If you sell products or services to schools in the UK, one of the first strategic decisions you need to make is who to target first.
Should you go directly to individual schools? Or should you focus on multi-academy trusts, where one relationship might open the door to several schools at once?
It is a sensible question, and the answer is not always the same for every supplier.
Some businesses waste months chasing trust-level conversations when they would have been better off winning a few individual schools first. Others spend too long pitching school by school when the real buying decision sits at trust level. The right route depends on what you sell, how schools buy it, how much coordination is involved, and how much proof you already have.
This guide will help you decide whether to target MATs or individual schools first, explain the pros and cons of each route, and show you how to choose the right starting point for your business.
If you are still building your foundations, you may also want to read How to Start Selling to Schools in the UK. And if you want a clearer picture of the checks schools often make before saying yes, see What Schools Ask Before Approving a New Supplier.
If your goal is to get discovered by more schools and trusts, you can also register as a school supplier on AllSchools so your business is visible in a school-focused directory.
What is the difference between a MAT and an individual school buyer?
An individual school usually makes decisions within the context of one site, one leadership team and one local set of priorities. The buyer may be a headteacher, school business manager, SENCO, pastoral lead, estates lead or department head, depending on what you offer.
A MAT, or multi-academy trust, sits above more than one academy and may centralise some decisions across multiple schools. In some trusts, buying is heavily centralised. In others, schools still have a fair amount of autonomy. That means a supplier cannot assume every trust buys the same way.
That is important.
Some MATs approve suppliers centrally. Some set framework rules but let schools choose within them. Some centralise major spending, estates, compliance, MIS, finance and trust-wide initiatives, while smaller day-to-day purchases stay at school level.
So the real question is not simply “MAT or school?” It is:
Where is the buying power for the specific thing you sell?
The short answer
For many newer suppliers, individual schools are the better place to start.
They are often easier to approach, faster to understand, and more realistic for building early case studies, testimonials and proof.
But for some suppliers, MATs are clearly the smarter target, especially when the offer affects multiple schools, requires standardisation, involves trust-level budgets, or becomes much more valuable when rolled out across a group.
So rather than treating this like a universal rule, it is better to look at the strengths and weaknesses of each route.
Why many suppliers should start with individual schools
There are several reasons why individual schools are often the best starting point.
1. Individual schools are usually easier to access
A single school often has fewer layers between you and the person who cares about the problem you solve.
For example:
- A SENCO can quickly see the value of a specialist intervention.
- A school business manager can assess a local maintenance service.
- A head of PE can decide whether a sports coaching offer is worth exploring.
- A pastoral lead can respond quickly to a mentoring or wellbeing service that matches an immediate need.
In contrast, a MAT-level decision may involve multiple stakeholders, longer approval cycles and more scrutiny before you even get a first conversation.
Real-world example:
A speech and language therapist offering part-time school support may get quicker traction by building relationships with individual primary schools that have clear SEND needs, rather than trying to persuade a trust to adopt the service across eight schools from day one.
2. Individual schools help you build proof faster
If you are relatively new to selling to schools, your first priority is often not scale. It is trust.
Winning one or two good school clients gives you:
- Case studies
- Testimonials
- Examples of delivery
- A better understanding of school expectations
- Practical language for future marketing
That proof is extremely useful later if you decide to approach trusts.
A MAT-level buyer is often reassured when you can say, “We already work successfully with schools similar to yours.”
That statement is much stronger when it is true.
3. Individual schools can move faster
Not always, but often.
If the problem is local, immediate and budget-manageable, a school may be able to act much faster than a trust-level process would allow.
Example:
A secondary school may need short-term attendance mentoring this term. A primary school may want a one-day staff training session before the new academic year. A site manager may need a local repair or maintenance contractor quickly. These are often easier conversations at school level than at trust level.
4. Individual schools allow more tailored conversations
One school may need your service for a very specific reason. That makes your message easier to tailor.
You can say:
- why your service fits that phase
- how it works in a school like theirs
- what problem it solves in practical terms
- what outcomes similar schools have seen
Trust-level conversations, by contrast, often require you to frame your offer at a broader, more strategic level.
That can be powerful, but it can also be harder if your service is still quite bespoke or school-specific.
When individual schools are the better first target
Targeting schools first is often the stronger move if:
- You are new to the education market
- You need case studies and testimonials
- Your service is highly tailored
- Your offer solves a local or immediate school problem
- The value of your work is easiest to demonstrate in one school first
- You are a smaller provider with limited capacity
- Your service works best as a pilot before wider rollout
Examples of suppliers who may do well targeting schools first:
- Speech and language therapists
- Educational psychologists building direct relationships
- Tutors and intervention providers
- Behaviour mentors
- Wellbeing practitioners
- After-school clubs and holiday club operators
- Local maintenance, grounds or site services
- Creative workshops and enrichment providers
Why some suppliers should target MATs first
That said, MATs can be the better starting point for the right offer.
1. One trust relationship can create multi-school reach
This is the obvious attraction. If you win trust approval or trust-wide adoption, you may gain access to several schools instead of starting from zero each time.
That can save huge amounts of time and can make delivery more efficient.
Real-world example:
An MIS-adjacent tool, a trust-wide attendance dashboard, a estates compliance service or a central safeguarding system may be much more attractive at trust level because its value increases when multiple schools use the same approach.
2. MATs often think in terms of consistency and standardisation
Some services become more valuable when delivered in a consistent way across a group of schools.
Trust leaders may care about:
- Standard processes
- Shared reporting
- Central oversight
- Comparable data across schools
- Operational efficiency
- Reduced duplication
If your offer supports those goals, a trust-level conversation may make more sense than approaching schools one at a time.
3. Some budgets and decisions sit above school level
For certain categories, the real decision-maker may not be in the school at all.
This often applies to:
- Estates and facilities
- Large maintenance programmes
- Trust-wide software
- Procurement frameworks
- Centralised staffing or outsourced services
- Group-wide CPD
- Finance or HR systems
If you are trying to sell one of these at school level, you may keep hearing polite interest without ever reaching the real buyer.
4. Trusts may be more strategic buyers
Some MAT leaders think not just about one term or one school, but about scalable systems, recurring value and group-wide priorities.
That can be a strong opportunity if your offer is strategic rather than one-off.
Example:
A trust may be more interested than a single school in a service that helps standardise compliance checks, centralise supplier management, reduce reporting inconsistency or support trust-wide training planning.
When MATs are the better first target
Targeting MATs first often makes more sense if:
- Your offer becomes stronger when used across multiple schools
- Your buyer is likely to be central operations, estates, finance or trust leadership
- Your service needs standardisation to work well
- You have enough delivery capacity for a multi-school rollout
- You already have proof and experience
- Your service is more strategic than local
- You sell something that individual schools may not have the authority to buy alone
Examples of suppliers who may do well targeting MATs first:
- EdTech and trust-wide data systems
- Estates and compliance providers
- Large-scale facilities contractors
- Trust-wide CPD providers
- Central HR, finance or operations services
- Procurement and approved supplier frameworks
- School furniture or fit-out providers for multiple sites
The biggest mistake: choosing based on scale alone
Many suppliers are drawn to MATs because the idea of one relationship unlocking several schools sounds efficient. Sometimes it is. But sometimes it is a trap.
A larger opportunity is not always the best first opportunity.
If you are still refining your offer, still learning school language, or still trying to prove practical impact, a MAT conversation can become much harder than expected. Trust leaders may want more evidence, more certainty, more structure and more confidence that you can deliver consistently across different contexts.
Meanwhile, a smaller number of individual school wins could give you the proof you need to approach those same trusts later from a stronger position.
So do not choose MATs just because the possible prize looks bigger. Choose them because the buying logic genuinely fits your offer.
A simple test: where does the pain sit?
If you are unsure who to target first, ask yourself where the problem you solve is most strongly felt.
If the pain sits mainly in one school, school-level outreach is often the better route.
If the pain sits across multiple schools and leadership wants consistency, MAT-level outreach may be better.
Examples:
- A one-school attendance issue: probably school-level.
- A trust-wide compliance headache: probably MAT-level.
- A bespoke intervention for a specific pupil group: probably school-level.
- A shared reporting and oversight tool: probably MAT-level.
This is one of the simplest and most useful filters you can apply.
A second test: how repeatable is your service?
MATs often suit suppliers whose delivery can be repeated with consistency.
If your service is hard to standardise and highly dependent on one person, one relationship or one unique context, school-level selling may be easier at first.
If your service has clear processes, onboarding, documentation and repeatable delivery, trust-level conversations become much more realistic.
Simple example:
A solo consultant doing highly customised school culture support may get more traction selling directly to individual schools first. A provider with a clearly packaged training model, rollout plan and central reporting system may be better placed to pitch trusts.
A third test: do you already have proof?
This matters a lot.
If you already have:
- strong school testimonials
- evidence of consistent delivery
- clear documentation
- strong onboarding
- experience in similar settings
then MAT outreach becomes easier.
If you do not yet have that, school-level wins can help you build it.
This is one reason many suppliers find success in a staged approach:
- Win individual schools first
- Build proof and refine delivery
- Approach MATs with stronger evidence
That path is often more realistic than trying to jump straight to trust-wide adoption with no track record.
How smaller suppliers should think about this
If you are a smaller provider, there is another practical question to ask:
Could you actually handle a MAT win right now?
It sounds positive to win a trust-level conversation, but it can create pressure quickly if multiple schools want onboarding, delivery, paperwork, reporting and support at once.
There is no shame in starting smaller.
In fact, many strong education businesses grow by:
- winning a few schools
- getting good results
- creating repeatable systems
- then moving into trusts once capacity is stronger
That is often a more stable route than trying to scale before the business is ready.
How larger or more operational suppliers should think about this
If your business already has strong processes, wider capacity and experience working across multiple sites, MATs may be a very sensible first target.
This is especially true if your offer affects:
- multiple buildings
- trust reporting
- central operations
- group-wide procurement
- shared compliance
- trust-wide improvement priorities
In those cases, going school by school may actually slow you down.
You could win local enthusiasm but still hit a ceiling if central approval is needed anyway.
What about using both routes?
In many cases, the smartest answer is not choosing only one forever. It is choosing which route comes first.
A balanced strategy can work very well.
For example:
- Win individual schools to build proof, then approach trusts
- Target MATs for central approval while also building school-level awareness
- Use one school inside a trust as a foothold, then expand wider
- Use trust-level conversations for strategic offers and school-level conversations for local services
Real-world example:
A facilities supplier may build relationships with individual schools through smaller maintenance jobs, then later use those case studies to approach MAT estates leaders for larger multi-site work.
An EdTech company might do the opposite: start with MAT operations teams because the product is strongest when rolled out consistently across a group.
Who are the likely buyers in each case?
Understanding the likely buyer helps clarify your route.
If targeting individual schools, likely contacts may include:
- Headteacher
- School business manager
- SENCO
- Pastoral lead
- Subject lead
- Site manager
- Deputy head
If targeting MATs, likely contacts may include:
- Chief operating officer
- Trust estates lead
- Trust finance lead
- Director of education
- Central SEND lead
- Trust operations manager
- Procurement or compliance lead
The more clearly you know who is likely to care, the better your outreach will be.
Questions to ask yourself before choosing
If you are deciding where to focus first, ask yourself:
- Who usually owns the problem we solve?
- Would one school be able to buy this on its own?
- Does the service become better or cheaper when rolled out across several schools?
- Do we already have enough proof to approach trusts credibly?
- Could we deliver well if multiple schools wanted this at once?
- Is our offer highly tailored or clearly repeatable?
- Are we trying to build traction, or are we ready for scale?
Your answers usually make the direction much clearer.
A practical recommendation for most suppliers
For most newer suppliers, a sensible first route is:
- Start with high-fit individual schools
- Refine your message
- Build case studies and testimonials
- Learn what schools actually ask
- Use that proof to approach MATs later if trust-level buying makes sense
This tends to reduce risk and improve your long-term chances.
It also helps you speak more credibly when MAT conversations do come.
Instead of saying, “We think this could work well across your schools,” you can say, “We already know this works in schools like yours, and we now have a clearer model for wider rollout.”
That is a much stronger position.
Where visibility helps both approaches
Whether you target MATs first or individual schools first, visibility still matters.
Schools and trusts both need ways to discover relevant suppliers. A strong supplier profile can help your business look credible, school-focused and easier to understand.
That is one reason it can help to join the AllSchools supplier directory. It gives your business another route to be found by schools and trusts looking for support in your category.
Final thoughts
MATs vs individual schools is not really a question of which is “better” in the abstract. It is a question of fit.
Individual schools are often the better first target when you need traction, proof, speed and local relevance.
MATs are often the better first target when your offer is strategic, repeatable, centrally bought or much more valuable across multiple schools.
If you remember one thing, let it be this:
Target the level where the buying power and the pain actually sit.
That will usually lead you in the right direction.
And if you want to make your business easier to discover while you build those relationships, register as a school supplier on AllSchools.
