A school group needs one comparable number per campus, which is only possible if definitions are set at the trust and values at the branch. Attendance rules, fee heads, grading bands and flag thresholds are defined once centrally; each campus supplies its own values but cannot redefine the term.
Campuses on different boards can still be compared on attendance and money. They cannot be compared on marks, and a group roll-up that pretends otherwise is worse than no roll-up.
The Monday-morning roll-up is the reason groups buy software, and the reason they distrust it by November. Two campuses report 94% attendance; one counts a half day as present and the other does not. The number is not wrong, exactly — it is just not one number.
The distinction is the whole design. A definition is what a term means: what counts as present, what a fee head includes, where the grade boundaries fall, at what point a student is flagged. A value is the number a campus puts against it: its own fee amounts, its own thresholds within the allowed range.
A campus can change a value. It cannot change a definition. That single constraint is what makes a group figure trustworthy, and it is also the constraint principals push back on hardest in week one — which is a better conversation to have in week one than in November.
Attendance, collection, staff ratios, enquiry conversion and transport utilisation compare cleanly across a CBSE campus and a state-board one, because the underlying definition can be made identical.
Marks do not. A 78% under one board’s scheme is not a 78% under another’s, and a group dashboard that ranks campuses by average marks will be quietly gamed within two terms. The honest presentation is per-board, side by side, with the boards labelled — not a single league table.
A student moving from one campus to another inside the group should carry their record — attendance history, fee ledger, results — rather than being admitted afresh with a new admission number. Where the group shares a numbering series this is straightforward; where each campus numbers independently, the record carries both and the group identifier is the stable one.
Phrased the way they arrive, answered so each one stands on its own.
Yes. Fee heads are defined at the trust so that "tuition" means the same thing everywhere, while the amounts are set per campus. That is what allows collection to be compared without forcing identical pricing.
Only if the trust grants it. Permissions are per branch, per role and per field, and the default is that a campus sees itself. Trust-level roles see the roll-up and can drill into any campus.
Groups run to around forty campuses on this model. Beyond a handful, the constraint is rarely technical — it is whether the trust is willing to fix definitions centrally.
Checked by the Implementations desk on 6 September 2026. Corrections go in the page, dated, rather than quietly.
Pricing is on the page, in the open, with the counting rule written next to it. Nobody has to book a call to find out what it costs.
See pricingForty minutes with an implementation engineer — your classes, your fee heads, your grading scheme, entered as we go. No slides, no sample school.