Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s Independent Appeal Panel’s decision to refuse his child, Y’s, appeal for a place at a grammar school. The Council was at fault. The Clerk’s notes did not explain how the Panel reached its decision. This caused Mr X uncertainty about its decision. The Council has agreed to arrange a fresh appeal with Mr X. It will also remind staff of the importance of keeping an accurate record of appeal hearings.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Independent Appeal Panel’s decision to refuse his child, Y’s, appeal for a place at a grammar school. He said the Independent Appeal Panel did not properly consider supporting information during the appeal. Mr X said as a result, Y’s future aspirations have been affected. He wants the Independent Appeal Panel to reconsider its decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way a school admissions appeals panel made its decision. If there was no fault in how the panel made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. 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)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke with Mr X and considered information he provided.
5. I considered information provided by the Council.
6. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

School admission and appeals

7. Statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals is in the School Admissions Code and the School Admission Appeals Code, published by the Department of Education.
8. Parents and carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer a child a school place. An independent appeal panel decides the appeal. The clerk to the appeal panel must ensure an accurate record is taken of the points raised at the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting and reasons for decisions.
9. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
• Stage 1: the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether: 
1. the admissions arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements set out in the School Admissions Code; 
2. the admission arrangements were applied correctly; and if 
3. the admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.  
10. If a panel decides that admitting further children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources” they move to the second stage of the process. 
• Stage 2: balancing the arguments. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted.  
11. Appeal panels must either uphold or dismiss an appeal and must not uphold an appeal subject to any conditions. Appeals must be decided by a simple majority of votes cast. A panel’s decision that a child shall be admitted to a school is binding on the admission authority concerned. 

Appeals for grammar schools

12. Designated grammar schools are permitted to select children for admission on the basis of academic ability. Some admission authorities for grammar schools offer places to those who score highest, others set a pass mark and then apply oversubscription criteria to those applicants that reach the required standard.
13. Panels may be asked to consider a grammar school appeal where the appellant believes the child did not perform at their best on the day of the test. The panel must only uphold the appeal if it is satisfied:
• that there is evidence to demonstrate that the child is of the required academic standards, for example, school reports giving Year 5/Year 6 SAT results or a letter of support from their current or previous school clearly indicating why the child is considered to be of grammar school ability; and
• where applicable, that the appellant’s arguments outweigh the admission authority’s case that admission of additional children would cause prejudice.

What happened

14. In March 2023, Mr X submitted an application form to the Council to appeal the decision to refuse his child Y a place in year 7 at the local Grammar School.
15. To automatically be selected for a place at the Grammar School, applicants must pass the Council’s entry assessment. The entry assessment is made up of several individual tests in subjects such as english and maths. Pupils must achieve an overall score of 332 or more and 108 or more in the individual tests. Y did not meet the entry requirement assessment score. This is because they had achieved an overall score of 333 but 103 in maths.

The appeal

16. As part of his appeal application, Mr X said:
• although Y fell short of five points in their maths test, the test did not accurately reflect their abilities. Mr X said during the time of the assessment, there were problems within the family which had affected Y’s focus on the assessment;
• the curriculum at the Grammar School was more suited to Y’s academic goals and interests; and
• throughout their primary education, Y had demonstrated continuous improvement in their grades and had a leadership role.
17. In addition to the above, Y’s primary school provided supporting information which included:
• two supporting letters from the Headteacher and the Classroom Teacher. The letters said the test score in maths did not accurately reflect Y’s abilities and repeated at the time of the assessment, Y had difficulties at home. Y was consistently at the top of their class in terms of academic achievement, particularly in maths; and
• Y’s end of year report which showed Y was excellent in all core subjects including maths.
18. The School’s written case set out that it had admitted its published admission number and there were shortfalls in communal areas. It said ‘in previous years we have been able to accommodate a small number of extra students. This would stand this year and we could accommodate an extra 20 should the panel feel it is appropriate’ but it went on to say that the admission of pupils in excess of the 300 offered ‘would seriously prejudice the provision of efficient education and the efficient use of resources in the school’.
19. Mr X’s appeal hearing took place in May 2023. The Independent Appeal Panel considered his appeal at stage one. The panel was satisfied the admissions arrangements were lawful. The panel considered the School’s case. The Clerk noted the panel discussed the lack of circulation space and infrastructure issues but it was satisfied the School could take an additional 20 pupils without causing prejudice to efficient provision of education and use of resources.
20. The Independent Appeal Panel then considered Mr X’s appeal at stage two. The Clerk’s notes recorded Mr X’s comments including Y had visited the school and was a good fit. He was interested in learning and was strong at maths and had a love of maths and science. He had performed above average in his school reports and the primary school had provided letters of support.
21. The record of the Panel’s decision making asked, ‘is the Panel satisfied that there is evidence to demonstrate that the child is of the required academic standards, for example, school reports giving year 5/year 6 or SATS results, or a letter of support from their current or previous school clearly indicating why the child is considered to be of grammar school ability?’ All three panel members answered no. The Clerk’s notes said the Panel noted Y’s family circumstances prior to the assessment but it could not find sufficient evidence of their maths ability to override the maths score.

Later in May 2023, the Council wrote to Mr X with the outcome of the appeal hearing. It said it had considered all supporting evidence in relation to Y’s strengths and abilities and that they had faced some challenges at home around the time of the assessment however, Y had not met the standard requirement for admission to the school so it could not offer a place at the Grammar School.

22. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to us.

Back to top

Findings

23. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the appeal panel followed the Admissions Appeals Code. We do this by examining the panel’s papers and the notes taken by the clerk during the hearing. As long as it considered the evidence put forward properly, the Ombudsman cannot say what conclusion it should have come to. If we find fault which calls the panel’s decision into question, we may ask for a new appeal hearing.
24. Mr X provided supporting letters and an end of year report in support of his case that Y was of grammar school ability. The Clerk’s notes stated the Independent Appeal Panel could not find sufficient evidence of Y’s maths ability to override the maths score. However, the notes do not explain how the Panel came to its decision, how it considered the evidence Mr X provided or why it considered that it was not satisfactory to demonstrate Y's abilities. This was fault and called into question the decision making of the Panel and whether it properly considered the evidence Mr X provided.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• arrange a fresh appeal with Mr X; and
• remind all clerking staff of the importance of accurately recording how the panels have reached their decisions.
26. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have now completed my investigation. The Council was at fault. It has agreed to action the recommendations to remedy the injustice caused and prevent a recurrence of fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman