Internal scrutiny is crucial for ensuring effective governance, financial management, and risk mitigation within Multi Academy Trusts (MATs) and Single Academy Trusts (SATs). However, several common challenges can complicate this process:

• Limited Budget and Staffing: Both MATs and SATs often face constraints in terms of budget and staffing, making it difficult to allocate sufficient resources for thorough internal audits in the areas it is required most. Some in particular, may lack the required budget to hire dedicated internal auditors or to contract external professionals, which could compromise the depth and frequency of scrutiny.

  Competing Priorities: Trusts frequently must balance their limited resources between different priorities, such as improving educational outcomes and maintaining infrastructure. Internal scrutiny can become deprioritised, especially when confronted with immediate operational demands.

   

• Inadequate Internal Audit Skills: Internal scrutiny requires a certain level of expertise in audit processes, risk management, and knowledge in the specialised area. Many trusts, especially smaller SATs, may not have staff with the required skill set or experience to conduct effective internal audits. Which could lead to gaps in ensuring compliance with regulations and identifying risks.

  Training and Development: Staff who are tasked to oversee internal scrutiny may not receive appropriate training to stay informed on best practices or to effectively handle the complexities of educational governance, strategic operations and finance.

• Potential Conflicts of Interest: Ensuring the independence and objectivity of internal scrutiny is a significant challenge if those conducting the audits are part of the trust’s management team. It can lead to conflicts of interest, resulting in less rigorous scrutiny and a reluctance to report issues that could reflect negatively on the leadership.

  Lack of External Perspective: If a trust is utilising Internal auditors, they may lack the external perspective needed to benchmark performance against sector best practice or identify systemic issues.

• Resistance to Change: Implementation of robust internal scrutiny processes can often be meet with resistance from staff or leadership who may perceive audits as overly critical or as an unnecessary administrative burden. This cultural resistance can interrupt the implementation of effective scrutiny and limit the trust’s ability to identify key issues and make the necessary improvements.

  Transparency Challenges: Fostering a culture of transparency and openness is essential for effective internal scrutiny. Internal scrutiny needs to be utilised as a critical friend with all staff aware of the process and the scope to ensure that staff feel confident that the process is to help rather than be accusatory.

• Varied Standards Across Schools: In Multi Academy Trusts there can be inconsistency in the implementation of internal scrutiny across its schools. This can result from differences in local leadership, variations in school size, demographics, complexity, and differing levels of engagement with the central trust policies.

  Uneven Quality of Reporting: The quality of internal audit reports can vary significantly, depending on who is conducting the audit and the available resources. Inconsistent reporting makes it difficult for trust leadership to get an accurate and clear representation of its risks and performance across the trust.

   

• Keeping Up with Changes: The regulatory environment for academy trusts is continually evolving, with a change in requirements and expectations being introduced regularly. Trusts must continuously ensure they update the internal scrutiny processes to remain compliant, which can be a challenge, particularly for trusts with limited administrative capacity and knowledge.

  Balancing Compliance and Improvement: Trusts can struggle to balance the need for compliance with the broader goal of continuous improvement. A hyperfocus on ticking regulatory boxes can sometimes create a compliance-oriented culture rather than a culture that seeks to enhance governance and strategic performance.

   

• Data Integration Issues: Effective internal scrutiny often relies on the ability to access and analyse data from across the trust. Many trusts face challenges with integrating data systems across all their schools or ensuring that data is up to date and accurate, which can disrupt the audit process.

  Cybersecurity Risks: As trusts increasingly rely on digital systems, they must also manage cybersecurity risks. An internal scrutiny programme that includes an IT security focus is essential. Often, this area requires expertise due to the complexities.

Updated 06 May 2025 07:42