they should be carefully checked to ensure than any new arrangements further the charitable purposes and that the academy trust has the power to enter into such arrangements. Early discussions around the collaboration can also be vital to ensure a compatibility of values and approach.

The nature of more formal collaborative working inevitably means more complex contracts and decision-making processes. Arrangements that blur responsibility can expose academy trusts to regulatory, financial and compliance risks. Clear lines of authority and responsibility from the outset are vital.

Individuals involved in the collaborative arrangements may hold roles across multiple trusts or schools and therefore must be mindful of the risk that a conflict of interest may impact on their decision making, and take steps to mitigate or remove such risk (for example by declaring the conflict and not participating in the decision making on matters in which they are conflicted).

Finally, academy trusts remain individually accountable to the Department for Education unless and until a merger or transfer takes place, so any collaboration arrangements should not obscure lines of accountability, weaken internal controls or compromise compliance with the Academy Trust Handbook or the principles set out in the Academy Trust Governance Guide.

Trustees and leaders should approach collaboration as a spectrum of options, carefully balancing benefit against risk, and ensuring that governance, accountability and legal compliance remain robust at every stage. With clear purpose, strong relationships and sound governance, collaboration can be a positive and transformative force for academy trusts and the pupils they serve.

If you would like to discuss any aspect of this article further, please contact our Education team on 0113 244 6100.

You can also keep up to date by following Wrigleys Solicitors on LinkedIn.

The information in this article is necessarily of a general nature. The law stated is correct at the date (stated above) this article was first posted to our website.

Specific advice should be sought for specific situations. If you have any queries or need any legal advice, please feel free to contact Wrigleys Solicitors.