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

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son.

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 Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mrs X’s son (Y) sat the Kent Test. This is used to decide which children will be offered places at a selective (or grammar) school in the Council’s area. Mrs X’s preferred school (School Z) is a selective school. It therefore uses the Kent Test results to decide if children are of the required academic standard to attend.
6. Y scored a total of 322 in the test. The required standard was 332 with no individual score in the test below 107. Y scored 105 in the maths section of the test.
7. Y’s results in the Kent Test meant the Council did not offer him a place at School Z. Mrs X appealed the Council’s decision.

The appeals process

8. 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.
9. In appeals for selective schools, the panel needs to decide if the appellant’s child meets the necessary academic standard. If they decide this is not the case, then the panel cannot uphold the appeal.
10. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school can offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, then they must offer a place.
11. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school cannot offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, they need to balance the appellant’s case against the prejudice to the school.

Mrs X’s appeal

12. The clerk’s notes show that during the appeal School Z’s representative presented their case. They explained how places had been offered. The panel and parents could ask questions.
13. In Mrs X’s appeal, she explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. Mrs X explained Y was a twin whose sibling had passed the Kent Test. Mrs X did not want her children at separate schools. Mrs X explained Y was currently working at a higher level than his sibling. There was a further opportunity for questions.
14. The panel considered Y’s case. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a child would cause School Z prejudice. But more importantly, the panel decided there was not enough evidence to show Y was of grammar school ability. The panel refused the appeal and the clerk’s letter explained the decision.

Assessment

15. I understand Mrs X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken.
16. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, Mrs X referred to other parents whose appeals were successful. The fact other appeals were successful does not automatically cast doubt on how the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal. We need to consider if the evidence available shows any fault in how the panel considered Mrs X’s own appeal.
17. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Mrs X’s appeal. The panel considered the relevant tests set out in the School Admission Appeals Code.
18. The evidence shows Mrs X had the chance to present her case in line with the written information she provided.
19. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel considered all the information presented. It is for the panel to decide the weight it gives to each piece of evidence. The panel balanced the evidence presented and reached a decision it was entitled to take. The clerk’s decision letter is in line with the notes taken during the hearing.
20. Based on the evidence available there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman