We stand on the edge of the next chapter for our school system, where a renewed focus on children designed systems can replace a period of governance structure design. Not because of a single policy change or structural reform but because the evidence has been quietly accumulating for years. The story is being written all around us.
Wherever schools have chosen to work together as committed partners with shared stewardship, strong values and deep local purpose, children have benefited. Outcomes improve, professionals thrive and communities feel the difference. Where schools have remained isolated, however well intentioned, talent can drain away, leaders are overloaded and scarce public money leaks out of the system.
This is not an argument for scale at any cost. Nor is it a defence of fragmentation in the name of autonomy. The future lies somewhere more demanding and more hopeful than that. We believe the next generation of our system must be both proudly local and powerfully collective.
Moving beyond the old conversation
The Confederation of School Trusts has been clear in its Next‑gen governance work: the future of governance is not about replicating past structures but about designing arrangements that are strategic, civic and built for the long term.
If we genuinely believe we can do more together, why would we wait? Why does so much of our debate still default to mergers, acquisitions or defensive consolidation - language borrowed from the private sector and poorly suited to our most important public service?
What if instead we started from a different premise: that schools are deeply rooted in place, culture and community, and that any system worthy of children must protect that intimacy and beauty while also addressing the inefficiencies and fragilities that isolation creates?
Place and scale are not opposites
At the Ted Wragg Trust, we’re increasingly convinced this is a false choice. We believe there must be a better model out there, one where systems are built for children, where local groups of schools are inspired by their place and retain their unique identities, while also benefiting from the necessary advantages (sometimes uncomfortable, even a little ugly) of genuine scale.
Used intelligently, scale means many things can be done better and more cost‑effectively. It clears the clutter. It frees up time. And it allows those who know their children, families and communities best to focus on what really matters.
This isn’t about conformity, but coherence. It’s about hardwiring collaboration so leaders don’t have to keep reinventing the wheel and can instead spend their energy where it belongs – inspiring the next generation in the place they love.
A foundation partnership model
The idea we’re exploring is a foundation partnership model. In practical terms, this means groups of trusts and, over time, potentially federations and maintained school partnerships, remaining themselves while being structurally connected to something bigger, emphasising a cooperative style mentality.
In this model, local leaders continue to lead and enjoy being recognised locally. Communities continue to feel known and understood. Identity isn’t just preserved; it’s strengthened. At the same time, shared services are delivered through trusted, non‑profit subsidiaries, allowing scale to work for the sector rather than draining energy and money away from it.
Done well, scale removes waste, improves quality and builds resilience. Governance becomes more strategic and more civic, exactly as CST has called for. Most importantly, collaboration stops being optional or personality‑dependent, it’s simply how the system works.
This isn’t merging. It isn’t homogenising. It’s the deliberate design of a system where deep knowledge of children and families, operational excellence and innovative educational approaches can sit comfortably side by side.
Unlocking collective excellence
One of the least discussed costs of fragmentation is how it limits the spread of great ideas. Too often, trusts and schools develop high‑quality training, research‑informed practice or genuinely innovative approaches, only for that work to remain trapped within organisational boundaries.
A foundation model changes that. When schools work together in purposeful partnership, the best ideas can travel further and faster. Expert teachers, researchers and leaders across phases and communities can be connected and given the space to shape what comes next. The intellectual property Children invest in can be made to work harder and spread further, with sharing and factorising built in. Collaboration really can replace futile competition.
This isn’t about standardisation. It’s about ambition, collective ambition. A coherent national offer can emerge, rooted in local wisdom and delivered through genuine partnership, rather than endlessly recreated in isolation.
We can see the future already
Across the country, there are leaders and organisations quietly demonstrating what is possible when collaboration is deep, values‑led and relentlessly focused on children.
Small, high‑performing groups of schools show how shared purpose can lift standards while preserving identity. Civic‑minded trusts demonstrate how education can shape not just great schools, but great places. Rural and coastal partnerships show how connection and clarity of purpose can transform outcomes in the most challenging contexts. And new partnerships, sometimes formed under pressure, are proving that working together can strengthen identity rather than dilute it.
These examples tell a consistent story. When stewardship is shared and trust is real, outcomes rise, professionals grow and communities benefit and everyone has more fun! Joy is shared and multiplied.
Choosing what to build
There are some truths that do not change. Schools must meet the needs of their place. They must be accountable to the communities they serve. They must draw strength from their context, not fight against it. Different schools and places will have different priorities and needs.
Alongside these sit the realities of our moment. Scale, when used well, brings stability and improvement. When it is absent, schools are often forced to rely on private providers whose profits leave the public system altogether. The result is wasted money, duplicated effort and fragile capacity.
We do not have to accept the binary choices that have shaped the last decade. We can design something better: Groups of schools with deep community roots and cherished identities, connected through a foundation that provides hard wired collaboration and development, operational excellence, shared services and long‑term resilience.
The foundation partnership model is not a finished blueprint by any means. It is the starting point for a wider conversation. An invitation to think differently, to design deliberately and to move from informal collaboration to enduring civic structures that are built to last.
An invitation
This feels like a moment of real opportunity. We can continue to patch and protect what exists, or we can take seriously the opportunity to build something more coherent, more values-led and more sustainable for the long term.
If this way of thinking resonates, if you are curious about what a foundation partnership might look like in your context, we would love to talk. The next chapter will not be written by policy alone, but by those willing to imagine and build together. Please contact deputyceo@tedwraggtrust.co.uk if you would like be part of that conversation.
This blog is part of a series addressing the importance of building strength and resilience in the system. The series considers how we intentionally design a system that has the strength and scale to deliver for children. The trust system has always responded to the external environment with purpose and innovation. This blog series starts a conversation about the future shape of the school system in England.
We welcome perspectives from a diverse range of guest contributors. The opinions expressed in blogs are the views of the author(s), and should not be read as CST guidance or CST’s position.
