The Department for Education has been warned that its definition of stuck schools is “flawed” and risks deterring academy trusts from taking on schools in need of improvement.
The Confederation of School Trusts has raised concerns in a consultation response to DfE plans for Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence (RISE) teams to intervene at schools deemed to be “stuck”.
The creation of the RISE adviser role has been one of the first key school policies introduced by the government since it was elected in 2024.
The DfE plans for RISE teams to work with stuck schools, those requiring significant improvement and to provide a universal offer of support available to all schools.
The department is defining schools as stuck if they have had successive Ofsted grades of less than “good”, which can include a previous rating given to a school before its current academy trust took it on.
RISE school improvement teams
CST is concerned that the proposed definition fails to distinguish between schools that have already improved since being sponsored or rebrokered into a new trust, and “those with long-term underperformance under the same responsible body”.
In a statement accompanying its consultation response, the CST says the government’s definition for stuck schools is “flawed”.
The consultation response states: “The proposal in the consultation would mean that this school - on a demonstrable upward improvement journey - is deemed to be ‘stuck’. Meanwhile, a school that has been less than ‘good’ for at least the past two inspections (and possibly longer) under the same responsible body is deemed to be in the same situation. We think this is deeply problematic.”
It adds: “Consequently, to avoid being labelled ‘stuck’, this proposal risks putting sponsoring trusts in the unenviable position of having to move the most broken schools in the system to ‘good’ (or equivalent) within two years, or otherwise choose not to take on the school in the first place. This is a clear disincentive to sponsor schools most in need.”
The DfE is proposing that RISE teams work with stuck schools for two years. If the necessary improvement has not then been made at the end of this period then the department would look to move to a structural intervention. This could mean academisation or rebrokering a school into a different academy trust.
Call to review impact of intervention
The department is also proposing that from September 2026, its RISE teams provide 18 months of support to schools deemed to require significant improvement - a new category to be created by Ofsted when its report cards and inspections are introduced. The new inspections are scheduled to start in the autumn term of 2025-26.
Before September 2026, the DfE would use structural intervention in schools rated as “requiring significant improvement”.
In its response, the CST has said that the department should review how effective the RISE programme has been before using it to intervene in schools deemed to require significant improvement.
It states: “It is plausible that by September 2026 there will be sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal to move from structural intervention to Rise from September 2026 is appropriate.
“However, it must also be the case that if such evidence was not forthcoming, that government might wish to reconsider the fact, timing or scale of this change. We therefore suggest there is a review of this intent in the summer of 2026 when we know about the success of RISE, with a fall-back policy position of continuing to use structural intervention if necessary.”
The DfE consultation focuses on school accountability principles, its plans for school profiles - a new dataset about schools - and for Rise team intervention.
In its response, the CST has said there is a need for the DfE to have an overall “strategy for accountability and regulation” for the school system.
For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter
