ETHICAL LEADERSHIP
MYTHOS LEARNING TRUST (MLT)
INDEX
Page 2 MLT - strategic overview
Page 4 DfE– Regions Group
Page 6 MLT – CFO note to the board
Page 9 MLT – external quality review extract
Page 11 MLT – Board meeting minutes extract
Page 13 MLT – Director of Inclusion letter
Page 16 MLT – staff engagement summary
Mythos Learning Trust
Strategic overview (Extract from 2024–2027 strategic plan)
Mythos Learning Trust (MLT) is a group of education settings operating across multiple communities. The Trust comprises a combination of schools, Early Years and specialist provisions and serves communities with varying levels of socioeconomic challenge and additional learning need.
The Trust has grown over recent years and positions itself publicly as values-led, inclusion-focused and committed to long-term sustainability.
Our mission
“To provide ambitious, inclusive and sustainable education that enables every learner to thrive — academically, socially and personally.”
Our core values
Inclusion at the centre
Every strategic and operational decision must prioritise equitable access, particularly for vulnerable and disadvantaged learners.
Ethical leadership
We lead with integrity, transparency and accountability in governance and practice.
Community partnership
Our settings are rooted in and responsive to the communities they serve.
Excellence with equity
High standards are pursued without compromising fairness or opportunity.
Responsible sustainability
Financial and organisational stewardship must secure long-term resilience.
Strategic priorities 2024–2027
• Improve consistency of quality across all settings.
• Strengthen leadership capability at all levels.
• Embed inclusive practice and reduce exclusion.
• Improve workforce retention and wellbeing.
• Maintain financial resilience and identify operational efficiencies.
• Strengthen reputation and external partnerships.
Current position (public summary)
• Quality across settings is variable, with some inconsistency in outcomes and leadership capacity.
• Inclusion practice is recognised as a strength; however, associated provision costs have increased year-on-year.
• Workforce turnover is above national averages in several settings, with exit feedback citing workload and pace of change.
• Staff survey data indicates strong alignment with the trust’s mission, but reduced confidence in the consistency of its implementation.
• Financial pressures are increasing due to rising operational costs, changes in funding patterns and greater complexity of learner need.
• Reserves have reduced over the past two financial cycles, limiting flexibility for future strategic investment.
• Leadership has publicly reiterated its commitment to being “values-led and financially responsible”, while acknowledging the need for difficult decisions ahead.
Department for Education: Regions Group
Financial monitoring correspondence
Issued: 5 February 2026
Private and confidential
To: Chair of Trustees, Mythos Learning Trust (MLT)
Subject: Financial monitoring and recovery planning
The Department for Education Regions Group has reviewed the most recent financial return submitted by MLT and notes a projected operating deficit alongside a reduction in reserves below the trust’s previously agreed resilience threshold.
While we recognise the challenging financial environment facing academy trusts nationally, current projections indicate continued reserve depletion over the medium term without evidence of a secured structural recovery plan.
Trustees are therefore asked to provide:
1. A revised three-year financial forecast within four weeks.
2. A clear recovery strategy outlining structural adjustments required to restore financial sustainability.
3. Assurance that proposed actions will ensure compliance with the academy trust handbook, including expectations relating to regularity, propriety and value for money.
4. Confirmation of board oversight arrangements in relation to financial risk and governance scrutiny.
Observations
The most recent financial submission indicates increasing expenditure linked to inclusive provision and workforce costs. While the department recognises the trust’s stated mission and values, trustees remain responsible for ensuring sustainable financial management in accordance with statutory and regulatory requirements.
Trustees are reminded of their duty to secure long-term financial viability while maintaining effective governance and leadership oversight.
Failure to demonstrate credible progress toward a sustainable financial position may result in enhanced monitoring arrangements.
Yours sincerely,
Regional Director Regions Group Department for Education
Mythos Learning Trust
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) briefing note to the board
Confidential
1. Purpose of this paper
This paper provides an updated overview of the trust’s financial position and outlines strategic considerations required to restore medium-term financial resilience.
Board discussion is requested regarding risk appetite, value alignment and preferred strategic direction.
2. Overview of current financial position
The trust is forecasting an in-year operating deficit. While the trust remains solvent, financial headroom has reduced significantly over the past two financial cycles.
Reserves are now below the board’s previously agreed target threshold. Without structural intervention, forecasts indicate continued erosion of reserves over the next 18–24 months.
Short-term cost containment measures have slowed, but not reversed, this trajectory.
3. Key drivers of financial pressure
Increased complexity of learner need
The proportion of learners requiring enhanced or specialist provision has increased. This has led to sustained growth in staffing and associated operational costs. While aligned with the trust’s inclusion commitments, expenditure has exceeded original modelling assumptions.
Workforce-related costs
Staff turnover, absence and recruitment challenges have led to greater reliance on temporary cover and agency arrangements in some settings. This has reduced cost predictability.
Operational inflation
Energy, utilities, premises and service contract costs have increased at a rate above funding adjustments.
Income variability
Changes in learner numbers and funding allocations across some settings have created planning uncertainty.
4. Risk considerations
If current trends continue, the trust faces the following risks:
• further depletion of reserves below sustainable levels
• reduced capacity for strategic investment
• increased scrutiny from funding and regulatory bodies
• potential impact on reputation should financial instability become visible externally
• internal workforce confidence being affected by prolonged uncertainty
5. Strategic levers available
The executive team has identified a number of potential actions for board consideration. These are presented for discussion rather than recommendation at this stage.
• restructuring or reducing centralised support functions
• rationalising or consolidating provision where occupancy or demand is lower
• reviewing discretionary programmes and outreach services
• implementing temporary restrictions on recruitment or pay progression
• reprioritising capital or improvement projects
• exploring alternative income streams or partnership models
• repositioning elements of the trust’s external narrative to strengthen competitiveness
Each option carries operational, reputational and values-based implications.
6. Strategic tension
The trust’s inclusion-focused model contributes both to its reputation and to its cost base. The board is therefore asked to consider the balance between:
• protecting short-term financial stability
• maintaining long-term mission alignment
• sustaining workforce morale
• managing reputational positioning
Clarity of direction will be required in advance of the next financial planning cycle.
Mythos Learning Trust
Extract from external quality review letter
Confidential
Following a recent external quality review across a sample of settings within the trust, the review team identified the following strengths and areas for development.
Strengths
• Strong commitment to inclusive practice across the trust.
• Leaders articulate a clear moral purpose aligned to the trust’s published values.
• Vulnerable learners are well known to staff and safeguarding culture is secure.
• Senior leaders demonstrate visibility and accessibility across settings.
• Community relationships are generally positive.
Areas for development
• Variability in the consistency of implementation of trust-wide expectations.
• Middle leadership capacity is uneven across settings.
• Staff report increased workload linked to pace of change and compliance requirements.
• Tension identified between strategic ambition and operational capacity.
• Some leaders expressed uncertainty about how financial pressures may affect inclusive provision.
Workforce feedback (collated during review)
Reviewers met with staff across multiple settings. Common themes included:
• Strong belief in the trust’s values and mission.
• Perception that financial considerations are increasingly influencing decision-making.
• Concern that inclusion commitments may be difficult to sustain if cost controls intensify.
• Mixed views on whether senior leadership consistently models the stated values under pressure.
• Desire for clearer communication regarding long-term strategic direction.
Review team comment
The trust demonstrates a clearly articulated moral purpose. However, there is emerging tension between its stated values and its operational and financial trajectory.
If current financial pressures lead to reductions in inclusive provision, the trust risks a perceived misalignment between its stated values and its operational decisions.
Sustained clarity of leadership will be essential in navigating this period.
Mythos Learning Trust
Extract from trustees’ board meeting minutes
Meeting date: 12 January 2026
Agenda item 6: Financial sustainability and strategic direction
Attendees: Chair, vice chair, trustees, chief executive, chief financial officer
Summary of discussion
The chief financial officer presented the updated financial forecast and reiterated that current expenditure levels are not sustainable without structural intervention.
The chair noted that while the trust’s inclusion commitments remain central to its identity, the board must prioritise financial stability to protect long-term viability.
A trustee commented that “values are only meaningful if the organisation survives to uphold them”.
Discussion followed regarding the balance between moral purpose and financial stewardship.
Key points raised
• The board acknowledged that inclusive provision contributes significantly to the trust’s reputation but also to its cost base.
• Trustees agreed that maintaining reserves at historic levels is no longer realistic in the current climate.
• It was suggested that the trust should “reset expectations” regarding the scope of centralised support services.
• One trustee questioned whether the current model of inclusion is financially scalable.
• The vice chair emphasised the importance of reputational positioning and noted that the trust must remain competitive within the regional landscape.
• The chief executive highlighted the potential impact on workforce morale if cost reduction measures are perceived as values-based compromises.
Risk appetite discussion
The board discussed its appetite for short-term reputational risk to secure medium-term financial resilience.
A trustee observed that external stakeholders may “challenge inconsistency” if financial controls result in visible reductions to inclusive services.
Another trustee suggested that “controlled repositioning” of the trust’s external narrative may be necessary to reflect a greater emphasis on performance and efficiency.
Actions agreed
• Executive team to model revised operating structures with reduced centralised support.
• Scenario planning to be undertaken regarding consolidation of underperforming or underoccupied provision.
• Communication plan to be drafted outlining the trust’s approach to financial sustainability.
• Further discussion required at the next meeting before final strategic direction is agreed.
Mythos Learning Trust
Position paper from the Director of Inclusion
Submitted to trustees and executive team – 28 January 2026
Purpose of this paper
This paper responds to the board’s discussion on 12 January 2026 regarding financial sustainability and proposed restructuring options. It outlines the potential implications of reducing inclusive provision and centralised support functions.
The intention is to ensure that strategic decisions fully consider long-term educational, reputational and financial consequences.
Context
Mythos learning trust has built its identity on inclusion as a defining principle. Inclusive practice has not only shaped our internal culture but also influenced our external reputation and stakeholder relationships.
Current financial modelling identifies inclusion-related expenditure as a significant cost pressure. However, it is important to distinguish between cost drivers and value drivers.
Inclusive provision contributes to:
• improved safeguarding outcomes
• reduced exclusion and associated reputational risk
• stronger community trust
• increased staff retention in settings with high levels of challenge
• long-term learner progression and destination outcomes
Risks associated with reduction in inclusive provision
If outreach, specialist staffing or centralised inclusion services are reduced, the following risks should be considered:
• Increased exclusions or placement instability.
• Escalation of behaviour incidents requiring reactive resource deployment.
• Erosion of staff confidence in leadership’s commitment to stated values.
• Reputational impact within communities and with local partners.
• Increased long-term costs associated with crisis intervention rather than early support. Inclusion should not be viewed solely as a discretionary cost centre. It functions as a preventative investment model.
Scalability and sustainability
The question raised in board discussion regarding the scalability of the current inclusion model warrants further examination.
Rather than reducing provision, alternative approaches may include:
• Reviewing deployment models for greater efficiency.
• Strengthening partnership funding arrangements.
• Seeking collaborative commissioning opportunities.
• Phased restructuring that protects frontline provision. Financial sustainability and inclusive practice should not be framed as mutually exclusive objectives.
Ethical considerations
The trust’s published values commit us to prioritising vulnerable learners. Any visible reduction in inclusive support may generate a perceived misalignment between values and action.
Leadership credibility depends not only on financial competence but also on consistency between stated principles and operational decisions.
Recommendation
Before modelling reductions in inclusion provision, I recommend:
• A full impact assessment on learner outcomes and safeguarding risk.
• Scenario planning that includes reputational modelling.
• Structured consultation with setting leaders.
• Clear articulation of non-negotiable value commitments.
Short-term savings achieved through reduced inclusion may result in longer-term financial and reputational cost.
Mythos Learning Trust
Staff engagement survey summary – December 2025
Response rate: 68% across all settings
Participants: Teaching staff, support staff and middle leaders
Overall alignment with mission and values
• 82% agree that the trust has a clear moral purpose.
• 76% agree that inclusion is a defining feature of the trust’s identity.
• 58% agree that senior leadership consistently models the trust’s values in decision-making.
• 49% feel confident that current financial decisions align with the trust’s stated values.
Workload and sustainability
• 61% report increased workload over the past 12 months.
• 54% report feeling uncertain about future staffing stability.
• 47% believe the pace of change is currently unsustainable. Comments suggest tension between ambition and capacity.
Confidence in strategic direction
• 63% understand that financial pressures require difficult decisions.
• 44% believe leaders have been fully transparent about the scale of financial risk.
• 52% are concerned that inclusion commitments may be reduced in practice.
Selected anonymised comments
“I believe in what we stand for, but I am worried we are drifting from it.”
“Inclusion is why I joined this trust. I hope it does not become the first thing we compromise.”
“We are being asked to do more with less. That tension is starting to show.”
“I understand financial reality, but I need clarity on what is non-negotiable.”
“The messaging is positive, but decisions feel increasingly financial rather than principled.”
“If support services reduce, frontline staff will absorb the pressure.”
Summary observation
While belief in the trust’s mission remains strong, there is emerging uncertainty regarding the sustainability of inclusive practice and the consistency of values-led decision-making under financial pressure.