Who makes decisions in Multi-Academy Trusts?
Who is this article for?
This blog post is written for education suppliers who want to understand who makes purchasing decisions in Multi-Academy Trusts, and who to contact when selling to academy schools.
If you’re selling products or services to academy schools, knowing who to contact can be one of the biggest challenges.
Should you approach the MAT CEO? The finance director? The headteacher? Or the subject leader who will actually use your product?
The answer isn’t always straightforward.
At Buzz Education, I recently commissioned research into how academy schools make purchasing decisions, who influences supplier selection and when trust-level approval is required.
The findings reinforce something I’ve seen throughout my career: the person who identifies the need, the person who selects the supplier and the person who approves the expenditure are not necessarily the same person.
Who is responsible for purchasing in a MAT?
A Multi-Academy Trust (MAT) is one legal organisation responsible for running two or more academy schools.
Its trust board has ultimate responsibility for governance and financial oversight, but purchasing responsibilities can be delegated to central teams, headteachers, school business managers and departmental leaders.
The precise arrangements depend on the trust’s scheme of delegation, financial policies and the product or service being purchased.
For suppliers, this means that targeting the most senior person in the organisation isn’t automatically the best approach.
Who approves purchases in academy schools?
We asked who normally gives final approval for purchases within an academy’s delegated authority. Our survey found that:
Who normally gives final approval for purchases within delegated authority (% of academy respondents)
Other respondents identified trust-level roles or said approval depended on the purchase.
These findings are particularly interesting because they demonstrate the purchasing responsibilities that can remain within individual academies.
What can education suppliers do with this information?
Start by identifying who is likely to approve your particular product or service.
For classroom resources, a subject leader may be the most relevant first contact. For larger purchases, the headteacher or school business manager may become involved. For trust-wide services, central procurement or finance teams may be essential.
Rather than relying on a single job title, suppliers should establish who can recommend, approve and escalate a purchase.
Our guide to education job roles and decision makers explores the different school contacts suppliers should consider targeting.
Who has the greatest influence over supplier selection?
Interestingly, the most common answers were:
Depends on the product or service
32%
of academy respondents said the greatest influence depends on the product or service.
MAT finance or procurement
23%
of academy respondents said MAT finance or procurement has the greatest influence.
This tells us that supplier selection isn’t always controlled by one individual or department.
A curriculum resource may be heavily influenced by teaching staff, while an IT platform could require involvement from trust-wide technical and finance teams.
What can suppliers do with this information?
Adapt your marketing to the people involved in the decision.
Teachers and subject leaders want to understand how a product will help them and their pupils. Headteachers are likely to consider wider school priorities, implementation and value. Trust finance and procurement teams need clarity on cost, contractual arrangements and compliance.
One generic marketing message is unlikely to address all these concerns equally well.
When is additional approval needed?
We asked at what total contract value additional approval becomes necessary. Our research found that:
Total contract value at which additional approval is needed (% of academy respondents)
These are reported experiences, not universal purchasing rules. Every trust can establish its own approval arrangements within the relevant financial requirements.
What can suppliers do with this information?
Ask about approval requirements early.
A school may be enthusiastic about your product but still need further authorisation, particularly for multi-year agreements or contracts covering several academies.
Make it easy for your contact to share your proposal internally. Include clear pricing, contract terms, expected benefits and implementation requirements.
My perspective: Don’t confuse seniority with purchasing influence
As Chair of Governors at both a primary and secondary school, working across two local authorities, I have direct experience of the responsibilities involved in school governance.
I also chair panels covering finance, admissions appeals and exclusions, and have been involved in five Ofsted inspections and two academisation processes.
Combined with my work helping education suppliers reach schools through Buzz Education, this has reinforced the importance of understanding how decisions are made in practice.
A senior MAT executive may have considerable authority, but that doesn’t mean they’re the person identifying every classroom need or evaluating every supplier. Equally, a teacher may be enthusiastic about a product without having the authority to purchase it.
Successful education marketing needs to recognise both influence and authority.
Should suppliers target MATs or individual academy schools?
For many products, the answer is both.
Individual academies can generate demand, identify problems and champion solutions. MAT central teams can influence purchasing policies, approve contracts and support wider adoption.
Suppliers who engage both levels, with appropriate messages for each, are better placed to navigate the buying process.
Read our guide to MATs and academies for more background on trust structures.
And if you’re looking to reach relevant decision makers, Buzz Education’s school email marketing services can help you build targeted campaigns for academy and trust audiences.
The key takeaway: Don’t ask only who makes the final decision. Ask who identifies the need, who influences the choice and who can approve the purchase.
This article draws on Buzz Education’s October 2026 research into purchasing decisions among academy school professionals.
Want to reach decision makers at academy schools and trusts?
Build targeted campaigns for the people who identify, influence and approve purchases.
Frequently asked questions
Who is responsible for purchasing in a MAT?
A Multi-Academy Trust is one legal organisation, and its trust board has ultimate responsibility for governance and financial oversight. Purchasing responsibilities can be delegated to central teams, headteachers, school business managers and departmental leaders, depending on the trust’s scheme of delegation.
Who gives final approval for academy purchases?
In our research, 37% identified the headteacher or principal, 22% the school business manager or finance team and 16% a subject or department leader. Others identified trust-level roles or said approval depended on the purchase.
Who has the greatest influence over supplier selection?
32% of respondents said it depended on the product or service, while 23% selected MAT finance or procurement. Supplier selection isn’t always controlled by one individual or department.
At what contract value is additional approval needed?
29% reported no single approval threshold or were unsure, 27% selected £1,000 to £2,499 and 12% said it depended on the product or contract. These are reported experiences, not universal rules, as every trust sets its own arrangements.
Should I target the MAT CEO or the headteacher?
Targeting the most senior person isn’t automatically the best approach. Establish who can recommend, approve and escalate a purchase, and for many products engage both academy and MAT contacts with an appropriate message for each.
How can I make it easier for a school to buy from me?
Ask about approval requirements early, and make it easy for your contact to share your proposal internally with clear pricing, contract terms, expected benefits and implementation requirements.