Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son (Y). Mrs X says her original application should not have been refused as the S chool had spaces. Mrs X says the panel failed to properly consider her appeal.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether an independent school admissions appeals panel’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider if there was fault in the way the decision was reached. If we find fault, which calls into question the panel’s decision, we may ask for a new appeal hearing. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the School.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

School admissions / appeals

5. As part of determining their admission arrangements, all admission authorities must set a Published Admission Number (PAN) for each ‘relevant age group’. School Admissions Code Para 1.2
6. The relevant age group is the is the point at which pupils are or will normally be admitted to the school (the normal admissions round). In a secondary school this is year 7.
7. A school’s PAN only applies to the relevant age group.
8. In the normal admissions round, if a school is undersubscribed, any parent that applies must be offered a place. School Admissions Code Para 15(d)
9. In-year admissions are applications to the relevant age group submitted on or after the first day of term, or for admission to an age group other than the relevant age group. School Admissions Code Para Para 2.24 (60)
10. Where an admission authority receives an in-year application for a year group that is not the normal point of entry and it does not wish to admit the child because it has good reason to believe that the child may display challenging behaviour, it may refuse admission and refer the child to the Fair Access Protocol. School Admissions Code Para 3.10
11. An admission authority should only rely on the provision in paragraph 3.10 if it has a particularly high proportion of either children with challenging behaviour or previously permanently excluded pupils on roll compared to other local schools and it considers that admitting another child with challenging behaviour would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources. School Admissions Code Para 3.11
12. For in-year admissions, with the exception of grammar schools, all maintained schools with a place available must offer a place, unless admitting the child would prejudice the efficient provision of education or use of resources. School Admissions Code Para 2.28
13. Parents have the right to appeal the decision to refuse their child admission to a school. Appeals are considered by independent appeal panels.
14. Independent appeal panels must follow the law when considering an appeal. They need to consider if the school’s admission arrangements comply with the law, and if they were properly applied to the appellant’s application. They need to decide if admitting a further child would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources”. If they think it would, they need to consider if an appellant’s arguments outweigh the prejudice to the school.

Background

15. Mrs X applied for Y to transfer to year 10 in St Aloysius RC College. The School refused Mrs X’s application due to “challenging and unsafe behaviour”. Mrs X appealed the decision.
16. The School’s Headteacher provided the panel with information about why the School had refused Mrs X’s application – despite the School having spaces. The Headteacher’s statement referred to the exception set out in paragraph 3.10 of The School Admissions Code (see above). The Headteacher explained why they believed admitting Y would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources. The Headteacher provided specific information about Y and general information about the School.
17. Mrs X was not able to attend her appeal but sent a written submission. Mrs X referred to the School having spaces. Mrs X argued the School could only refuse admission if they believed a child has challenging behaviour and the tests in paragraphs 3.11 of The School Admissions Code had been met. Mrs X argued the School had not made this case – either when the application was refused or as part of its appeal papers. Mrs X provided background information to her application and appeal.
18. Mrs X’s appeal was unsuccessful.

Assessment

19. Firstly, I think it would have been helpful for the School to have provided more information about why it refused Mrs X’s application. I do not consider the one-line explanation in its refusal letter to be sufficient.
20. But the original decision to refuse admission was one the School was entitled to take. The Headteacher’s submission to the appeal panel explained this decision in more detail and with reference to paragraphs 3.10 and 3.11 of The School Admissions Code. Also, the lack of information in the original refusal does not mean the decision itself was wrong. This was something for panel to consider.
21. It is also not necessary for a school to rely on these two parts of The School Admissions Code to refuse an in-year application. As explained in paragraph 7, a school’s PAN only applies to applications for a relevant age group as part of the normal admissions round. This was an in-year application. As explained in paragraph 12, schools can refuse in-year admissions if the PAN has not been reached, but they believe admitting a further child will cause prejudice.
22. Turning to our role in cases like this, we are not a right of further appeal. We cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions were properly taken.
23. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider Mrs X’s appeal.
24. The panel considered all the information it had access to. The panel decided the original application had been refused as allowed by The School Admissions Code. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause prejudice to the School. The panel considered Mrs X’s appeal and decided her case did not outweigh the School’s. This is a decision the panel was entitled to reach and its letter to Mrs X explained its decision.
25. I understand Mrs X is disappointed by the panel’s decision. But I have not seen enough evidence the panel did not properly consider the appeal. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

26. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman