The government must be more transparent about how decisions about its RISE teams are made, leaders have said, after it emerged many advisers buy in support from their colleagues’ organisations. In a fifth of schools supported under the government鈥檚 RISE scheme, advisers brokered help from organisations employing fellow advisers, a Schools Week investigation found. Many worked in the same regions. One trust chief executive, who did not want to be named, said it 鈥済ives the perception of jobs for the boys鈥. But the government said it had a 鈥渃lear conflict of interest policy鈥 to 鈥渦phold integrity of the programme鈥. Many advisers had also been 鈥渟econded from trusts that have a strong track record of school improvement, and we have drawn on this expertise within the system to support RISE schools鈥. Sam Henson But the government does not currently publish details about how decisions are made. Sam Henson, the deputy chief executive of the , added: 鈥淲hile peer support can be valuable, this does open the programme up to questions about potential conflicts of interest that need careful management through robust accountability frameworks, clear impartiality safeguards and ongoing transparency.鈥 Our analysis also found organisations providing RISE support have their own 鈥渟tuck鈥 schools. And several trusts with more than one RISE school receive support from different organisations, leading to concerns improvements will be difficult to maintain once support ends. The RISE school advisers appointing their own Data obtained through the freedom of information act shows 167 stuck schools, added to the RISE programme before the summer break, have so far been given targeted support. Stuck schools are those rated 鈥榬equires improvement鈥 following an earlier inspection that resulted in a grade below 鈥榞ood鈥. The government has seconded 65 experienced turnaround school leaders as advisers who are appointed to specific RISE schools in their region to identify priorities and propose an outside organisation to deliver the support. The regional director then makes a final decision, with up to 拢100,000 funding available for each school. Schools Week analysis found that of the 167 schools, 34 (20 per cent) are receiving support from an organisation employing another RISE adviser. For 15 of these schools, the advisers work in the same region. ‘Clear boundaries’ Greenshaw Learning Trust, which has a RISE adviser, supports five schools. William Smith, its chief executive, said there were 鈥渃lear boundaries 鈥 for the different aspects of our involvement鈥 with RISE to ensure there were no conflicts of interest. Chiltern Learning Trust, which also employs an adviser, is also working with four schools. Adrian Rogers, its chief executive, said decisions over how to match schools were made jointly 鈥渂y the trust/school and the DfE鈥 and are 鈥渘ot within the gift of the RISE adviser to make鈥 themselves. 鈥淸They] are generally from the stronger trusts, stronger schools and stronger local authorities. Therefore, those organisations will be the ones supporting.鈥 But Mark Lehain, a former Department for Education special adviser who now leads a trust, said the findings 鈥渋llustrate the complexity inherent in the new [improvement] model鈥. 鈥淭here’s nothing necessarily wrong with the overlap of relationships, but it could lead to people wondering how and why certain decisions were made.鈥 Mark Lehain A trust CEO, who did not want to be named, added the 鈥渁bsence of transparency makes it worse. 鈥淭he key thing is it could be perceived to be a conflict of interest 鈥 [and] it gives the perception of jobs for the boys. 鈥淥ur sector is too mature for these types of things to happen in these days and ages.鈥 The DfE said it had a 鈥渃lear policy requiring all RISE advisers to declare any potential conflicts鈥. To 鈥渦phold the integrity of the programme鈥, schools 鈥渁re not matched with any organisation where a declared conflict exists鈥. Supporting organisations 鈥渕ust have a strong track record of school improvement, deliver high-quality and inclusive education and be well-matched to the specific context and challenges鈥 of the RISE school. The RISE school givers and takers Our analysis also suggests that seven stuck schools receiving support are run by either a council or trust that employed or recently employed a RISE adviser. And five of the organisations called in to help RISE schools also have their own stuck schools. Richard Sheriff, the chief executive of Red Kite Learning Trust, said this could lead to the credibility of supporting organisations being 鈥渃alled into question鈥. But he added 鈥渕any, many trusts鈥 worked in 鈥渟ignificantly disadvantaged communities鈥 鈥 which meant they 鈥渁lways have one school that鈥檚 got an issue鈥. Sapientia Education Trust, whose chief executive Jonathan Taylor is a RISE adviser, has been selected to support a Norfolk primary. Its City Academy Norwich has itself been designated a stuck school and is receiving RISE support. But Emma Davies, the trust鈥檚 director of education, said it was 鈥渋nevitable that some trusts working with a clear moral purpose and open to taking on schools facing challenge may have some schools that fall within the scope of RISE, whilst also having the strength and expertise to support other schools. 鈥淪trong MATs may well have schools in different stages of their school improvement journey and RISE鈥檚 individualised approach is a key strength and welcomed improvement of previous initiatives.鈥 However, Lehain said the wider findings highlighted the 鈥渁dvantages of the previous model for school improvement, which placed accountability for this solely with the responsible body 鈥 the trust for academies and the [council] for maintained schools. 鈥淚f a school given RISE support doesn’t get better, it’s no longer clear who is responsible.鈥 The RISE schools with different masters In all, 25 responsible bodies 鈥 trusts or councils 鈥 have more than one RISE school. Twelve of those are working with more than one supporting organisation. The DfE said in some cases, 鈥渙ne supporting organisation is best placed to support the schools鈥, while on other occasions 鈥渨e will draw on the strengths of different organisations for different schools鈥. Anne Dellar However, Anne Dellar, an education adviser and former chief executive, said this could leave trusts with schools 鈥渄oing different things鈥, hindering them from continuing to improve once they left RISE. She urged the teams to adopt a 鈥渃oordinated approach鈥. The Thinking Schools Academy Trust has seen both of its RISE schools matched with different MATs. Stuart Gardner, its chief executive, said 鈥渕uch more clarity is needed. The programme requires transparent accountability and a more joined-up approach for trusts with multiple schools in order to really transform provision.鈥 The trust was 鈥渨orking closely鈥 with the DfE to 鈥渟hare our experiences and feedback so the programme can continue to evolve and deliver on its intended purpose鈥. The RISE schools NOT getting support Our analysis also shows that 31 of the RISE schools have not been matched with a supporting organisation. The DfE said advisers assessed whether the schools had 鈥渢he resources and expertise to deliver the improvements they’ve planned鈥. Following this, it was decided they did not need the additional input from a supporting organisation. However, it is understood regular progress meetings are held. Loic Menzies Loic Menzies, an associate fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research, said the findings suggested 鈥渟chools are working with their RISE teams to put together packages of support that are tailored to their context and needs 鈥 rather than a one-size-fits-all鈥. But he warned: 鈥淭his diversity comes with the risk of inconsistent quality and will therefore need careful monitoring. 鈥淲e all know that there is a huge amount of expertise within the education system and hopefully, as RISE teams get into their stride, they will be able to play a valuable role in getting that expertise to where it can have maximum impact.鈥 Last month the department also confirmed RISE powers will be expanded, with a consultation set to be launched in the autumn. A DfE spokesperson said RISE teams were 鈥減roviding the catalyst needed to drive up standards in all corners of the country鈥.