RSC0028

Written Evidence submitted by the Department for Education

Summary and background

1. Since 2010 the numbers of open academies, free schools, university technical colleges (UTCs) and studio schools (all legally academies) in England have increased from 203 in May 2010 to 5326 as at 1 September 2015[1]. As the number of academies continues to grow it becomes increasingly important that tackling underperformance is handled by education experts with regional knowledge.

2. In 2014 the Department for Education appointed eight Regional Schools Commissioners (RSCs) across eight regions of England, each supported by a Headteacher Board (HTB). This is a key step in the development of a self-improving, academy system. Decisions about underperforming schools are taken closer to those they affect, with local outstanding academy headteachers, elected by the sector, providing direct advice and challenge on those decisions. However, ultimate responsibility remains with the Secretary of State to ensure democratic accountability.
3. The RSCs have been appointed for their extensive knowledge of the education sector within their regions.  Typically their experience has been gained through their backgrounds as highly experienced academy headteachers, chief executives of multi-academy trusts (MATs) and leaders in education. Assisted by their HTB, the RSCs have increased the capacity of the Department for Education to pick up local intelligence, inject sector expertise into decision making and intervene at trust and school level.
4. It is too early to assess the longer-term impact that the RSCs are having on educational outcomes in their regions. However, from the action RSCs have undertaken it is clear they are introducing new and different ways of working that support increased collaboration and self-regulation of the system. Their focus has been on the sustained growth of the academies market and taking swift and targeted action where it is needed most – based on local expertise and a nuanced understanding of the education sector in each region. 
5. As the role of the RSCs is further embedded and developed, resourcing and workloads will be constantly reviewed to ensure that they are able to provide sufficient oversight and take swift and decisive action. 

RSC responsibilities

6. The RSCs took up their responsibilities on 1 September 2014. Their responsibilities are to:

• monitor the performance of the academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools in their area;
• take action when an academy, free school, UTC or studio school is underperforming;
• approve the conversion of maintained schools to academies and make the decision on the sponsor for new academies in areas where the local authority has identified a need for additional school places;
• make recommendations to ministers about free school applications and advise whether approved free school projects are ready to open;
• encourage organisations to become academy sponsors or to establish free schools, approve applications to become sponsors and help to build the capacity and capability of existing sponsors within their area;
• approve changes to open academies, for example: changes to age ranges, mergers between academies, and changes to MAT arrangements.

7. The principle of the academy programme is that heads and teachers know best how to run their schools. Therefore there are clear parameters for RSC intervention within the academies sector, which are underpinned by Ofsted’s risk based inspection regime and other accountability measures. RSCs have no role in relation to academies that are performing well, except encouraging them to become a sponsor, support a local school through a MAT arrangement or set up a free school.
8. RSCs are not responsible for carrying out school improvement activities but commission action to be taken by the academy trust. They may prescribe the nature of the intervention and, where appropriate, advise the trust on suitable options. The responsibility for taking the necessary action to improve outcomes remains with the academy trust. RSCs do not fund or regulate academies; this is the responsibility of the Education Funding Agency (EFA).
9. As of 1 July the RSCs have also taken on responsibility for identifying underperforming local authority (LA) maintained schools that should become academies and matching them with an appropriate academy sponsor.

Figure 1: The eight RSCs and their regions

Regional focus and approach

10. RSCs carry out their functions within a national framework that has been agreed by ministers, and individual decisions are made in reference to the relevant legislation and published criteria. However, the regional approach means that RSCs are able to tailor their ways of working to meet local needs and priorities.
11. The eight RSC regions cover the whole of England, and follow existing local authority boundaries. The size of each region was chosen so that each represents a broadly balanced set of responsibilities for RSCs. This will be kept under review as the number of academies grows.  Annex A provides a series of tables setting out the number of open state schools by RSC region and the Ofsted grades of different types of school by region.
12. The RSCs are based in regional offices, and are directly supported by a small team of staff, as well as by dedicated teams in the Department for Education supporting the RSCs’ work on a regional basis. They are also supported in their work by expert educational advisors who are contracted by the Department to work with individual schools. Resources and workloads are kept under continuous review.
13. RSCs are able to work across local authority boundaries and facilitate the sharing of educational expertise across the region, for example between London and the shire counties.
14. The eight RSCs and the Schools Commissioner come together monthly to share practice and provide peer review and challenge. The RSCs also work closely together to ensure effective oversight of cross-regional MATs and sponsors. Specifically our largest chains are assigned a particular RSC as their lead contact. The lead RSC is responsible for chain level challenge and co-ordination and for negotiating any strategic decisions or approaches that have a direct implication for multiple regions. Any issues concerning individual academies or free schools within a chain are managed by the RSC for the area in which the school is located.

Headteacher Boards

15. HTBs are primarily responsible for advising their RSC, contributing their local knowledge and professional expertise to aid the RSC’s decision-making; this can range from scrutinising the staffing structure of a new school to challenging a proposed school’s improvement plan and budget forecasts.  In some cases HTB members also carry out additional support for RSCs in their regions. For example, in the West Midlands region HTB members are providing advice on sponsorship, academy status and school-to-school support options. In the South West, HTB members took on additional responsibilities to research and make recommendations to the RSC on key issues facing the region and to inform decision-making.
16. Each HTB is made up of six to eight members. On each HTB four members have been elected by local academy headteachers. Up to four further members can be appointed or co-opted to fill particular skills or expertise gaps. For example, Vicky Beer CBE from Ashton on Mersey School was recently co-opted to the Lancashire and West Yorkshire HTB to provide additional representation from the Manchester area. In addition to her knowledge of that geographical area Vicky also brings a wealth of experience, skills and expertise, including strong links to the Teaching Schools Council following her tenure as Chair of the Council. In the South East and South London region, Nikki King OBE has been appointed to the HTB. Nikki is the former managing director of vehicle manufacturer Isuzu Truck UK and Chair of Greenacre Academy Trust in Kent. She has added significant value to the regional HTB meetings, probing the plans of academies and sponsors.
17. Each HTB member, irrespective of how they gained a place on the board, has equal status. A list of HTB members and their schools can be found in Annex B of this paper. RSCs and HTBs also make use of local networks to gather intelligence to support decisions.
18. The Department publishes a register of interests for each RSC and HTB member. These are reviewed and updated quarterly. Robust protocols and procedures are in place for managing the risks of any conflicts of interest, for example, where a HTB member has an interest they do not receive the papers associated with the decision and leave the room when it is discussed.
19. The outcomes of decisions made by RSCs are publically available. For example, a monthly list of academy orders issued and open academies is published online; pre-warning notice and warning notice letters are published subsequent to being issued; and open free schools and successful applications are published online and updated regularly. The Department also publishes online monthly a record of HTB meetings, which includes discussion points and decisions made.
20. The RSCs have also had significant and regular interaction with the sector. In total RSCs have held over 60 events of varying size and format over the last year and received very positive feedback about their role and approach. For example, all 200 places at the ‘South West Education Conference’ organised by Sir David Carter in March 2015 were taken in just 24 hours. In addition, the Society of Merchant Venturers, a large Bristol-based sponsor, commented that they “have found the level of support and dialogue provided by the new RSC structure a real step forward”. 
21. This accessibility has supported increased transparency, enabling different actors within the education sector to talk directly to decision makers, explain their concerns and get direct answers to any questions they may have.

Accountability of RSCs

22. The Secretary of State is responsible for holding academy trusts to account for meeting the terms of their funding agreements including achieving good outcomes for their pupils, the effective governance of schools within the trust and managing their financial affairs to ensure regularity, propriety and value for money. The Secretary of State has intervention powers when an academy trust is failing.

23. Accounting officers in the Department for Education and the Education Funding Agency are accountable to Parliament for the proper stewardship of the resources allocated to the Department; and there is a clear chain of accountability between each academy trust and the Department. This system reflects the greater autonomy academies have, underpinned by greater financial freedoms and responsibilities, and academies’ direct contractual and funding relationship with the Department.

24. The RSCs are civil servants, employed by the Department for Education. They take decisions within the scope of their responsibilities in the name of the Secretary of State, who has the power to overrule their decisions.

25. The RSCs report through Frank Green CBE, the Schools Commissioner and Andrew McCully, Director General of Infrastructure and Funding to Lord Nash, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Schools. The RSCs have an agreed set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that track measures of progress within their region.
26. The RSCs provide regular updates to the minister, together and individually, on specific cases. Decisions that are sensitive, raise issues of interpretation of government policy, or relate to urgent safeguarding or extremism concerns are escalated to the minister for decision. 
27. The Department’s Academies and Free Schools Board oversees the delivery of the academies and free schools programmes. The Board’s assurance processes are informed by the KPIs, as well as other supporting data. Progress is measured relative to a set of baselines in each region, taken at the point that RSCs were introduced (September 2014). This recognises the fact that each region is unique, and requires its own set of priorities.
28. The performance indicators span four areas of RSC responsibility - approving new academy provision; managing the regional sponsor market; tackling educational underperformance and inadequate governance in open academies; and providing advice in relation to free schools, UTCs and studio schools. They are currently undergoing a year one review with the aim of ensuring they appropriately reflect the developing role of RSCs.
29. HTBs provide an important, additional check and balance. If an RSC intends to take a decision that contradicts the advice given by the majority of their HTB this must be reported to the minister. This process is an integral part of a self-improving, school-led system in which respected school leaders take greater responsibility for regulating the system. To date no such reports have been made.
30. The EFA are responsible for the regularity and propriety of expenditure and for getting good value for money from it. As the direct funder of academy trusts the EFA must be satisfied that academy trusts have appropriate arrangements for: sound governance; financial management; securing value for money; accounting; and ensuring that academy trusts’ use of public funds is consistent with the purposes for which the funds have been given.
31. The EFA monitors the financial health of trusts and has a robust risk assessment and intervention process to identify potential issues.  If RSCs identify financial or compliance issues in their oversight of educational performance, they report those concerns to the EFA. It is the EFA, not the RSC, which takes the lead in any action on these concerns.

Roles and responsibilities at regional level for RSCs, Ofsted, and local authorities

32. In undertaking their responsibilities in relation to monitoring and intervention in academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools, RSCs work closely with a number of key partners, including Ofsted and local authorities.

33. Ofsted are responsible for monitoring performance in all schools through their inspection regime. Ofsted inspection results and accountability measures based on school performance data underpin the RSCs intervention activity in relation to underperforming academies. The RSCs have established effective relationships with the relevant Ofsted Regional Directors to ensure that information is shared as appropriate.

34. Local authorities continue to have responsibility for monitoring the performance of maintained schools and intervening where necessary, and for special educational needs and safeguarding of pupils in all schools – maintained schools and academies. Where an RSC judges that an underperforming maintained school would benefit from becoming an academy they will work closely with the relevant local authority to match them with an appropriate academy sponsor.

35. Wherever possible, RSCs work proactively with local authorities and ensure that information is shared and the necessary action is taken particularly where there are concerns that cut across their responsibilities. Where the local authority has a concern about academy performance, including governance, they are able to raise this information with the relevant RSC.  Many local authorities are also sharing information about need for new school places with the relevant RSC.

36. In some cases, to support delivery of their responsibility for academies performance, RSCs are working more closely with local authorities within a particular area, for example, the ‘Blackpool Challenge Board’ in the Lancashire and West Yorkshire region. The board was set up following the local authority’s poor Ofsted school improvement judgment in December 2014. The Challenge Board brings together the RSC, local academy trusts, the local authority, maintained schools, and others. It is chaired by Professor Sonia Blandford, who is driving its work forward with the aim of securing improved educational outcomes for all children in Blackpool.
37. In the South Central and North West London region the RSC has worked closely with Northamptonshire Local Authority as they develop their 'Race to the Top' strategy to improve education performance in the area. The RSC is also represented on the Northamptonshire Strategic Education and Skills Partnership Board reflecting a shared commitment between the RSC and LA to improve outcomes across the region.

RSCs are taking robust action to intervene in underperforming academies, free schools, university technical colleges and studio schools

38. The main priority of all the RSCs is to take swift and targeted action to help those academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools that are underperforming to improve; and to encourage our best leaders to support these schools through sponsored academy arrangements.

39. RSCs have a range of intervention strategies available and are tailoring their approach based on an expert understanding of the circumstances of the individual school. In the East Midlands and the Humber region, either the RSC, an HTB member or an Educational Adviser visits each underperforming school to understand the context and issues they are facing. The RSCs also hold individual meetings with sponsors to provide robust challenge on the performance of their academies.
40. These academy visits also enable the RSC to identify issues and commission appropriate additional support, for example, from local Teaching Schools and National Leaders of Education. For example, the RSC for the South West region was able to broker bespoke support for Wellington Academy from the CEO of a strong sponsor MAT, who is also a member of the HTB. This included a series of external reviews, mentoring for the new headteacher and the commissioning of support from the London West Alliance. Following this intervention the academy has reported to us that its results this year have made a clear improvement. They believe they are likely to have moved from below, to well above the national floor standards.
41. In the East Midlands and the Humber region, the RSC, working closely with the EFA, undertook a detailed visit and investigation of a number of academies in The Phoenix Multi-Academy Trust to address concerns raised in relation to governance. This resulted in a robust action plan, providing challenge to the academies to improve their governance and accountability structures.  Progress against the plan will be reviewed by HTB members.
42. The RSCs are working closely with the Teaching Schools Council at regional level to support the performance of academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools. For example, the South East and South London RSC and South East Teaching Schools Council have worked together to deliver the first ever conference for Teaching School Alliances and MATs in the region, and to tackle educational underperformance in coastal areas. This work included a workshop, hosted by the RSC, for 10 academy and sponsor representatives based in coastal towns to share practice and develop tailored solutions. Following this event the RSC intends to establish sub-regional groups of system leaders in key areas of coastal challenge and is working with the Education and Employers Taskforce, the Teaching Schools Council and selected leaders to deliver a conference in Thanet to drive the improvement of academies in the region.
43. In addition, the RSCs are working with the National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) to ensure the most effective allocation of its school-to-school support fund. So far this year 1043 Teaching Schools and National Leaders of Education have received school-to-school support grants nationally, totalling £10.86 million, from the NCTL to build leadership capacity to support schools to move towards an Ofsted rating of good, through a time-limited intervention.
44. RSCs also work with Academy Ambassadors, a not-for-profit organisation, to make recommendations for experienced individuals from the world of business and the professions to sit on the boards of academy trusts and MATs in order to strengthen their governance. For example, STEP Academy Trust recruited trustees through Academy Ambassadors including Patrick McAleenan, a retired Chartered Accountant who joined STEP in November 2014 as the Chair of Operations and Audit Committee. Academy Ambassadors has made 80 appointments on trusts to date.
45. Nationally, the RSCs have issued 50 pre-warning and warning notices to academy and free school trusts. Depending on the specific terms of academy funding agreements, these notices require an action plan from the academy trust, which if found inadequate can prompt more fundamental intervention.
46. These notices in many instances have, we believe, encouraged improvements in the academies. For example, The Kemnal Academies Trust was issued with a pre-warning notice by the RSC for East of England and North East London region early in the 2015 school year in respect of Heybridge Primary School in Essex. Heybridge Primary was judged to be requiring improvement by Ofsted in June 2014, and 53% of pupils at Heybridge achieved the expected level in reading, writing and maths in summer 2014 compared to the national average of 78%.
47. The pre-warning notice required Kemnal Academies Trust to take urgent action to address the issues identified by Ofsted including governors’ understanding of pupil progress and the quality of teaching. The RSC was not entirely satisfied with the response received from the trust regarding the notice and so the RSC met with the CEO to clarify the actions the Trust would take and the follow-up monitoring that the RSC’s team would conduct. Following this meeting, the trust strengthened leadership and governance at the school and established partnerships with local high performing schools to improve teaching standards at Heybridge.
48. The RSC’s team visited the academy in March to assess progress on the issues identified in the pre-warning notice and to discuss the outcomes of the recent Ofsted monitoring visit. The RSC’s team agreed with Ofsted’s findings which stated that the quality of teaching was improving; the new governing body was increasingly well informed and that assessments indicated pupil progress was accelerating. The academy’s provisional self-reported data for 2015 shows that the proportion of pupils attaining the expected level in reading, writing and maths combined increased by 35 percentage points, taking Heybridge’s results from below the floor standard to above the national average.

49. In some instances changing the governance of an academy or free school has been necessary where it is clear that the sponsor or trust has not had the impact needed in the school. RSCs have required 62 academies and free schools to move to a new trust or sponsor over the last academic year, compared to 13 in the previous academic year. In addition, three free schools have been closed since 1 September 2014. 
50. In other instances new governance arrangements have been prompted within trusts. For example, over the last year the RSC for the North of England has worked closely with Ascent Academies Trust, a multi-academy trust of four special schools, to improve its governance structure. Following the RSC’s intervention the trust was mentored by a local leader from another special schools trust and received support from the Academy Ambassadors programme. As a result the trust has now appointed two local business leaders with skills in finance and risk management and has a CEO designate who will shortly take up post. These changes, directed by the RSC, will significantly strengthen the effectiveness of the trust and equip Ascent with crucial skills as it grows from its current family of four academies.
51. In a small number of cases the sponsor has chosen to withdraw. One example of this is Prospect Academies Trust who sponsored five academies in the South West region and one in South London and the South East. Prospects announced in May 2014 that they intended to wind up their trust and officials working with the newly appointed RSC found new trust arrangements for all six schools.
52. These types of intervention highlight the ability of the RSCs to use their experience and local networks, to diagnose issues and quickly identify solutions. An example of this is intervention into Brookfield Academy in Rotherham. Following the need to find an alternative sponsor for Brookfield Academy being identified, the RSC for East Midlands and the Humber, drawing on the expertise and local insights of her HTB, secured the resources of a strong sponsor – Outwood Grange Academies Trust - within the region who was able to go into the school and quickly provide a detailed perspective, independent of that provided by the outgoing trust. This, alongside visits to the school, helped to build a fuller understanding of the issues facing the academy. A suitable local sponsor – Wakefield City Academies Trust - that the RSC was confident could address the school’s weaknesses was then quickly identified to take on the running of Brookfield Academy, minimising the disruption to pupils.
53. In the North of England region, Furness Academy in Cumbria was in special measures when the RSC took up post. Due to the unacceptably slow progress towards the removal of special measures the RSC swiftly negotiated that the three co-sponsors of Furness Academy would relinquish their sponsorship. The RSC worked with the local alliance of system leaders in Cumbria to support the school while she secured BAE Systems, one of the biggest employers in the area, as a sponsor. This enabled strong educational support to be quickly put in place in the academy and a shadow board to be established involving the new sponsor. The academy moved out of special measures within two months of working with its proposed new sponsor. The academy expects its key stage 4 results to show a significant improvement this year.

Figure 2: Intervention activity by RSC region from 1st September 2014 to 1st August 2015.

54. In the South West the RSC was able to use his educational expertise and support from local Teaching School Alliances to make a rapid change for St Aldhelm’s Academy in Poole. Recognising that the current sponsor did not have the necessary capacity and that swift intervention and support was required, the RSC negotiated for a strong local sponsor, Ambitions Academies Trust (AAT) to take over the sponsorship. The new sponsor took over the leadership of the academy immediately and an Interim Executive Board (IEB) was established to provide effective governance.
55. AAT brought strong, visible and high profile leadership to the academy - appointing a new Principal from their trust who started work with immediate effect. They were completely open with parents, and brought with them a clear commitment to succeed. With support from the RSC, two Vice Principals were also seconded into the academy, one from Ringwood Teaching School Alliance and the other from the Teaching Schools Alliance, where AAT is a member.  Both are now permanent in post at St Aldhelm’s.
56. Although the sponsorship is in its early days, AAT has already started making a positive difference. Ofsted’s May monitoring visit noted the sponsor’s ‘relentless’ work to improve student behaviour. Families which had sent their children to different schools are now returning to St Aldhelm’s.

RSCs are expanding and stimulating the sponsor market

57. RSCs are expanding and stimulating the sponsor market and encouraging our best leaders to support other schools. Since September 2014 an additional 120 sponsors have been approved.
58. The regional focus of the RSC and HTB is enabling a more nuanced understanding of sponsor capacity in specific areas and targeted action is being taken to fill gaps. In the South East and South London region, the RSC has identified capacity gaps on the southern coast of East Sussex, southern Hampshire and in several parts of Kent. As part of his regional strategy, the RSC is encouraging sponsor applications from outstanding converters and grammar schools in areas of need through targeted letters, individual meetings and events. This has resulted in the approval of 16 new sponsors since 1 September 2014, with an additional 16 expressions of interest received. It also reflects a growing national trend - 73% of the 120 sponsors approved since September 2014 are academy converters, which highlights the success of our plan to move towards a self-improving school led system.
59. Alongside this, in the East of England and North East London region the RSC sought to encourage quality sponsors from outside the East of England to develop new geographical clusters. For example, REAch2 is developing two new clusters in Ipswich and Lowestoft to fill a sponsor gap in those areas. Also in this region a number of HTB members are working with CEOs of small but growing MATs to develop their leadership, and with trust boards such as the Diocese of Norwich and Diocese of Ely MATs to help them effectively develop their corporate governance as they expand their trusts. In this region an additional 23 sponsors have been approved since 1 September 2014, up from 16 during the previous academic year.

RSCs are supporting the development of multi-academy trusts and using collaboration to support school improvement in academies

60. As the academies system matures and evolves the RSCs are supporting and facilitating increased collaboration between academies. This can be seen in the number of new academies that are part of MAT arrangements. Between 1 September 2014 and 1 August 2015, 761 new converter and sponsored academies have been opened nationally. Of these new academies, 85% are part of a collaborative MAT, up from 76% of new academies last academic year. In total, nationally over half of academies are in MATs.

63. RSCs are also working with existing MATs to facilitate the sharing of expertise and to support academy performance. In March 2015 the South Central and North West London region brought together a group of executive headteachers from across the region to discuss how smaller academy sponsors and MATs can grow sustainably and to share expertise from more established chains. The day covered discussions of governance, finance and assessment, and finished with a presentation from Lucy Heller, CEO of ARK, one of our strongest academy chains. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive and another event is planned for later in the year.
64. RSCs are also proactively working with NCTL, local Teaching School Alliances and other educational leaders to support their responsibilities for academy performance. Each RSC has set up a network within their region, enabling them to draw on a group of high-calibre individuals and to facilitate the sharing of expertise and practice.   

RSCs are advising ministers on applications for new free schools and readiness to open

65. RSCs are responsible for advising ministers on free school applications and have played an active role in the process since October 2014. Supported by their HTB members, they provide advice on applicant groups, supply knowledge of the local school landscape, and can also sit on the interview panels. In total, RSCs and HTB members have attended 94% of all free school interviews since their introduction in wave 8.

66. RSCs continue to be involved in free school projects as they develop and progress towards opening. This can take the form of contributing to assessments of the projects’ readiness to open as well as brokering additional support for proposer groups where this is required.

The Education and Adoption Bill

67. The Education and Adoption Bill will build on the RSCs’ current responsibilities, providing new and strengthened powers of intervention

68. The Education and Adoption Bill, currently before Parliament, contains strengthened powers to ensure that failing maintained schools – those that are judged inadequate by Ofsted – will be transformed into sponsored academies more swiftly, ending unnecessary delays caused by bureaucracy and those seeking to obstruct the process. It typically takes just over a year from the time a school is inspected and judged to be in category 4 to it opening as a sponsored academy. That means young people spend over a year in a failing school.

69. It will also allow ‘coasting’ schools to be identified and intervened in – those schools whose data shows that, year on year, they are failing to ensure their pupils reach their potential.

70. These new and strengthened powers of intervention in the Education and Adoption Bill will be exercised by the RSCs on behalf of the Secretary of State. They build on their current responsibilities and, in practice, mean that they would, subject to the successful passage of the Bill:
• Issue an academy order to any maintained school judged Inadequate by Ofsted, requiring it to become a sponsored academy. They will then be responsible for putting in place the academy solution for that school, with the support of the governing body and the local authority, which will be under a new duty to progress the conversion.

• Notify schools that they are coasting, meaning they will be eligible for intervention. The RSC will, with support from their HTB, consider whether the school has a sufficiently strong plan and the capacity necessary to bring about improvement and, dependent on this assessment, whether and how to intervene.

• Issue a warning notice to any other maintained school that they consider to be causing concern, including those showing unacceptably low standards of performance. As with the current approach to academies and free schools, this warning notice gives the school the opportunity to tackle the concern in the first instance, or face necessary intervention where serious concerns remain. LAs will also retain their ability to issue warning notices – though we know their willingness to do this is variable.

71. In the cases of a coasting maintained school or a maintained school which has failed to comply with a warning notice and has therefore become eligible for intervention, the RSC will be able, on behalf of the Secretary of State, to intervene in the school by:

• requiring the governing body to enter into arrangements, for instance to collaborate with another school or enter into a contract for advice or support from a specified person;
• appointing additional governors;
• appointing an IEB;
• taking over responsibility for an IEB;
• making an academy order; or
• directing a LA to close a school.

72. We are considering what extra resources and capacity RSCs will need to enable them to effectively use these new powers, if they are agreed by Parliament.

73. We will publish a new version of the statutory guidance on Schools Causing Concern, reflecting the changes in the Bill, for consultation during the autumn. This will set out how RSCs will use their intervention powers in practice, including how they will exercise their discretion to decide when intervention is necessary.

74. RSCs will take these new decisions, as they do their existing ones, whilst being immersed in the local context. This will enable them to make decisions based on local circumstances, and to identify what suitable help and support for schools is available locally.

75. The statutory intervention powers in the Bill do not apply to academies because of their separate legal framework. However we will identify academies whose performance shows they are coasting against this definition and RSCs will assess their capacity to improve in the same way as maintained schools, supporting and challenging them to improve and intervening where that is necessary.

Annex B: List of HTB members by region

B1: East of England and North East London

B2: East Midlands and the Humber

B3: Lancashire and West Yorkshire

B4: North of England

B5: South Central and North West London

B6: South East and South London

B7: South West

B8: West Midlands

September 2015