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 for us to be able to question the panel’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her daughter. Mrs X is concerned the panel wrongly believed her daughter was allowed extra time during the selection test for her preferred school.

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 daughter (Y) sat the Kent Test. This is used to decide which children will be offered places at selective (or grammar) schools 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. Test results, combined with School Z’s oversubscription criteria, are used to decide which will be offered places. Mrs X applied for Y to attend School Z.
6. The required test standard was 332 with no individual score in the test below 107. Y scored a total of 300 in the test – below the required score. Y also scored 106 in the English section, 89 in the Maths section, and 105 in the Reasoning part of the test. All below the required individual scores.
7. Y’s results in the Kent Test meant School Z did not offer her a place. Mrs X appealed this 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 them 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 expanded on her written appeal and explained:
• Y is an outstanding student.
• The Kent Test was not an accurate reflection of Y’s ability.
• As well as a crisis of confidence on the day, it had since been discovered Y struggles with timed test conditions. There was also an issue during the test when Y’s pen leaked.
• Y’s primary school has put in place arrangements for future tests.
• Mrs X has concerns about the school the Council has offered Y a place at.
• Y’s sibling already attends School Z.
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 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. 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.
17. The evidence shows Mrs X had the chance to present her case in line with the written information she provided.
18. 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 clerk’s decision letter is in line with the notes taken during the hearing.
19. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, Mrs X referred to the panel’s decision letter stating “They [the panel] noted the support from her [Y’s] primary school”. Mrs X is concerned the panel wrongly thought her daughter received extra time in the Kent Test. Having looked at the clerk’s notes, they do record “noted school support”. But there is no suggestion the panel thought this extra support was available for the Kent Test. There is no evidence the panel thought extra time was granted or that this influenced their decision. The panel considered Y’s scores in the test and the other evidence available. This included Y’s low score in the Maths part of the test. The panel decided Y was not of grammar school ability and that is a decision it was entitled to take.
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.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman