����Vlog

The “rushed” process of developing Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence (RISE) plans for schools has led to concerns among “many” headteachers, a report warns.

The Department for Education’s second suggests that most heads and supporting organisations were critical of the timeframe for drafting, and that earlier deployment of advisers did not improve this.

Building on findings from an earlier review, researchers find that schools “broadly” believe RISE supports meaningful improvements in schools.

“Clear indicators” of early progress include better attendance and behaviour, improved punctuality among students and smoother transitions into schools, the report shows.

‘Rushed’ RISE process

However, schools and other bodies involved in RISE - which was launched in 2025 - also referenced challenges, notably in the process of drafting improvement plans in schools.

Most were critical of time available for these plans, with many describing the process as “rushed”.

Despite respondents “benefiting” from earlier access to RISE advisers and faster initial diagnosis than seen in the scheme previously, the process for developing improvement plans had not become more manageable for schools.

Researchers cited longer processes for identifying supporting organisations as the primary reason for a “compressed window” to co-develop and finalise plans.

One head said their plan was written to meet the deadline provided and did not provide an accurate representation of their school’s requirements.

Despite the time pressures, however, most heads were confident in delivering on achievement plans within the two-year time period provided.

Heads felt ‘excluded’

There was uncertainty among some schools and their responsible bodies (such as multi-academy trusts and local authorities) about what would happen following the initial diagnosis from a RISE adviser: some heads reported feeling “excluded”, having not seen the diagnosis report early enough - if they saw it at all.

Experiences of the matching process between schools and supporting organisations have been varied: some heads described a “smooth ad well-aligned” process, but some school bodies said it was “rushed or insufficiently tailored to school context, geography or existing partnerships”.

Around half of schools in the previous evaluation reported difficulties with the pairing process, citing issues with geographical proximity, capacity and whether the support offered was a good fit.

Writing for ����Vlog in February, Leora Cruddas, chief executive at the Confederation of School Trusts, said the initial evaluation revealed “a set of structural, cultural and operational challenges that risk undermining the programme’s potential”.

The researchers behind the evaluation published today report that RISE is “maturing operationally”, thanks to “clearer roles” and “smoother early‑stage processes since summer 2025”.

��

��