91����

Paying trustees in multi-academy trusts would improve scrutiny and allow boards to be held to a higher standard, according to the chair of Lift Schools.

Alastair Da Costa, whose trust runs 59 schools, was speaking on a panel for a 91���� webinar about why the role of chair of trustees is more important than many think.

The panel also included Claire Heald, chair of Active Learning Trust (21 schools) and CEO at The Cam Academy Trust (17 schools), and Gavin Robert, chair of REAch2 Academy Trust (65 primaries).

Mr Da Costa flagged that other parts of the public sector, such as the NHS, pay trustees, and said introducing this in academy trusts could increase board accountability.

“It doesn’t matter how much you’re paying,” he said. “It adds to the accountability and the ability to scrutinise and make sure the chair and others on the board are held to a higher standard.”

This would be important as the sector moves to an all-trust model, Mr Da Costa added, to “improve governance, to improve diversity...and to improve, ultimately, accountability”.

You can view a preview clip of the webinar below (requires cookies to be enabled), and you can watch the full webinar on the 91���� magazine YouTube channel .

��

NHS provider trusts pay non-executive directors according to a national , under which chairs receive between £40,000 and £63,000 a year, depending on their organisation’s size.

However, fellow panellist Mr Robert was not convinced that academy trusts should move to this model.

Mr Robert, who was previously a non-executive director at an NHS hospital trust, said: “I’m not convinced that everyone in the academy sector will welcome that particular drain on their budget because there’s not a lot of money around in the sector.”

Most governors and trustees are also not in favour of paid roles, according to the National Governance Association (NGA). School and trust governance is “an inherently voluntary, civic role”, said the NGA’s deputy chief executive Sam Henson.

However, he also acknowledged recruitment pressures, with two-thirds of boards reporting difficulties in filling posts.

He added: “The NHS parallel is potentially a worthwhile comparison, but it raises a fundamental question: where would the money come from? School and trust budgets are stretched, many to breaking point.”

The panel also discussed how the chair of trustees’ role is growing in importance and complexity as the sector consolidates.

Ms Heald said: “When you’re running a merger, they’re complex, they’re tricky, and you need strong backing and support from your board. You need your board to be able to really understand strategic risks and how they can take assurance around those things.”

‘Accountability gap’

But Ms Heald said there is too much inconsistency in how the role is carried out.

“I think there’s an accountability gap,” she said. “I think we’re clear on how executives and school leaders are held to account. I think we’re less clear on what accountability looks like for chairs.”

Despite some “great stuff” happening in some trusts, there is a need for greater focus on chairs’ performance management, development and feedback, Ms Heald added.

Mr Robert said the chair’s role lacks “tight definition” and said the framing is “much looser” than in the NHS, for instance.

There appears to be more focus on growing the leadership of boards and chairs in further and higher education, and “more fora” for trustees to be part of in those sectors, said Mr Da Costa.

The panellists all agreed, however, that some of the variability across multi-academy trust chairs reflects the nature of the trust sector, with some organisations much smaller than others.