More than one school: who decides, and who pays

Two questions decide whether school software ever gets bought, and they are not always answered by the same body. Who signs off the decision, and whose budget does it come out of? In England, an academy is funded directly by government through its trust, and in a multi-academy trust the trust board's scheme of delegation may put the choice above the individual school entirely, while a maintained school runs through its local authority. In the United States it is normally the district and its board. In Germany the split is unusually sharp: the municipality as school authority (Schulträger) pays for buildings and equipment while the federal state employs the teachers, so budget and users sit with two different bodies. Whatever the arrangement is called where you are, the practical consequence is identical – once one body oversees several schools, most platforms stop being able to help, because they know exactly one school. SchuleVernetzt is built from the other side.

Coming soon

  • GDPR-compliant
  • Hosted in Germany
  • Free for teachers

A product of SavePaper.work

Benefits

What a body running several schools gets from it

Cover across school boundaries

If a lesson is uncovered at one school and nobody there is free, a neighbouring school in the network can take it. Whether that is permitted is your ruling, not the software's – the technology is there either way.

Small subjects together

A course that never fills at one school fills across three. Joint courses and shared material are part of the same network.

One overview instead of enquiries

Absences, utilisation and cancelled lessons across every school you oversee – without anyone collecting figures by email and merging them into a spreadsheet.

One contract, one data package

A single data processing agreement for the network rather than one per school. Hosted inside the EU, roles down to the individual teacher, deletion periods configurable per school so that different rules can sit side by side.

How it works

How a school network comes about

Four steps, and the first is the smallest – two schools are enough to see whether the pool holds up in daily use.

1 2 3 4
  1. 1

    Connect two schools

    Two schools that already help each other out form the first network. Both keep their own class register, their own classes and their own parent communication.

  2. 2

    Set the rules

    Whoever holds the authority determines which lessons may enter the pool at all, who may accept them and how far apart the sites may be. That is a governance decision, and it is worth writing down before the first cover lesson rather than after.

  3. 3

    Cover in daily use

    An open lesson appears in the pool, a teacher from the neighbouring school takes it, and both schools see the same thing in the plan. How the hours are accounted for between the schools is settled by whoever employs and pays the staff.

  4. 4

    Extend the network

    Further schools join without the existing ones being reconfigured. Joint courses and shared material follow as soon as more than two sites are involved.

In comparison

A network or separate schools side by side

SchuleVernetzt in a network
CoverA pool across every participating school
CoursesCan be planned across schools
OverviewOne view of every site
ContractsOne contract and one processing agreement for the network
Separate systems per school
CoverEnds at your own staff room
CoursesOnly within one school
OverviewOne report per school, merged by hand
ContractsA separate contract per school
In detail

What the network actually solves

The cover problem does not end at the school gate

The lost teaching time that shows up in a group's statistics rarely arises because nobody in the whole area had time. It arises because the search stops at the school boundary. A school looks through its own staff, finds nobody and reports a cancellation – while two kilometres away a teacher of the same subject has a free period nobody knows about. That is exactly the information missing today, and no platform that knows only one school can supply it. A shared pool makes it visible. Whether it then turns into an actual cover lesson is an employment and organisational question, and the answer depends on who the employer is: a trust that employs staff across all its schools clears that hurdle in a sentence, while a system in which each school's staff are employed elsewhere has more to negotiate. Either way, the question can only be asked once the information exists.

Small subjects and the question of minimum size

Every school group knows courses that fail at a single school on participant numbers: a third foreign language, an elective, an advanced course in a minor subject. Across three schools the group would be large enough, but there is no way to form it – the systems do not know each other, enrolment runs per school, and nobody sees the sum. SchuleVernetzt runs courses that may contain learners from several schools, and shows where a joint group would come together on the numbers. Whether it comes together in practice depends on timetables and travel, not on software – but here too: only once the number is visible does it become a decision.

What the group level sees and what it does not

A network view showing everything would be easy to build and wrong under data protection law almost anywhere. Educational responsibility for individual learners sits with the school, and so does access to the class register, grades and parent communication. What the level above sees are indicators across schools: how many lessons were cancelled, how many were caught by the pool, how utilisation compares between sites. That is enough for steering and budgeting and needs not a single pupil's name – which is also the cleanest answer to the controller question, because a body that never sees personal data has far less to argue about. The role model separates the two levels technically, not merely organisationally: a network account cannot open the detail level, not even by accident.

A network does not appear all at once

Nobody switches fifty schools on one date, and nobody needs to. The network works from the second school onwards: two neighbouring schools that already help each other out are the most reliable first step. Further schools join later without the first ones changing anything. A school can also join an existing network even where the body above it does not run one – which matters in systems where schools group themselves rather than being grouped from above.

FAQ

Common questions from bodies running several schools

You do, not the software. Whether a teacher can be deployed at a second school is an employment question, and the answer depends on who the employer actually is – which is exactly the point that differs. In Germany, teachers are typically employed by the federal state while the school building belongs to the municipality; in an English multi-academy trust the trust is the employer across all its schools, which makes cross-school deployment a far shorter conversation. SchuleVernetzt reflects what you release: you set which schools share a pool and which lessons may be offered at all.

No, not by default. The network view works with indicators across schools – utilisation, cancellation rates, open lessons. Access to individual pupil data stays with the school, because that is where the educational responsibility sits. The role model separates the two, and that separation is also what keeps the data protection question simple.

It takes its data with it and carries on alone. The network is a connection between schools, not a shared pot nothing can be lifted out of again. A full export is part of it – worth checking in any system, because school groups reorganise more often than software contracts assume.

No. Each school works with what it needs; what is connected are the areas the network concerns – cover, joint courses, shared material. A school still keeping its class register elsewhere can take part in the pool all the same. That matters wherever schools in one group sit under different rules, which is more common than it sounds.

Through one data processing agreement for the network, hosting inside the EU on servers in Germany, and a role model that separates the schools from each other as well: a neighbouring school sees the open lesson, not the class register. Retention periods are set per school rather than for the network, because the school is where the applicable education law attaches – and in a group spanning more than one region, those periods will not be the same.

The network is the third plan and is aimed at whoever operates the network. A single school can also join an existing network without running one itself. How the pricing model is built is set out on the pricing page; the amounts follow at launch.
Coming soon

Be there when SchuleVernetzt launches

We're building SchuleVernetzt at full speed. Leave your email and we'll notify you the moment your school can get started – free and with no obligation.

We use your address only to notify you at launch, and you can unsubscribe at any time.