Should You Offer Schools a Free Trial or Pilot?

A free trial can help a school understand a product before committing money, staff time and organisational trust to it.

It can also become an open-ended period in which the supplier provides setup, training, support and consultancy without payment while the school remains no closer to making a decision.

The difference is rarely whether the trial is technically “free”. It is whether the evaluation has a clear purpose, defined scope and agreed conclusion.

A useful school trial should answer a specific question.

For example:

Can teachers complete the main workflow confidently?
Will the software operate on the school’s devices and network?
Can the product integrate with an existing system?
Will a small group of pupils engage with the resource?
Can the supplier deliver consistently across more than one academy?
Will the proposed service model work within the school day?

A weak trial begins with:

“Try it for free and see what you think.”

It has no defined users, no implementation plan, no success criteria and no date on which the school will decide what happens next.

At the end, the supplier asks whether the school would like to buy. The school says staff have not had enough time to use it, requests an extension and adds more users. The evaluation continues while urgency steadily disappears.

Free trials are therefore not automatically generous, persuasive or commercially sensible. Some products benefit from them. Others are better evaluated through a tailored demonstration, reference conversation, paid discovery project or tightly scoped pilot.

This guide explains when school suppliers should offer a free trial or pilot, how to choose between free and paid evaluation, what terms to agree and how to prevent a trial from becoming indefinite unpaid work.

Understand the difference between a demo, trial and pilot

Suppliers sometimes offer a trial because the demonstration did not produce a decision.

That is not always a good reason.

A demonstration, trial and pilot should answer different questions.

Product demonstration

A demo shows how the offer works using prepared scenarios.

It is suitable when the school needs to understand:

the main workflow;
what different users see;
how reporting works;
what the product looks and feels like;
which features are included;
how implementation would operate.

The AllSchools guide to running a product demo for teachers and school leaders explains how to organise the session around real school workflows rather than every available feature.

A demo is normally sufficient when the school’s question is:

“Can you show us how this works?”

Free trial

A trial gives the school limited direct access to a standard product or resource.

It may be appropriate when the school needs to answer:

Can staff navigate the product?
Does it work on the devices normally used?
Is the content suitable for the intended users?
Will the basic workflow fit existing practice?
Does the physical sample meet the expected quality?

A trial should normally involve little customisation and limited supplier effort.

Pilot

A pilot is a small implementation designed to test a defined use case before wider adoption.

It may involve:

a selected department, year group or academy;
configuration;
staff training;
data import;
planned support;
agreed measures;
formal review.

A pilot is appropriate when the school’s question is:

“Can this work in our organisation under realistic operating conditions?”

Proof of concept

A proof of concept is usually narrower and more technical.

It may test whether:

an integration can exchange the required information;
a technical architecture is viable;
the system can support a required volume;
a specific custom function can be delivered;
data can be migrated successfully.

It should not quietly expand into a complete implementation.

Paid discovery or assessment

Some offers cannot be evaluated responsibly through free access.

A consultancy, estates service, complex implementation or specialist assessment may first require:

interviews;
site inspection;
data analysis;
technical design;
a written report;
professional recommendations.

This is valuable work in its own right and is often better treated as a paid discovery project.

The choice can be summarised as follows:

Evaluation method	Main purpose	Typical supplier effort
Demo	Show how the offer works	Low
Free trial	Allow limited use of a standard product	Low to moderate
Pilot	Test a defined implementation in real conditions	Moderate to high
Proof of concept	Test technical feasibility	Variable
Paid discovery	Investigate and define a complex requirement	High

Do not offer the most expensive form of evaluation merely because the school is reluctant to decide.

Offer a trial only when it answers a genuine buying question

The strongest reason to offer a trial is that the school cannot reasonably assess an important requirement through evidence, discussion or demonstration alone.

Examples include:

teachers need to experience the normal workflow;
the school needs to confirm compatibility with its devices;
leaders want to see whether staff will adopt the process;
a resource needs to be evaluated with the intended age group;
a MAT wants to test academy-level and central administration;
a physical product needs to be inspected in the intended environment;
an integration needs testing with the school’s technical setup.

Begin by writing one trial question.

For example:

“Can five classroom teachers create, assign and review an activity without direct supplier assistance after one training session?”

Or:

“Can the trust receive agreed attendance data from two academies and produce its required central report?”

Or:

“Is the proposed chair durable, appropriately sized and practical to move and store in the school’s existing classrooms?”

If the trial does not answer a defined question, it is likely to produce vague feedback.

Feedback such as:

staff liked it;
it seemed useful;
we did not have enough time;
some people logged in;
we might revisit it later;

does not support a clear buying decision.

Ask why the school needs a trial

Useful questions include:

Which uncertainty would the trial resolve?
Why can this not be answered through a demonstration or reference?
Who needs evidence from the trial?
What would the school do if the trial succeeded?
Is a budget and purchasing route available?
What decision date follows the evaluation?

A school may request a trial because:

it has a legitimate implementation concern;
staff need to compare products;
a formal procurement requires evaluation;
the internal champion lacks authority to progress;
no budget exists;
the buyer wants to delay the decision;
free access would be useful even without an intention to buy.

These reasons should not receive the same response.

Do not use a trial to avoid unresolved discovery

A supplier should already understand:

the current process;
the main problem;
the intended users;
the desired result;
the relevant buyer;
the likely budget;
the purchasing level;
the approximate timetable.

If those facts remain unknown, the supplier may be giving free access to an unqualified prospect.

Use the discovery framework in Discovery Questions to Ask a School Before Making a Proposal before agreeing the evaluation.

A successful trial must lead somewhere

Ask before setup:

“If the agreed criteria are met, what happens next?”

Possible answers include:

the school requests a quotation;
the proposal goes to senior leadership;
the trust begins procurement;
the buyer selects between shortlisted suppliers;
the pilot academy recommends trust-wide rollout;
the school decides whether to include the purchase in the next budget.

If no decision can follow, the timing may be wrong.

Recognise when a free trial is commercially sensible

Free trials work best where the cost of providing one additional evaluation is low.

This is common with:

standardised software;
online resources;
digital content libraries;
small physical samples;
self-guided products;
services with a repeatable introductory session.

A free trial is more likely to make sense when:

the product is already configured for trial use;
fictional or limited data can be used;
only a small number of users need access;
setup can be completed quickly;
training is short and repeatable;
support can be limited clearly;
the school has passed basic qualification;
the potential contract value justifies the effort;
there is a named decision process.

The marginal cost should remain controlled

Calculate the actual cost of the trial.

Include:

sales time;
setup;
technical work;
data preparation;
training;
support;
travel;
physical samples;
shipping;
custom reporting;
review meetings.

A “free” pilot that consumes 30 staff hours is not low cost.

If the likely annual contract is £1,500, that effort may be impossible to recover. If the opportunity is a substantial trust-wide agreement, it may be commercially reasonable.

Standardise repeatable trial elements

Create:

a standard trial agreement;
fixed trial lengths;
defined user limits;
recorded or scheduled training;
sample data;
support boundaries;
automated reminders;
a review template.

This prevents every salesperson from inventing a different arrangement.

Use qualification thresholds

A free trial might be available only where:

a relevant buyer has attended discovery;
the product fits the school’s phase and size;
a credible budget route exists;
the decision is not blocked by a current contract;
the school has named the users;
a review date has been booked;
the potential contract exceeds a stated value.

This is not unfriendly. It protects the supplier’s ability to support serious evaluations properly.

Consider self-service and supported trials separately

A self-service trial may be offered widely because supplier involvement is limited.

A supported trial involving training, configuration and meetings should normally require stronger qualification.

Make the distinction clear:

Trial type	Included	Best suited to
Self-service	Standard access and online guidance	Early individual evaluation
Guided	Access, one training session and review	Qualified single-school opportunity
Structured pilot	Configuration, training, support and evaluation	Larger or higher-risk opportunity

Charge for pilots that require meaningful delivery work

A pilot should usually be paid when it provides significant value or requires substantial supplier effort.

Examples include:

onsite consultancy;
system configuration;
custom integration;
data migration;
several training sessions;
physical installation;
specialist professional assessment;
bespoke content;
trust-wide project management;
extensive reporting.

The school is not merely testing access. It is receiving a defined service.

A paid pilot can improve commitment

Payment does not guarantee engagement, but it often means:

the pilot has been approved internally;
a budget holder is involved;
staff time is more likely to be protected;
the school expects a formal result;
both parties take the timetable seriously.

A free pilot may be treated as optional whenever the school becomes busy.

Price the pilot transparently

Explain what the fee covers:

setup;
licences;
training;
consultancy;
travel;
support;
evaluation report;
removal or exit work.

Do not present a substantial paid implementation as a “small pilot” to avoid discussing the full commitment.

Consider crediting the pilot fee

A supplier may offer to deduct some or all of the pilot fee from the full contract if the school proceeds.

For example:

“The eight-week pilot costs £2,000 plus VAT. If the trust enters the proposed annual agreement within 30 days of the final review, £1,500 will be credited against the implementation fee.”

This recognises the work performed while reducing duplication if the project continues.

The terms should be explicit:

the credit amount;
the qualifying contract;
the deadline;
whether the credit applies to setup or subscription;
what happens if the scope changes.

Avoid speculative custom development

A school may ask the supplier to build a feature “for the pilot”.

Before agreeing, establish:

whether the feature benefits the wider product;
who owns the resulting intellectual property;
whether the school is paying for development;
whether the feature is necessary for evaluation;
what happens if the school does not purchase;
whether a delivery date can genuinely be committed.

Custom development is not automatically a free sales cost.

Use paid discovery where the requirement is still unclear

A supplier may need to assess the school before it can propose a solution.

Examples include:

IT infrastructure review;
estate condition survey;
school website content audit;
energy assessment;
HR or compliance review;
complex data-migration assessment.

The school should receive a useful output, such as:

findings;
risks;
priorities;
recommended scope;
implementation options;
cost estimate.

This is professional work, not merely a longer sales meeting.

Define the pilot scope, users and responsibilities

A pilot should be small enough to manage but realistic enough to produce useful evidence.

“One teacher can log in” may be too limited to test a whole-school product.

“Give the entire trust free access” may be too broad to control.

Define the participating group

Specify:

the school or academies involved;
the department or year group;
the number of staff users;
the number or category of pupils where relevant;
administrators;
senior reviewers;
technical contacts.

For example:

“The pilot will involve two Year 7 mathematics classes, four teachers, the head of mathematics and one school administrator.”

Select representative users

Do not use only the most enthusiastic and technically confident person unless the trial is specifically testing expert use.

Include users who represent the intended rollout.

This may mean:

staff with different levels of confidence;
more than one department;
an academy with ordinary rather than exceptional capacity;
users with relevant accessibility needs;
both administrator and end-user roles.

Define what is included

State:

products, modules or services;
user numbers;
data or integrations;
training sessions;
support hours;
meetings;
reports;
physical equipment;
delivery and collection;
optional features excluded from the evaluation.

Do not demonstrate or trial the premium version if the proposed school package excludes those functions.

Define the supplier’s responsibilities

These may include:

providing access;
configuring the agreed environment;
delivering training;
supplying documentation;
providing defined support;
monitoring agreed technical measures;
attending review meetings;
removing or deleting trial information at the end.

Define the school’s responsibilities

These may include:

nominating a pilot lead;
selecting participating staff;
providing required information;
arranging training attendance;
using the product for the agreed activities;
reporting issues promptly;
collecting feedback;
attending the final review;
making or progressing the agreed decision.

If the school does not complete its responsibilities, the supplier may be unable to interpret the result fairly.

Agree exclusions

Examples include:

custom development;
additional integrations;
onsite support;
use outside the selected academy;
unlimited users;
data migration beyond the agreed sample;
extension without written agreement.

Clear exclusions prevent a pilot from expanding informally.

Agree success criteria before the trial begins

A trial should not be judged solely on whether participants “liked it”.

Satisfaction matters, but it should be connected to the buying question.

Good criteria are:

relevant to the decision;
observable;
proportionate;
realistic within the time available;
within the supplier’s reasonable influence.

Usage criteria

Examples include:

four of five nominated teachers complete the main workflow;
each academy submits the agreed weekly record;
administrators create and remove accounts successfully;
the equipment is used in three planned sessions.

Usage demonstrates participation, not necessarily wider impact.

Usability criteria

Examples include:

users complete the task after one training session;
the average workflow requires fewer manual steps;
teachers can locate the required information without supplier assistance;
reported accessibility barriers are documented and reviewed.

Technical criteria

Examples include:

single sign-on works for the selected users;
the agreed data import completes accurately;
the product runs on supported school devices;
the required report exports in the agreed format;
the integration exchanges the defined fields.

Operational criteria

Examples include:

support requests receive responses within the pilot standard;
deliveries arrive during the agreed window;
the supplier covers planned staff absence;
the service operates without disrupting the school timetable;
the central team receives consistent information from participating academies.

Educational or pupil-facing criteria

Use these carefully.

A short pilot may reasonably measure:

participation;
completion;
teacher confidence;
observed usability;
fit with the curriculum or support plan;
quality of information available to staff.

It may not be capable of proving:

long-term attainment gains;
sustained behaviour change;
whole-school attendance improvement;
reduced staff workload across the organisation;
lasting wellbeing outcomes.

Do not design success criteria that the pilot duration cannot support.

Commercial criteria

The pilot may also need to confirm:

the number of licences required;
the final implementation scope;
support requirements;
trust or academy billing structure;
whether the expected value justifies the cost.

Agree how evidence will be collected

Possible methods include:

system usage data;
task completion;
staff survey;
structured interviews;
technical testing;
observations;
service records;
comparison with the existing process.

Be clear about who collects the information, how personal data is handled and who reviews the result.

Set a fixed duration and stop automatic extensions

The pilot should be long enough to test normal use but short enough to maintain focus.

Possible durations include:

seven to 14 days for straightforward digital-resource trials;
four to six weeks for repeated classroom or administrative workflows;
half a term for a more structured school pilot;
one term where meaningful implementation and review require it.

The correct duration depends on:

frequency of use;
school timetable;
training;
data preparation;
the decision being tested;
the amount of evidence needed.

Begin the trial when users are ready

Do not start the clock when access is technically created if:

staff have not been selected;
training has not happened;
school data is not ready;
the intended project lead is absent;
the school is about to close for a holiday.

Define the official start condition.

For example:

“The six-week pilot begins on the first Monday after staff training and confirmation that all nominated users can access the platform.”

Schedule the final review before launch

Book the review meeting as part of setup.

The school should know:

when access ends;
when feedback is collected;
when the final review occurs;
which people need to attend;
what decision is expected.

Do not extend automatically

An extension may be appropriate when:

the supplier caused a significant delay;
a technical problem prevented the agreed test;
school closure or an exceptional event removed most of the evaluation period;
one additional cycle is genuinely necessary to answer the agreed question.

An extension is weaker when:

staff did not prioritise the trial;
no project lead was appointed;
the school wants indefinite free use;
the decision-maker has still not been involved;
the school has no likely budget date.

Before extending, ask:

“What will happen during the additional period that did not happen during the original trial?”

If there is no clear answer, an extension is unlikely to change the outcome.

State what happens at the end

Possible outcomes are:

the school proceeds to purchase or procurement;
the supplier issues a revised proposal;
the parties agree the product is not suitable;
access ends and data is returned or deleted;
physical products are collected;
a paid extension is agreed.

Free access should not continue merely because no one made a decision.

Put data protection, safeguarding and procurement arrangements in writing

A free trial does not sit outside the school’s normal responsibilities.

If the supplier processes personal data on the school’s behalf, the parties still need an appropriate written controller–processor contract covering the trial processing. The Information Commissioner’s Office states that whenever a controller uses a processor to process personal data, a binding written contract is required for those processing activities.

Prefer fictional or anonymised data where possible

A product can often be evaluated using:

fictional pupils;
sample classes;
synthetic records;
anonymised information;
a limited technical dataset.

Do not request real pupil information simply to make the trial feel realistic.

Where personal data is necessary, define the processing

Record:

which personal data is used;
why it is necessary;
the parties’ roles;
security arrangements;
authorised users;
subprocessors;
hosting locations;
retention;
deletion or return at the end;
incident reporting;
whether a data protection impact assessment is required.

The fact that no money changes hands does not remove these requirements.

Do not quietly convert trial users into marketing contacts

Staff access details collected to administer the evaluation should not automatically be added to unrelated marketing campaigns.

Explain how user information is used and distinguish service communications from promotional contact.

Address safeguarding for pupil-facing pilots

Where supplier staff interact with pupils, agree:

which staff will deliver the service;
recruitment and checking arrangements;
supervision;
the school’s safeguarding procedures;
how concerns are reported;
whether sessions are recorded;
how pupil information is shared;
who obtains any necessary consent.

A pilot does not justify informal safeguarding arrangements.

Check procurement before implying that success guarantees a contract

A successful pilot may show that the product works. It may not allow the school to award the full contract directly.

Schools should check their own procurement policies and choose a route appropriate to the value and nature of the purchase. Depending on the circumstances, this may involve quotations, a framework or a competitive process.

Before the pilot, ask:

How will the full purchase be procured?
Can the school appoint the pilot supplier directly?
Will other suppliers receive an equivalent evaluation opportunity?
Does a framework specify the selection route?
Will the pilot’s cost count towards the wider contract value?
Who approves the full contract?

Do not tell the school:

“If the pilot succeeds, the contract is automatically ours.”

unless the purchasing process genuinely provides for that outcome.

Use a written pilot agreement

It should cover:

parties;
purpose;
scope;
dates;
participants;
supplier and school responsibilities;
fees;
data protection;
safeguarding;
insurance;
support;
intellectual property;
success criteria;
termination;
end-of-pilot arrangements;
the status of any future purchase.

Department for Education guidance advises schools to define requirements, secure approval and manage the supplier relationship through an appropriate contract.

Review the pilot fairly and turn evidence into a decision

The final review should not begin with a general question such as:

“So, what did everyone think?”

Return to the agreed buying question and success criteria.

Review participation first

Ask:

Did the intended users participate?
Was training completed?
Was the product used for the agreed activities?
Did technical or organisational barriers prevent proper testing?
Was the trial representative of likely implementation?

If only one of ten nominated users participated, the result may tell you more about project engagement than product suitability.

Review each success criterion

Use a simple structure:

Criterion	Evidence	Result
Teachers complete the main workflow after training	Four of five completed independently	Met
Central report combines both academies	Report generated, one data field requires adjustment	Partly met
Works on supported staff devices	Successful on Windows laptops and managed tablets	Met
No significant accessibility barrier identified	Keyboard issue in reporting screen	Not yet met

Separate product issues from implementation issues

A criterion may not be met because:

the product lacks the function;
the supplier configured it incorrectly;
the school did not complete an agreed action;
training was insufficient;
the test was poorly designed;
the requirement changed during the pilot.

This distinction affects the next decision.

Ask different stakeholders separately where useful

Teachers, administrators, leaders and IT staff may have different experiences.

Review:

day-to-day usability;
administration;
reporting;
technical fit;
support;
implementation effort;
commercial value.

A product may be popular with end users but create excessive administration. It may satisfy central reporting but make the teacher workflow worse.

Record limitations honestly

Do not rewrite “partly met” as “success” merely to support the sale.

A credible conclusion may be:

“The pilot confirmed that the classroom workflow and central reporting are suitable. The current product does not meet the trust’s keyboard-accessibility requirement in one reporting area, so the trust should not proceed unless that issue is resolved and verified.”

Make one of four clear decisions

The review should normally lead to:

Proceed: the school begins the agreed purchasing route.
Proceed with conditions: specified issues must be resolved.
Do not proceed: the offer is not suitable.
Pause until a defined date: the product fits, but budget or timing prevents action.

“Continue evaluating indefinitely” should not be the default fifth option.

Use evidence in the final proposal

Where the school proceeds, the proposal should reflect what was learned:

confirmed user numbers;
implementation requirements;
training needs;
technical adjustments;
support level;
success measures;
final pricing.

The paid contract should not unexpectedly differ from the version tested.

Common mistakes when offering school trials and pilots

Offering a trial before discovery

The supplier provides access without knowing the problem, users, budget or decision process.

Using a trial to rescue weak interest

Free access rarely creates urgency where the school has no clear priority.

Giving access to too many people

No one takes ownership, training becomes difficult and feedback is inconsistent.

Choosing only enthusiastic users

The result may not represent wider rollout.

Having no success criteria

The review becomes a collection of opinions rather than a buying decision.

Starting at the wrong time

The trial overlaps with holidays, exams, inspection preparation or staff absence.

Providing significant consultancy for free

A complex pilot should often be paid or credited against the full contract.

Allowing scope to expand

More users, integrations, training and support are added without reviewing cost or purpose.

Extending automatically

The school receives more free use without explaining how the extension will change the result.

Using real personal data unnecessarily

Fictional or limited data may be enough to answer the trial question.

Ignoring safeguarding because the project is temporary

Pupil-facing trial activity still requires appropriate controls.

Assuming a successful pilot permits direct award

The school may still need to follow its procurement policy and an appropriate route to buy.

Testing a version the school cannot purchase

The demo or pilot includes premium features excluded from the proposed contract.

Failing to involve the budget holder

End users complete the pilot successfully, but no one can approve the purchase.

Collecting feedback without making a decision

The supplier produces a report, but no decision meeting or next step has been agreed.

Frequently asked questions

Should school suppliers offer free trials?

Only where the trial answers a genuine buying question and the supplier can control the cost. A trial should have defined users, scope, duration, criteria and a decision at the end.

What is the difference between a free trial and a pilot?

A trial usually provides limited access to a standard product with little customisation. A pilot is a structured implementation involving selected users, training, support, evaluation and a formal review.

How long should a school free trial last?

It depends on how frequently the product is used. A straightforward digital resource may need one or two weeks, while a repeated operational or classroom workflow may need four to six weeks or part of a term.

Should a school pilot be free?

Not necessarily. Charge where the pilot requires significant setup, training, integration, consultancy, travel, specialist delivery or reporting. The fee can sometimes be credited against a subsequent contract.

When is a free trial a bad idea?

It is usually a poor idea when the school has no defined problem, budget, decision-maker or timetable, or where providing the trial requires substantial unpaid work.

Should a supplier ask about budget before offering a trial?

Yes. The school does not need to provide a final approved amount, but the supplier should establish that the likely full price is realistic and that a possible funding route exists.

Who should participate in a school pilot?

Choose a small but representative group of intended users, together with the person leading the project and any administrator, technical reviewer or senior decision-maker needed to assess the result.

Should pupils participate in a pilot?

Only where pupil participation is necessary to answer the evaluation question and appropriate safeguarding, data protection, supervision and consent arrangements are in place.

Can a free software trial use real pupil data?

Use fictional, anonymised or limited data where possible. Where real personal data is necessary, the parties need appropriate contracts, security, retention and deletion arrangements.

Does a free trial need a data-processing agreement?

Where the supplier processes personal data on the school’s behalf, an appropriate written controller–processor contract is still required. The fact that the service is free does not remove data-protection duties.

Does a school need to procure a free pilot?

The answer depends on the arrangement, its value, linked future commitment and the school or trust’s rules. The school should check its procurement policy rather than assuming that a zero-price pilot sits outside all controls.

Can a successful pilot guarantee the supplier the contract?

Not automatically. The school may still need quotations, a framework process, competitive procurement, approval and contract review. The future purchasing route should be understood before the pilot begins.

What should success criteria include?

They may cover usage, usability, technical fit, operational delivery, accessibility, implementation effort and the specific outcome the trial is capable of testing. Avoid broad long-term claims that a short evaluation cannot prove.

What should happen if the school does not use the product?

Review why. If the supplier caused the problem, an extension may be fair. If the school did not allocate users or time, an automatic free extension may not produce a different result.

Should trials be extended?

Only where an extension has a specific purpose and agreed plan. Ask what will happen during the additional period that did not happen during the original trial.

What should happen to data when the trial ends?

The agreement should explain whether data is returned, exported, anonymised or deleted, when this happens and how backups are handled. User access should also be removed appropriately.

Can the supplier use a successful pilot as a case study?

Only with the school or trust’s appropriate permission. Agree what may be named, which evidence can be shared and who approves the final case study.

Should a supplier build custom features during a trial?

Only under a clear written arrangement covering scope, payment, ownership, delivery and what happens if the school does not buy. Do not make informal development promises merely to secure the pilot.

What is the best question to ask before approving a trial?

Ask: “What decision will the school make if the agreed success criteria are met?” If no decision can follow, the trial may be premature.

What is the biggest school trial mistake?

The biggest mistake is allowing the trial to become an undefined period of free use. Every trial should have one buying question, a fixed scope, an end date and an agreed decision process.