The UK School Budget Breakdown 2026/27

About the author

I co-founded Sprint Education back in 2007 with a mission to transform how brands connect with schools. Today, we’re the world’s leading education agency that creates over 48,000,000 connections between schools and education brands each year.

As a former teacher, I know how schools operate inside and out - how decisions get made, how budgets are balanced, and how carefully every new purchase is considered.

After nearly two decades helping brands like you sell to schools, I’ve observed both sides of the same challenge: how schools decide what’s worth investing in, and how you win a place in those decisions.

I know the reality of school budgets goes much deeper than just the headlines in the news. So, I’ve looked closely at how 2026/27 budgets are shaping up, surveying finance teams and Head Teachers across UK schools, academies, and multi-academy trusts to understand the real pressures they’re facing, how confident they feel about the year ahead, and where spending priorities are shifting.

The result is an accurate snapshot of school finances from the inside, grounded in real-life responses from the people responsible for making the numbers work…

… and insights into what those numbers actually tell us.

Guy Lewis
Co-Founder, Sprint Education

The funding backdrop for 2026/27

Before we dive into what school leaders told us, let’s check the numbers to see what schools are working with this year…

£67 billion

The Department for Education has confirmed that core school budgets will reach £67 billion in 2026/27, up from £65.3 billion in 2025/26. That’s a 2.6% increase - but with the UK CPI sitting at around 3%, school funding isn’t rising fast enough to outpace inflation.

By the time you factor in staffing costs, pay rises, energy and services inflation, and rising SEND costs, schools will likely be feeling a squeeze bigger than just 0.4%.

Per-pupil funding from April 2026

The minimum per-pupil funding levels have also risen compared to 2025:

• £5,115 minimum funding per primary pupil (+3.2% growth)
• £6,640 minimum funding per secondary pupil (+2.7% growth)

SEND reform

As part of the longer-term SEND reform, the government has pledged to add a further £3.5bn in SEND funding by 2028-2029. For the 2026/27 year, high-needs funding will total £12.2bn, an increase of £0.3bn (or about 2.5%) since April 2025.

The bigger picture…

While these figures point to continued financial pressure, they don’t tell the whole story. Schools have become increasingly strategic about how they allocate budgets, prioritising initiatives that deliver clear value, measurable outcomes, and support for their most pressing challenges. The question isn’t simply whether funding is rising or falling, but how schools are choosing to spend what they have.

About the respondents

We invited all UK schools and trusts…

… to take part in this survey and help us understand how school budgets are shaping up for 2026/27.

The responses we received (from finance leaders and senior leadership teams) provide a snapshot of how different types of schools are approaching the financial year ahead, giving you essential insights to help you tailor your communications per school type.

Our responses gave us the following breakdown of representation:

• 51% Local authority maintained schools
• 32% Academies within MATs
• 9% Standalone academies
• 7% Independent schools
• 1% MAT central teams

For context, the structure of the school system across England is roughly:

• 43% academies (both standalone and those within MATs)
• 38% local authority maintained schools
• 6% independent schools

England data is used here because the Department for Education publishes the most detailed and consistent breakdown of school types, and the larger majority of UK schools are based in England, making it a reliable benchmark for comparison.

When we compare this with the survey results, the mix of respondents is very closely aligned with the overall structure of the sector.

This gives us confidence that the results reflect a balanced view of how different types of schools are experiencing the year ahead.

Budget outlook

School funding headlines often give the impression that budgets are steadily increasing. From my time as a Head of Department, this is exactly where the disconnect usually starts. On paper, budgets might look healthier, but by the time you factor in staffing, resources, and day-to-day costs, it rarely feels that way in practice.

The impact on schools is inevitable - but just how significant will that be?

We asked school and trust leaders three key questions about their financial outlook to build an accurate picture of what the budget really means for schools this year.

Together, these responses give a clear sense of the financial pressure schools are operating under - and how that pressure is shaping decision-making.

Will core funding cover essential costs?

When asked whether their core funding will fully cover essential costs, the majority of respondents indicated that budgets will remain tight.

• 38% said they expect to struggle significantly to cover essential costs
• 24% expect to struggle slightly
• 32% said funding will cover costs but with very little flexibility
• 4% said their funding will comfortably cover essential costs
• 3% were unsure

62% of schools expect their core funding to fall short of covering essential costs, while nearly a third say they will only just break even with very little room for additional spending.

Confidence in investing for the future

Despite the pressures on budgets, we also wanted to understand how confident schools feel about their ability to invest in improvements over the coming years.

When asked about their confidence in being able to invest in improvements over the next 1–3 years, responses showed a clear sense of caution:

• 24% said they feel very concerned
• 30% said they feel somewhat concerned
• 15% felt neutral
• 25% said they feel somewhat confident
• 5% said they feel very confident

More than half of respondents expressed concern about their ability to invest in improvements over the coming years.

This reflects the reality many schools face: while investment in teaching, learning and operational improvements remains important, financial pressures mean those decisions are likely to be more carefully scrutinised and prioritised.

How far ahead can schools realistically plan?

Financial uncertainty also affects how far ahead schools feel able to plan.

When asked how far ahead their school or trust can realistically plan financially:

• 11% said less than one year
• 35% said one year
• 24% said two years
• 25% said three years or more
• 4% were unsure

While some schools are able to plan further ahead, the most common answer was just one year, reflecting the need to remain cautious in a changing financial environment.

It’s not all bad news…

This shorter planning horizon can also create opportunities. When schools are planning budgets year by year rather than locking spending into long-term cycles, it gives education organisations more opportunities to introduce new solutions and demonstrate value - without having to wait several years for the next procurement window to open.

For suppliers, this means that timing and relevance matter more than ever. Schools are approaching spending more cautiously, but they are not stepping away from investment altogether. Instead, they are focusing on solutions that deliver clear value, can be trusted to work, and make a tangible difference within tighter planning cycles.

In practice, this means opportunities are still there - but they are more likely to go to organisations that can clearly demonstrate impact, reliability, and value for money from the outset.

Takeaway tip:

Schools are still buying - but they’re buying more carefully

I’ve seen this first-hand in schools. Even when budgets were tight, we still invested, but only when we were completely confident it would deliver. Anything unclear or risky was easy to say no to.

To succeed, suppliers need to make it easier for schools to feel confident in saying yes.

For example:

Instead of leading with features, lead with a clear, specific outcome
E.g. “Schools using this reduced marking time by 25% within one term” is far more compelling than a list of functionality.

Make it easy to trial before committing
Offer a pilot with a small group of teachers or one year group, so schools can see impact in their own context before rolling out more widely.

Show how your solution fits into existing priorities
If SEND or behaviour is a current focus, explicitly position how your product supports those pressures - not just general improvement.

Remove friction from the approval process
Provide a short business case, pricing breakdown, and implementation plan that a school leader can quickly take to SLT or a trust for sign-off.

Design for low lift, not just high impact
Schools are more likely to adopt solutions that are easy to implement and don’t add significant workload for already stretched staff.

Those that can make decisions feel low-risk, clearly justified, and easy to approve will still find strong opportunities, even in a more cautious spending environment.

The pressures behind school budgets

So, we know schools are unfortunately facing budget struggles this year. But inevitably those struggles won’t be felt evenly across buying categories.

To understand the reality behind the numbers, we looked more closely at where schools are feeling the greatest financial strain, whether certain areas are driving more pressure than others, and how it’s shaping their spending decisions.

What’s driving budget pressure?

The results show that budget pressure is being driven by a combination of rising core costs and increasing demand for support.

• 81% of respondents cited staffing costs
• 59% cited SEND provision
• 47% cited building maintenance
• 28% cited energy and utilities
• 24% cited supply staff costs
• 19% cited inflation on resources and services
• 15% cited technology maintenance or upgrades
• 1% cited pupil numbers
• 1% cited trust allocation of funds

The biggest pressures: staffing, SEND, and estates

Three areas stand out as the dominant drivers of financial pressure:

Staffing costs (81%)

Staffing is by far the biggest pressure, reflecting rising salaries, employer contributions, and the ongoing challenge of recruitment and retention. Unlike other areas, staffing costs are largely non-negotiable, leaving schools with limited flexibility to reduce spend. When I worked in schools, staffing costs were always the hardest pressure to manage, because there’s very little flexibility without it impacting people or provision, which is why external support often becomes part of the solution.

You should…

Focus on how your solution can save staff time, reduce workload, or improve efficiency. Be clear about how you minimise additional burden. Where possible, demonstrate how your product helps schools do more with existing staff capacity.

SEND provision (59%)

The growing demand for SEND support continues to place significant strain on budgets. Schools are increasingly required to provide additional support without a corresponding increase in funding, making this one of the most complex and persistent financial challenges.

You should…

Clearly demonstrate how your solution can support SEND provision effectively and at scale, while remaining cost-effective. Evidence of impact, ease of implementation, and alignment with statutory requirements will be particularly important.

Building maintenance (47%)

Half of respondents highlighted estates as a key pressure. This reflects the reality of maintaining ageing school buildings, where costs are often unpredictable but unavoidable.

You should…

Position your offering around reliability, long-term value, and cost savings. Solutions that help prevent future issues, reduce unexpected costs, or extend the life of existing infrastructure will be especially compelling.

How schools are responding

In response to these pressures, schools are taking a range of strategic actions to manage their budgets more effectively.

• 91% of respondents are reducing spending in certain areas
• 62% are reprioritising internal budgets
• 54% are applying for grants or alternative funding
• 47% are seeking better-value suppliers
• 43% are delaying planned purchases
• 25% are increasing collaboration with other schools or trusts
• 1% are implementing a change management programme
• 1% are looking at PTA funding for larger projects

A shift towards more strategic spending

What’s interesting here is that this isn’t just reactive. In schools, you’re constantly balancing priorities, but when budgets tighten, those decisions become much more deliberate.

The most immediate response to budget pressure is clear:

91% of schools are reducing spending in certain areas

At first glance, this suggests widespread cost-cutting across the sector.

But a closer look reveals a more nuanced picture…

Our data suggests that these are not simply blanket cuts being made in isolation. Alongside reducing spend, schools are also taking a more planned and methodical approach to managing budgets:

• 62% are reprioritising internal budgets
• 54% are seeking external funding
• 47% are seeking better-value suppliers

This points to a more balanced reality. Yes, schools are cutting costs - but they’re also using other strategies to avoid unnecessary reductions and protect spending in the areas that matter most. It’s important to note that the third option above doesn’t say schools are seeking cheaper suppliers - just better-value. While keeping costs low is vital, the focus is more about maximising their spend and getting their money’s worth.

Rather than making indiscriminate cuts across the board, many schools appear to be reviewing budgets carefully, and looking for alternative ways to maintain investment where possible.

What this means for education organisations

These findings reinforce an important point: financial pressure isn’t necessarily eliminating demand, but it is changing how decisions are made.

For suppliers, this means that success increasingly depends on:

• Aligning with core pressures schools cannot ignore.
• Demonstrating clear and immediate value.
• Helping schools make the most of limited and carefully managed budgets.

Takeaway tip:

Pressure is driving more focused spending

Budget pressures are widespread, but schools are trying to do more than just cut spend in certain areas.

Schools are still investing, but with a sharper emphasis on necessity, value, and impact than ever before.

The rise of MAT decision-making

Over the past decade, the structure of the school system has changed significantly.

This is something I’ve seen evolve over time. Where decisions were once made almost entirely at school level, there’s now far more collaboration (and in many cases, oversight) from trust leadership.

In England, academies now make up around 43% of all schools, a figure that has grown rapidly since the early 2010s. In fact, there were just over 200 academies in 2010, compared to more than 10,000 today - now accounting for roughly half of all schools.

A lot of these academies now operate within multi-academy trusts rather than as standalone academies, reflecting a continued shift towards group-based governance and decision-making.

This matters because as more schools move into trust structures, purchasing and budget decisions aren’t just the responsibility of the individual school. Depending on how the trust runs things, decision-making might be shared with the trust, or entirely centralised in some cases.

To understand exactly where the decision-making lies, and how this is affecting spending, we asked both academies and the central trusts two key questions…

How much autonomy do academies really have?

Among academies within multi-academy trusts, autonomy over purchasing decisions varies significantly:

• 63% say they have some autonomy, but trust approval is required
• 3% say purchases are mostly managed centrally by the trust
• 31% say they have full autonomy
• 3% say all purchasing is managed centrally

What this means for you

Academies play a critical role in identifying needs, evaluating solutions, and influencing decisions. In many cases, they remain the starting point for new opportunities, even where final approval sits at trust level.

At the same time, some purchases - particularly higher-value solutions - may require trust-level alignment or approval.

This means you should:

• Continue engaging directly with schools to build interest and advocacy.
• Be prepared to support conversations at trust level where needed.
• Position your solution so it works both for individual schools and across a group.

In short, it’s still imperative to continue speaking with academies - but the most successful approaches recognise that the final decision may not always sit with them alone.

Where decisions are actually made

More likely to be decided at trust level

• Finance or operational systems - 64% trust / 24% both / 12% school
• Estates and facilities projects - 58% trust / 27% both / 15% school
• Energy or sustainability initiatives - 39% trust / 30% both / 30% school

These categories tend to be higher-value, infrastructure-heavy, or long-term investments, where trusts are looking to standardise systems and achieve efficiencies across multiple schools.

More likely to be decided at school level

• Classroom resources - 3% trust / 9% both / 88% school
• Educational trips or enrichment activities - 3% trust / 9% both / 88% school
• Behaviour or pastoral programmes - 9% trust / 21% both / 70% school

These decisions are closely tied to day-to-day teaching and pupil experience, meaning schools retain a high level of control.

Mixed or shared decision-making

• Staff CPD or training - 12% trust / 45% both / 42% school
• Edtech platforms or software - 27% trust / 36% both / 36% school
• Safeguarding / wellbeing tools - 39% trust / 27% both / 33% school
• Assessment tools - 12% trust / 36% both / 52% school

These areas often involve shared decision-making, and it’s clear why: the benefits are firmly felt by teachers and pupils, but these solutions are often more expensive and tend to have the ability to be easily rolled out across multiple schools, meaning trusts may want to influence approval, procurement, or supplier choice.

Your snackable summary

Purchasing decisions tend to lie with…

• Schools: when purchases are lower-cost, flexible, and directly impact classroom delivery (e.g. resources, trips, pastoral support).
• Trusts: when purchases are higher-value, operational, or need to be standardised across multiple schools (e.g. finance systems, estates, trust-wide platforms).
• Both: when solutions support teaching and learning but are more expensive and/or can be scaled across multiple academies (e.g. CPD, safeguarding tools, some edtech).

But…

This isn’t the case across all trusts and academies, so keeping an open line of communication across both is essential. Schools remain key influencers in most decisions, and some trusts will want to vet every purchase - so don’t think of either as a single route to market.

Takeaway tip:

Think beyond a single school

If you’re targeting academies, don’t just think about winning one school at a time.

The strongest opportunities come from marketing campaigns that take into account the pain points of who’s likely going to be making the decision, as well as make it clear the solution has real impact, both in a single classroom and across potentially 100 schools in one trust.

The flexibility for new initiatives

Two schools might be facing similar budget pressures, but if one has room to invest and the other doesn’t, the outcome is very different. So we’ve asked how much flexibility schools actually have in their budgets this year - and how that’s changed.

How much flexibility do schools have?

Compared to last year, many schools expect reduced flexibility in their budgets for new initiatives:

• 34% expect much less flexibility
• 34% expect slightly less flexibility
• 27% expect about the same
• 5% expect slightly more flexibility
• 0% expect much more flexibility

Overall, this means that two-thirds of schools expect less flexibility than last year, reinforcing the cautious financial environment highlighted earlier in the report.

A balanced approach to spending

Despite this, schools are not shifting entirely into cost-cutting mode.

When asked how they would describe their overall approach to spending in 2026/27:

• 27% said they are taking a balance of investment and cost control
• 73% said they are mostly focused on reducing costs

This shows that while cost control is a priority, there are still schools actively balancing investment alongside financial caution - and those cost reductions will likely be across specific categories.

A more cautious approach to spending

When budgets tightened in schools I worked in, we didn’t stop spending altogether, but we did slow everything down. Fewer quick decisions, more conversations, and a lot more scrutiny before committing.

Most schools are now operating with a strong focus on cost control, with 73% saying they are primarily focused on reducing costs. Only 27% describe their approach as a balance between investment and cost control.

This reflects a more cautious mindset. Schools are approaching the year looking to manage budgets carefully and avoid unnecessary spend.

However, this doesn’t mean investment has stopped altogether.

Instead, it suggests that new purchases need to work harder to earn their place. Spending decisions are being made more selectively, with greater scrutiny, clearer priorities, and a stronger focus on value.

What this means for education organisations

Reduced flexibility doesn’t necessarily mean reduced opportunity, but it does change how those opportunities are won.

You should:

• Focus on clear, immediate value rather than long-term potential alone.
• Make it easy for schools to justify the spend internally.
• Position your solution as something that supports efficiency, savings, or improved outcomes.
• Reduce perceived risk through evidence, trials, or low-commitment options.

Where budgets are tight, the strongest propositions are those that feel necessary, reliable, and worth the investment.

Takeaway tip:

Less flexibility, not less opportunity

Schools may have less room to spend, but they’ll still need to invest where it matters.

The organisations that succeed will be those that can clearly show why their solution is worth prioritising, even within tighter, more controlled budgets.

Where schools are prioritising spending

Even with limited flexibility, schools are still making active decisions about what gets prioritised and what doesn’t. So, we asked where they expect to focus their spending in 2026/27.

Top spending priorities for 2026/27

The results show a clear focus on core delivery, support for pupils, and operational efficiency:

• 67% of respondents are prioritising SEND provision
• 43% prioritising estates and facilities
• 37% prioritising pupil wellbeing, behaviour, and safeguarding
• 33% prioritising recruitment and retention of staff
• 32% prioritising curriculum resources
• 24% prioritising operational efficiencies (procurement, finance, etc.)
• 22% prioritising staff development and CPD
• 13% prioritising classroom technology
• 4% prioritising assessment tools

A focus on essential and high-impact areas

In schools, there’s always a pecking order when it comes to spending. When budgets tighten, that order becomes much clearer, with things directly affecting pupils and outcomes naturally rise to the top.

SEND provision sits firmly at first place, followed by estates and facilities, then pupil wellbeing and safeguarding. These aren’t optional areas - they’re where demand is rising, expectations are high, and in many cases, action is unavoidable.

Alongside this, schools are also prioritising recruitment and retention, as well as curriculum resources, reinforcing the fact that maintaining staffing and core delivery remains a central concern.

Further down, areas like operational efficiency, staff development, and technology still feature, but with less urgency. These are important, but are more likely to be considered once immediate pressures are addressed.

What this tells us about spending decisions

Schools are focusing first on what they must address - capacity, compliance, and core delivery.

Improvement-focused investments haven’t disappeared, but they are being approached more selectively and often need to connect clearly to these higher-priority pressures to make the cut.

You should…

• Align your messaging with the areas under greatest pressure, particularly SEND, estates, and wellbeing.
• Show how your solution supports core delivery or helps schools respond to immediate challenges.
• Where you sit outside top priorities, clearly link your offer to impact, efficiency, or risk reduction.
• Make it easy for schools to see how your solution fits into existing priorities, not competes with them.

Takeaway tip:

Follow the pressure points

Spending is being pulled towards areas where schools feel the most pressure.

You don’t need to change what your product does, but you do need to show how it connects to these priorities and why it deserves a place within them.

Choosing suppliers: what really drives decisions

When budgets are tight and scrutiny is high, the difference between being considered and being ignored often comes down to a few key factors.

To understand this, we asked schools what matters most when selecting suppliers, what typically blocks a purchase, and how they discover new solutions.

What matters most when selecting suppliers

We asked schools to choose their top two priorities when evaluating new products or services - and they were clear on what matters:

• 87% prioritise cost and value for money
• 46% prioritise proven impact on outcomes
• 18% prioritise integration with existing systems
• 15% prioritise supplier reputation or brand
• 14% prioritise recommendations from other schools
• 8% prioritise ease of implementation

A clear focus on value and impact

From a school perspective, this is exactly how those decisions play out. I’ve sat in budget discussions where something might look great, but if we couldn’t clearly justify the cost in terms of impact, it was very difficult to move forward.

The top two factors (value for money and proven impact) stand well above the rest.

This reflects a clear shift in how schools are evaluating suppliers:

• It’s not enough to be interesting or innovative.
• Solutions need to be justifiable, evidence-backed, and worth the investment.

Ease of implementation also ranks highly, reinforcing that schools are not just asking “does this work?” but also “can we realistically make this work?”.

What stops schools from buying?

Even when there is interest, there are clear barriers that can prevent a purchase from going ahead:

When asked to identify the single biggest barrier:

• 75% cited budget availability
• 9% cited staff capacity to implement something new
• 5% cited lack of clear evidence of impact
• 4% cited integration with existing systems
• 4% cited time to evaluate options
• 3% cited trust/MAT approval requirements

The scale of the top response is striking.

Three-quarters of schools identified budget availability as the single biggest barrier to making a purchase. No other factor comes close.

This reinforces a clear reality: most purchasing decisions aren’t being blocked because schools don’t see value, but because they simply don’t have the available budget at that moment.

You should…

• Be clear on cost and value upfront, and help schools justify the spend.
• Show how your solution is easy to implement with minimal staff time.
• Provide clear, credible evidence of impact.
• Reduce perceived risk by showing how you fit into existing systems and workflows.

If it’s not clearly worth it, it won’t get bought

With 75% of schools citing budget as the biggest barrier, the bar for investment is high.

The organisations that make more school sales this year will be those that can clearly answer one question:

“Why is this worth the money right now?”

How schools discover suppliers

Next, we looked at how schools typically discover or evaluate new suppliers.

When asked to identify their main route of discovery:

• 37% cited independent research
• 32% cited peer recommendations from other schools
• 11% cited existing supplier relationships
• 10% cited education conferences, professional networks, or sector events
• 9% cited trust-approved supplier frameworks or trust recommendations
• 1% cited education publications, newsletters, or online communities

Search is the starting point - but not the whole story…

When a need for a new product or service is identified, a lot of schools do what we nearly all do: they go straight to Google, or ask their peers.

Whether it’s looking for options, comparing suppliers, or sense-checking recommendations, the starting point is usually independent research.

However, it’s important to remember that respondents selected their main route, not every influence along the way.

Schools want to explore options on their own terms, but what they find - and recognise - is shaped by what they’ve already seen and heard.

Suppliers that consistently appear in inboxes, sector content, and campaigns are more likely to:

• Be recognised when schools begin researching.
• Be recommended by peers who have seen or used them.
• Feel familiar and lower risk during evaluation.

In other words, by the time a school is actively researching, much of the groundwork has already been done.

Your website matters just as much as your marketing

Many schools start with independent research — but what they find depends on what they already recognise. Your marketing builds familiarity, and your website turns that into trust, helping schools compare, validate, and shortlist suppliers.

What schools want from suppliers

We also explored what would make schools more likely to move from interest to investment, and what suppliers can do to remove barriers in the process.

• 63% want free trials or pilot programmes
• 52% want shorter contract terms or break clauses
• 39% want discounts for multi-year commitments
• 37% want discounts for MAT or group purchasing
• 27% want flexible payment tiers
• 13% want deferred payment plans

Confidence matters more than cost

When you’re in charge of school purchasing, you aren’t just responsible for choosing a product… you’re also accountable for how it works. I’ve been in those conversations where if something didn’t deliver, it wasn’t just a wasted budget, it created extra work and frustration for staff.

While discounts and payment flexibility are important, they sit below options that reduce uncertainty and build confidence - particularly free trials and shorter contract terms.

This suggests that schools are not simply looking for cheaper options. Instead, they need reassurance that they’re making the right decision.

Put simply, it’s not that schools don’t want to spend. They just want to be sure they’re making the right call.

You should…

• Focus on reducing perceived risk, as well as cost-saving initiatives.
• Give schools the opportunity to try before they commit.
• Offering flexibility that allows them to change course if needed.
• Providing reassurance through evidence, support, and clear outcomes.

You don’t have to necessarily be the cheapest provider to win the sale - just the one that feels the most reliable and lowest risk.

Takeaway Tip:

Schools want to feel confident before they commit

Schools are still willing to invest, but they want to know they’re making the right decision.

If you can reduce uncertainty and show clear value early on, you make it much easier for them to move forward.

Key actions for selling to schools in 2026/27

1. Be known before you’re needed

Most schools start by researching options or asking peers, but they’re far more likely to engage with suppliers they already recognise.

If you’re not familiar, you’re less likely to be shortlisted.

Consistent, targeted marketing builds that recognition early, so when schools start looking, your name is already in the mix.

2. Make the case easy to say yes to

With 75% of schools citing budget as the biggest barrier, every purchase needs to be clearly justified.

Schools are asking: “Is it worth us spending money on this right now?”

You need to answer that quickly and clearly, showing value, impact, and why your solution deserves a place in a tightly managed budget.

3. Reduce the risk of getting it wrong

Cost is a huge driver of school purchasing decisions, but even more so in some cases is the confidence behind the purchase.

Schools want to trial products, avoid long-term lock-in, and feel reassured they’re making the right decision.

Free trials, flexible contracts, and clear proof points all make it easier to move from interest to commitment.

4. Don’t just sell to schools or trusts - sell to schools and trusts.

Decision-making is rarely owned by one group.

Schools often identify needs and influence decisions, while trusts may approve or shape them especially for larger or shared purchases.

The most effective approach builds support at school level while aligning with trust priorities.

5. Solve problems schools can’t ignore

The biggest pressures on budgets - staffing, SEND, and estates - aren’t optional.

Schools are far more likely to invest in solutions that help them manage these challenges, save time, or improve efficiency.

If your solution clearly links to a real, unavoidable pressure, it becomes much easier to prioritise.

The bottom line…

Schools are still spending — just more carefully.

The organisations that succeed will be the ones that are visible, trusted, and easy to say yes to.

Turning insight into action

Having worked both inside schools and alongside organisations trying to reach them, this shift is very familiar - just now more pronounced than ever.

The data in this report paints a clear picture: schools are still investing, but decisions are more considered, more scrutinised, and shaped by tighter budgets and shared decision-making.

That means success comes down to more than just getting in front of schools. It’s about being recognised, trusted, and easy to choose when the moment to invest arrives.

At Sprint Education, we help brands do exactly that, building targeted campaigns that reach the right schools and trusts, create familiarity over time, and generate real conversations when schools are ready to act.

If you’d like to explore how your organisation can reach more schools and make the most of the opportunities ahead, book a free strategy call with one of our education marketing experts.

We’ll review your current approach, share practical insights from across the sector, and help you identify the best next steps for turning awareness into engagement - and engagement into sales.

Thank you for reading

Speak to one of our education experts about how we can help today!

E: info@sprint-education.com
W: sprint-education.com