The evolution of School MIS Support Teams is largely a journey from centralisation to autonomy. There has recently been a lot of talk on the role of School Support teams and how they generate revenue, and their influence on the buying cycle is an interesting subject. To understand it fully, you need to unpick how we got here in the first place.

This blog aims to unravel the evolution of these teams, from their inception to the present day, highlighting the significant changes in licence and support arrangements.

The Beginnings: Centralised Control

Towards the end of the 20th century, the concept of local authority MIS support teams emerged alongside the advent of electronic MIS. Before this, schools relied on databases, spreadsheets, and predominantly paper-based systems managed under the strict control of local authorities. Every school within a local authority used the same MIS, as decisions about IT implementations were made centrally.

At this time there were few MIS options available, and the period saw the dominance of SIMS across most English local authorities, virtually all Welsh local authorities, and Northern Ireland.

By and large, local authorities purchased MIS licences for their schools, ensuring uniformity and ease of support. In-house MIS support teams supported the MIS, providing assistance to schools and helping them use the MIS to meet statutory requirements such as the school census and pupil enrolment tracking.

The Shift: Devolved Funding and Academisation

As time progressed, changes in government policies and school funding models led to significant shifts. Local authority MIS support teams transitioned from centrally funded entities to traded services. They began creating Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and selling support contracts to schools within their local authorities. Most schools within the geographical area of each LA continued to buy into these traded services.

The introduction of academisation marked another turning point. Schools that converted to academies gained autonomy over their MIS choices and funding. It also meant that schools that had previously been able to access and use a Local Authority-purchased SIMS licence were no longer able to do so when they converted to academy status. They were forced to purchase a brand-new set of SIMS licences if they wanted to continue using it – plus a support contract – at a significant cost which left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths.

In addition, more academies started to explore alternative MIS providers which offered cloud-based solutions without the need for specialised hardware.

New Dynamics: Independence and Commercialisation

At the Local Authority level, funding cuts continued, and more and more services became decentralised. Some local authority teams became arm’s length entities, needing to operate as standalone businesses and this shift required them to generate revenue independently, sometimes even returning revenue to their parent local authorities. Some support teams were decommissioned completely.

The evolving educational landscape also saw growth in independent school support businesses operating nationwide, supporting academy trusts and schools irrespective of their geographical location. These are fully commercial entities without any involvement from local authorities at all and can compete with all teams for support business.

Changes to Licencing and Market Share

Right into the 2010s, SIMS was the most dominant MIS by far. In 2012, 18,051 English state schools (84%) were using SIMS, largely under a licence arrangement where the Local Authority had procured in-perpetuity SIMS licences for their schools to use subject to payment of Annual Entitlement. Recently, schools using SIMS under an LA licence were told they were required to contract with ESS directly for Annual Entitlement and sign into a 3-year contract, a move that wasn’t universally popular and led the the CMA getting involved. It also meant that Local Authority teams were no longer able to negotiate a favourable deal for their schools, and maintained schools were no longer obliged to take support from them as they held their own SIMS licences.

In reality, what happened was that many schools continued to get support from their local teams as they’re usually people they’ve built a relationship with for many years. These local teams offer much, much more to schools and work in partnership with them to provide an exceptional technical and learning environment for staff and students.

So all of the above has ultimately led to many support teams, understandably, creating support arrangements with multiple MIS to meet the needs of their schools and academies. MIS support is just one part of the support puzzle, and teams are committed to supporting their schools irrespective of which MIS they use; they support the process, not the product.

What’s also happened in recent years is an exodus from SIMS. 84% of state schools were using SIMS in 2012 but, according to analysis by BringMoreData, this has dropped to 49% in 2024. SIMS is serving under half of England’s state schools; they’re still the biggest but they no longer have a majority. Northern Ireland has also recently selected a new MIS provider for their 1,100 schools, and our intelligence says many Welsh Local Authorities are starting to look at the market to move.

Present Day: Transparency and Accountability

Today, the relationship between MIS support teams and schools is more diversified than ever. Challenger MIS providers have partnered with support teams, offering support rebates to encourage collaboration. MIS-Agnostic School Support Teams often create opportunities for their customers to review the MIS options out there in the form of ‘beauty parades’ or discovery days. They will work with suppliers from across the market to arrange joint training, plan migrations and assist with procurement – something their schools find to be incredibly valuable.

However, comments have surfaced suggesting that some support teams might be receiving referral fees (or ‘kickbacks’) for promoting certain MIS products. While these practices are legitimate for independent commercial entities, they become contentious when involving local authority-affiliated teams. If a Local Authority team is making a recommendation that schools spend budget on a certain product because they themselves can financially benefit, then those actions can conflict with the Nolan Principles of public life. It emphasises the need for transparency and accountability and WhichMIS has launched a petition calling on all Local Authorities to ensure that their traded services operate with full transparency and ethical conduct when recommending MIS platforms. Fortunately, though, the number of teams engaging in such practices is minimal, and most have adopted transparent policies to avoid conflicts of interest.

Conclusion: Adapting to Change

The journey of MIS support teams from the 80s/90s to today reflects broader shifts in the educational sector towards greater autonomy, market choice, and commercialisation. These teams, whether local authority-affiliated, arm’s length, or fully independent, now operate in a landscape that demands adaptability, transparency, and a commitment to supporting schools effectively.

There is undoubtedly more change around the corner. As the sector continues to evolve, it remains essential for all stakeholders—school leaders, business leaders, government bodies, and support partners—to understand these changes and work collaboratively to ensure that the focus remains on enhancing educational outcomes for all students.