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

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for his son (Y). Mr X is concerned the panel did not properly consider the information Mr X supplied in support of his appeal. This included details of how Y becomes nervous around major events. Mr X said this affected his performance when sitting the School’s entrance test.

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 St Bernard’s RC Gammar School (the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Mr X’s son (Y) sat the entrance test for a place at the School. This is a selective / grammar school. It uses the entrance test results to decide if children are of the required academic standard to attend. Results from the entrance test are used along with the School’s oversubscription criteria to decide which children will be offered places.
6. The pass mark for the test was 111 and Y scored 110. This meant the School did not offer Y a place. Mr X appealed this decision.

The appeals process

7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.

Mr X’s appeal

11. In Mr X’s written appeal he explained why he wanted Y to attend the School. Mr X explained Y gets nervous around major events. Y was sick on the day of the School’s selection test. Mr X said this affected his performance, but Y was still only one mark short of the required standard. Mr X sent information in support of his appeal. This included reports from Y’s primary school.
12. The clerk’s notes show that during the appeal, the School’s representative presented their case. They explained how places had been offered. Mr X attended the appeal. Parents and the panel could ask questions. Mr X presented his case which expanded on the information already sent. There was a further opportunity for questions.
13. The panel considered Y’s case. The panel decided the School’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting a child would cause the School 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

14. I understand Mr X is unhappy his appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken.
15. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Mr X’s appeal. They considered the relevant tests set out in the School Admission Appeals Code.
16. 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. The panel considered that Y was unwell on the day of the test. It took into account the information from Y’s primary school and Y’s age when he sat the test.
17. It is for the panel to decide the weight it gives to each piece of evidence.
18. The panel noted Y had been tutored for the test and had sat the selection test for another school. The panel took into account that other students would have been nervous and there was an opportunity to postpone the test if Y was unwell. The panel considered that other children refused a place would also be working at a high level at their primary school.
19. The panel decided there was not enough evidence to show Y was of grammar school ability. That is a decision the panel was entitled to reach.
20. Based on the evidence available there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mr X’s appeal to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Mr 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