RISE teams and a new era for school intervention

School improvement and accountability remain a central focus for the new government’s education plans and the latest proposals surrounding Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence (RISE) teams are a key element. The teams, made up of experienced leaders with a track record of driving improvement, are set to take on a more significant role in supporting underperforming schools. Here’s everything you need to know.

Focusing on “stuck schools”

Under current proposals outlined in the Department for Education’s (DfE’s) school accountability reform consultation, RISE teams will initially focus on “stuck schools.” These are schools that:

currently hold a ‘requires improvement’ single headline grade; or
received a sub-judgement of ‘requires improvement’ for leadership and management and/or quality of education in 2024/25; and
were rated below ‘good’ in their Ofsted inspection before that.

Over 600 stuck schools have already been identified, meaning RISE teams have a significant task on their hands to provide targeted intervention, work alongside school leaders to build capacity and implement sustainable improvement.

The future of intervention

Looking forward to September 2026, the role of RISE teams will evolve to align with the government’s intention to replace the existing intervention model. Currently, underperforming schools are subject to structural intervention measures: academy orders for maintained schools and rebrokering for academies. However, the next academic year will bring a new approach, in which RISE teams will deliver mandatory targeted intervention as the first level of intervention for underperforming schools, and under the new system, structural changes will only be triggered as a last resort. In practice, this will mean a school will have 18 months to demonstrate sufficient progress following RISE intervention, as assessed by Ofsted monitoring and inspection.

The move to delayed academisation or rebrokering is unsurprising given the Department’s recent ‘structural agnosticism’ and its preference for internal capacity building in the first instance. Nevertheless, multi academy trusts (MATs) remain a central feature of the intervention model, with the consultation document acknowledging the important role they have in driving improvement. For governors and trustees, this marks a huge shift in accountability structures and introduces a new programme of school improvement. Although more detailed guidance from the DfE is yet to be published, governors and trustees will likely need to work closely with RISE teams to monitor interventions and ensure they lead to meaningful progress for their schools.

Commenting on these proposals, first set out in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, Emma Balchin, NGA Chief Executive, said:

“Ending the presumption that any new school will be an academy, and every school causing concern will be academised, is also sensible. Trusts add huge value to many schools and are experts at delivering school improvement. However, it is not realistic to believe that trusts will always be best placed to open a new school in every community, and nor that academisation will always be the best way of delivering improvement for any struggling school. The bill rightly facilitates greater flexibility for local decision makers.”

Universal support services

Beyond intervention, RISE teams are also expected to deliver a broader “universal service,” supporting all schools by signposting best practice, facilitating peer support networks and encouraging collaboration. Although the granular plans are yet to be revealed, this future initiative presents an interesting opportunity for boards to actively participate in sector-wide improvement, ensuring schools benefit from shared learning and cases of innovation driving success in the school system.

These proposals remain subject to consultation, and governing boards should consider what these changes mean for their schools and trusts, particularly against the existing backdrop of Ofsted reform. It has been announced that the definition of “stuck schools” will evolve with the introduction of Ofsted’s new report cards. Once implemented, schools identified as “needing attention” in leadership and governance, alongside a history of below ‘good’ Ofsted outcomes, will be subject to RISE team intervention. More information on Ofsted report cards can be found in their parallel consultation.

Recognising the role of governance

As these reforms take shape, keeping up to date with the evolving accountability landscape will be essential. By engaging with RISE teams and ensuring that interventions lead to sustainable improvement, governance will be instrumental in shaping a system that aims to drive greater school improvement. However, the question remains, will the RISE teams have the governance-specific knowledge to capitalise on the wealth of insights governors and trustees bring to the conversation? As the first line of accountability, those governing are perfectly placed to bridge the gap between strategy and school improvement efforts, positioning them as key partners in this evolving framework of intervention. Ultimately, while the ambition behind RISE is clear, its success will depend on effective collaboration, clarity of roles and the recognition and utilisation of an organisation’s governance expertise.

Fariha Choudhury

Senior Projects and Advocacy Officer

Fariha supports the development of NGA's policy and information outputs with a particular focus on multi academy trust governance. Alongside working at NGA, Fariha is undertaking a Masters in Education at the University of Birmingham.