1. Webinar: Multi-school options and collaborative structures ------------------------------------------ Presented by Nick MacKenzie, partner at Browne Jacobson

2. Nick MacKenzie, Partner 30 September 2014 Multi School Options & Collaborative Structures

3. some context “.. flat line revenues which, bearing in mind that schools are having to do so much more, means they have to start thinking out of the box in terms of their financial management.” Lord Nash, April 2014

4. IFS’ perspective The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has estimated that public spending on education in the UK will have fallen by 3.5% per year in real terms between 2010/11 & 2014/15. According to the IFS this would represent the largest cut in education spending over any four-year period since at least the 1950s.

5. drivers for collaboration teacher training & education diminishing LA capacity/services accountability agenda leadership capacity shared services creating safety net educational outcomes

6. common models of collaboration common action MoU collaboration agreement collaboration company hard federation/ academy groups

7. common action Very informal Agree at convenience to work together on a specific activity

8. common action pros cons easy to end little commitment no sharing risk quick,easy and cheap to establish flexible can include all school types pros cons

9. memorandum of understanding Short document setting out what you are agreeing to do Not legally binding Balance between detail and brevity Can be supported by joint committee*

10. memorandum of understanding not legally binding limited commitment with limited scope to deal with challenging issues no sharing risk quick,easy and cheap to establish can flush out misunderstandings flexible pros cons

11. collaboration agreement Formal contract setting out rights and obligations Typical terms: objectives, business planning, KPIs, decision-marking, term and termination

12. collaboration agreement pros cons can end on notice limited shared governance limited risk sharing relatively easy to establish deal with shared resources greater commitment pros cons

13. collaboration company Similar to collaborative agreement but also have shared company Company can be profit/not for profit/charitable

14. collaboration company Constitutional Relationship Contractual Relationship School Academy Collaboration Company COLLABORATION AGREEMENTCOLLABORATION AGREEMENT

15. collaboration company more complicated to establish harder to end employment of staff not necessarily straight forward limited liability speed up joint decision-making flexible governance arrangements pros cons

16. hard federation / academy group One legal entity responsible for maintaining two or more schools

17. F&GP hard federations School 4 School Level Governing Body GB level T&LStaffing Premises School 3 School 2School 1 Regulations set out rules on composition & appointment of GB. Frequently committees established on cross-federation basis. Different approaches to leadership – from Executive Head Teacher to separate Head Teachers reporting to Chair

18. Academy 1 multi-academy trusts LGB School Level Board of Directors Trust level Members Academy 2 Academy 3 Academy 4 LGB Members – appoint & remove directors Board of Directors – approve accounts, MFA, employ staff, hold land & overall responsibility Academy - SFA, oversight of educational standards at local level

19. umbrella trust Members Board of Directors Academy 1 Academy 2Academy 3Academy 4 Members Umbrella Trust Board of Directors

20. hard federation/academy group pros cons feeling of loss of autonomy difficult to end impact of shared risk collaboration at all levels create critical mass pool assets and resources pros cons

21. some barriers not enough time too complex GB feel pressurised one sided unblocking the barriers

22. unblocking WG to report on –why needed –approach firm but fair timeline clear rationale with targets unblocking the barriers

23. questions …

24. contact Nick MacKenzie | 0121 237 4564 | nick.mackenzie@brownejacobson.com Please note The information contained in these notes is based on the position at 30 th June 2014. It does, of course, only represent a summary of the subject matter covered and is not intended to be a substitute for detailed advice. If you would like to discuss any of the matters covered in further detail, our team would be happy to do so. © Browne Jacobson LLP 2014. Browne Jacobson LLP is a limited liability partnership.

25. For more resources and support in your role, visit www.optimus-education.com www.optimus-education.com