Our trust have been using the Framework for over two years. We used it initially as a MAT temperature/reality check. I sent out the Framework to three distinct groups of people: Executive leaders and the trust Chair, Headteachers, and then a larger group of middle leaders. This provided stimulus for further discussion with the combined Heads and Executive group. The discussion for us was more useful then the exact RAG colour rating. We identified areas for improvement, and in the case of our one red area, it stimulated an MDIF bid which allowed us to successfully buy and install a data processing platform that actually met our needs. We replicated the same process a year later to review last year’s outcomes and compared them with the trust priorities. It allowed us to check the progress we were making and also show staff how their views had influenced our priorities - the middle leaders group were ‘delighted to find we had listened’ to them!
Trustees and local governors have been trained on the Framework as it has allowed us to point out to them how all the systems fit together in bringing about school improvement. The non-educationalists that now dominate most trust boards (ours anyway) need the Framework to understand how we achieve the education metrics, not just the financial or HR ones. It has a helpful clarity and provides them with questions for appropriate challenge.
This case study was taken from the guidance on the MAT Assurance Framework.