The DfE’s supply staff mandate requires academy trusts in England to look more closely at how they buy agency cover. The immediate task is not simply to choose an approved supplier. Trusts need to understand which arrangements they are entering into, how charges are calculated and who has authority to agree the terms.
The requirement
Paragraph 2.28 of the 2026 Academy Trust Handbook requires trusts to use the Government Commercial Agency’s Supply Teachers and Education Recruitment framework unless they have an alternative framework or contract that complies with the Procurement Act 2023, satisfies the applicable financial thresholds and has rates no higher than those available through the framework. Handbook compliance is a condition of trusts’ funding agreements.
A familiar agency is not necessarily a compliant arrangement
A trust may have a long standing and positive relationship with a particular agency. That may provide confidence in the quality of candidates and service, but it does not answer the separate question of whether the arrangement complies with the new requirements.
There are two distinct issues to consider: first, whether the procurement route is compliant and secondly, whether the rates do not exceed those available through the framework. Evidence of one does not establish the other.
As good practice, the procurement lead should retain a brief record of the purchasing route selected, the pricing comparison undertaken and the individual who approved the decision. Ultimately, the trust remains responsible for satisfying itself that the arrangement is compliant; a supplier’s assurance that it is “compliant” should be treated as supporting information rather than a substitute for the trust’s own assessment.
Value the requirement across the trust
When assessing procurement requirements, trusts should consider the anticipated value of the arrangement being procured and the likely level of expenditure across the trust. A realistic assessment at the outset will assist in selecting an appropriate procurement route and demonstrating value for money.
For supply staffing, the DfE directs trusts to assess expenditure across their schools. Looking only at an individual school’s weekly invoice can therefore obscure the scale of the procurement.
For example, a trust planning cover across several schools should bring those forecasts together before deciding its purchasing route. The finance team should work with HR on likely vacancies, recurring absence cover and specialist requirements. This is a practical planning exercise, not a reason to assume that every possible future staffing cost belongs in one contract – the valuation must reflect the arrangement actually being procured.
Compare the charge, not just the headline price
The DfE distinguishes worker pay, employment on costs and the supplier’s fee. The cap targets the agency element, not the worker’s pay. Trusts should therefore request a candidate specific breakdown rather than accept an unexplained daily total.
Two agencies quoting the same overall amount may be offering different worker pay and retaining different fees. Without the breakdown, a trust cannot properly understand either the comparison or the proposed saving.
The published caps are ceilings, not necessarily the best available prices. Procurement staff should retain the relevant framework rate information and record the role, assumptions and date used for comparison. Where the appropriate comparator is unclear, they should seek clarification before approving an alternative route.
An agency’s suggestion that the mandate requires lower supply-worker pay should be challenged. The DfE expressly says that pay and conditions should not be affected and asks trusts to report such claims.
Protect the terms when booking cover
GCA provides an order form and procedures for placing contracts under the framework. Selecting an agency listed on it should not be confused with actually contracting on framework terms.
This distinction matters when a school receives an urgent booking confirmation accompanied by the agency’s standard conditions. Staff should know who can accept those documents and when procurement advice is needed. A central purchasing decision can be undermined if individual schools subsequently agree inconsistent terms.
The GCA’s published offer includes a fee free move from temporary to permanent employment after 12 weeks, with four weeks’ notice. HR should check the applicable contractual conditions and timetable before making an offer. The benefit should not be treated as an unconditional entitlement arising simply because someone has worked at the school for three months.
Safer recruitment remains a separate responsibility
Framework purchasing does not remove the school’s safeguarding responsibilities.
Before an assignment begins, schools should ensure they have received the recruitment and vetting assurances required by safeguarding guidance and that there is a clear process for addressing any safeguarding issues or disclosures that arise.
Schools should also be satisfied as to the identity of the individual attending the school and that relevant safeguarding information is communicated to the appropriate staff.
Make compliant booking straightforward
Before the next procurement or renewal, trusts should identify current agreements, their expiry dates, who books cover and who can approve contractual changes. DfE states that it will not force a trust to exit an existing contract provided that the contract complies with the Procurement Act 2023. Existing contracts still need individual review, and the guidance should not be treated as permission to terminate them without examining their terms and applicable procurement rules.
A proportionate implementation plan would give schools approved booking routes, named contacts for urgent queries and clear instructions on agency paperwork. Finance can then sample invoices against agreed charges, while HR checks that recruitment assurances are reaching the right people.
These controls are practical recommendations, not additional statutory deadlines. Their purpose is to let school staff secure suitable cover promptly, with the commercial and safeguarding decisions already thought through.
