Across Europe, education systems are trying to improve at a time of budgetary constraints. There is interest in exploring the impact of new models, such as free schools in Sweden (Bolhmark and Lindah, 2015). England’s Department for Education (DfE) has converted half of maintained schools to 'academies', which are publicly funded but, unlike maintained schools, they are independent of local authorities (LA).

Academies are run by trusts that are charities constituted as companies. They are funded directly by central government in accordance with a funding agreement between the trust and the Secretary of State for Education rather than via their LA. In some cases, multi-academy trusts (MATs) run a number of academies under a single funding agreement.

This autonomy has led to some cases of financial mismanagement in the academy sector. This is not just an issue in England. Keddie (2015, p2) considers that many education systems ‘are being transformed by the policy moves of autonomy and accountability’.

There is great interest in the salaries of the top person in trusts, both directly and as an assumed proxy for the overall costs of the teams involved in supporting them as a 'middle tier' (Bubb et al, 2019). This research looks at the executive leader’s salary in MATs through the use of large stratified samples of published data. It asks what patterns we can see in salaries, and whether there is a gender gap.

The Eurydice report notes that England has the widest gap between teacher and headteacher pay in Europe (Eurydice, 2019, p28). Academy trusts are not bound by the national pay structure, the School Teachers Pay and Conditions (STPCD) document, and can set their own staff salaries. The Incomes Data Research (2018) found that although trusts broadly worked within the STPCD pay ranges for teachers, they went beyond it in setting salaries for leaders.

Is it necessary to pay leaders of academy trusts so much? Research has consistently found ‘limited value of pecuniary rewards for commitment in an environment where employees are mission-oriented’, such as in education and the charity sector (Bryson et al, 2019, p50). High CEO salary figures are likely to be contributing to financial difficulties. In 2018/19, the academy sector received £22.5 billion income but spent £24.8 billion. This is of great concern: given the increase in numbers of trusts and the high costs of the executive salaries this seems to be speeding towards catastrophe.

Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
We analysed 220 MAT accounts for 2016/17 to discover the salaries of the leader in large, medium-sized, small-sized and single academy MATs. We used the list of MATs in the academies’ annual accounting returns for 2016/17 published by the DfE to give us the number of academies and pupils in each trust. The annual accounts identify the number of staff with salaries over £60,000 within £5,000 or £10,000 ranges rather than giving the salary figures for individuals, and we used the number from the bottom of these ranges in all cases, to produce the most conservative estimates available. Pension contributions received, other benefits and on-costs payable by the employers were not included in our figures, so that we were comparing like with like.
The salaries were analysed against the number of schools and the numbers of pupils in each trust. The gender of MAT CEOs was analysed to examine whether there was any pay gap.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings

We analysed 220 MAT accounts to discover the salaries of the leader in large, medium-sized, small-sized and single academy MATs. We used the list of MATs in the academies’ annual accounting returns published by the DfE to give us the number of academies and pupils in each trust. The salaries were analysed against the number of schools and the numbers of pupils in each trust. The gender of MAT CEOs was analysed to examine whether there was any pay gap.

This paper contributes to the growing body of research about academisation and does something unique: it looks at the financial and ethical implications of MAT leader salaries. The distribution of salaries in 220 MATs ranged from £50,000 to £440,000. Half the MATs paid more than £100,000 to their leader. To put this into perspective, the average salary across all occupations in the UK at that time was £26,244. There seems no logic to MAT leaders’ pay. Half (53) of the MAT leaders earning over £100,000 had fewer than 3,000 pupils in their care and nine had fewer than 1,000 pupils. In the sample of 220 MATs, there were more male than female MAT CEOs: 123 men compared to 97 women. Not only were there more men, but they dominated the larger sized trusts. The CEOs of large trusts (11+ academies) were predominantly male: 42 out of 54. In contrast, only half of the single academy MATs had a male CEO (25 out of 49 trusts). There was a clear gender gap in MAT leader salaries. Women CEOs were paid less than men. The big difference arises in salaries of £150,000 and more, where the percentage of women was only 19%. The bigger picture illuminated by this research is the high actual and higher potential cost of the MAT model: it is very expensive for the education system to pay such high salaries to their leader, and the effect is multiplied by the pull this exerts on the pay and expectations of their colleagues.

Ball, SJ (2009) Academies in Context: politics, business and philanthropy and heterarchical governance. Management in Education. 23 (3), pp. 100-103 Bolhmark, A and Lindahl, M (2015) Independent schools and long-run educational outcomes: evidence from Sweden's large-scale voucher reform. Economica, 82, 508-551. Bryson, A, Stokes, L and Wilkinson, D (2019) Better schools for all. London: UCL Bubb, S, Crossley-Holland, J, Cordiner, J, Cousin, S and Earley, P (2019) Understanding the Middle Tier: Comparative Costs of Academy and LA-maintained Sectors. London Cirin, R (2017) Academy Trust Survey 2017: Research Report. London: Department for Education. Davies, P, Diamond, C and Perry, T (2019) Implications of autonomy and networks for costs and inclusion: Comparing patterns of school spending under different governance systems. Educational Management Administration and Leadership Eurydice (2019) Teachers' and School Heads' Salaries and Allowances in Europe – 2017/18. Luxembourg: European Union. Greany, T and Higham, R (2018) Hierarchy, Markets & Networks: Analysing the ‘self-improving school-led system’ in England and the implications for academies. London: UCL IOE Press. House of Commons Education Committee (2017) Multi-Academy Trusts, Seventh Report of Session 2016-17 [HC204]. London: House of Commons. Incomes Data Research (2017) Academies’ approaches to teachers’ pay. London: Office of Manpower Economics. Keddie, A. (2015). School autonomy, accountability and collaboration: A critical review. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 47, 1–17. Rayner, S.M., Courtney, S.J. and Gunter, H.M. (2018) Theorising systemic change: learning from the academisation project in England, Journal of Education Policy 33(1): 143-162. Simkins, T. (2015) School Restructuring in England: New School Configurations and New Challenges, Management in Education, 29:1: 4–8 Simkins, T, Coldron, J, Crawford, M and Maxwell, B (2018) Emerging schooling landscapes in England: how primary system leaders are responding to new school groupings, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership Simon, C, James, C and Simon, A (2019) The Growth of Multi-Academy Trusts in England: Emergent Structures and the Sponsorship of Underperforming Schools, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership