Far from being incoherent, trusts spanning mainstream, AP and special schools can teach other trusts and ministers a thing or two about inclusive, first-rate education, says Andy Johnson Debate about the future shape of multi-academy trusts has sharpened, particularly around where special schools and alternative provision should 鈥渇it.鈥� Recent calls for ministers to settle the question of academy trust make-up reflect a system grappling with whether trusts should specialise by phase or setting, or remain generalist. We are a , including mainstream primaries and secondaries alongside special schools and alternative provision.聽 Far from being a compromise, we made a deliberate choice. We believe this model points towards a more inclusive, coherent, resilient education system. We have 11 schools across Berkshire and south Oxfordshire: four primaries, four secondaries, two special schools and a pupil referral unit. This blend reflects our organisational values: aim high, be inclusive and work together. Our schools鈥� diversity mirrors our communities鈥� diversity. It means a breadth of expertise that no single-phase or single-setting trust could replicate. Expertise is shared, not isolated One clear advantage is how expertise is shared, not isolated. Too often, special schools sit at the margins, while mainstream schools operate separately despite facing increasingly complex needs. Within mixed trusts, knowledge flows both ways. Our autism specialist school informs trust-wide practice in communication, sensory regulation and structured learning. Our school for pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs shapes thinking about relationships, behaviour and trauma-informed approaches. Our pupil referral unit and alternative provision team offer vital insight as behavioural complexity increases across mainstream settings. This specialist knowledge is embedded into professional development, curriculum design and pastoral systems. Equally important, our special schools benefit from the curricular and pedagogical strength of our successful mainstream schools. Subject expertise, curriculum sequencing, assessment practices and approaches to high-quality teaching have been shared and adapted. This strengthens curriculum ambition and coherence within specialist settings, while remaining responsive to individual need. Staff move between setting types The impact is tangible for staff. Mainstream teachers develop confidence and skill supporting diverse learners. Specialist staff see expertise valued, while gaining access to wider curricular and pedagogical networks. Increasingly, staff move between setting types within the trust as part of their professional development, strengthening trust-wide practice. Additionally resourced provisions within our mainstream schools further blur boundaries. They enable pupils with additional needs to remain part of local school communities, while accessing targeted support. Special school staff, including our therapist team, have been invaluable supporting these provisions. Mixed-setting trusts also challenge the assumption inclusion requires lowered expectations. Specialist and alternative provision schools have long excelled at building ambitious, personalised pathways that recognise success in its broadest sense. Combined with strong mainstream curriculum design, this thinking strengthens outcomes. 鈥淎im high鈥� does not mean identical experiences. It means high-quality teaching, coherent curricula and meaningful progression for all. There are organisational benefits, too Shared systems, economies of scale and operational expertise from larger schools can be transformative for smaller or specialist settings. Parents gain confidence from a trusted local brand, offering continuity and quality across different settings as children鈥檚 needs change. Of course mixed-setting trusts aren鈥檛 without challenge. Leadership and governance require more wide-ranging expertise. Balancing priorities across very different settings requires sustained effort. Funding pressures, particularly for special schools and alternative provision, remain acute. Being part of a financially sustainable trust offers some protection, but doesn鈥檛 remove systemic strain. Lessons for SEND reform Mixed-setting trusts are no silver bullet for deep-rooted SEND challenges. But they offer something the system urgently needs: structures that make collaboration inevitable, not optional. As we await further detail on SEND reform, the direction of travel is clear: stronger inclusion within mainstream schools, earlier intervention and better use of specialist expertise. Success requires not just new policy, but new organisational thinking. By design, mixed-setting trusts dissolve the boundaries between 鈥渕ainstream鈥� and 鈥渟pecial.鈥� Mixed-setting trusts show how to build the future: deliberately, inclusively and at scale.