Summary: Mrs X complained about the appeal panel’s decision not to offer her son a sixth form place. We find some fault in how the panel handled Mrs X’s appeal. This means she cannot be satisfied the appeals process was carried out fairly. The School has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the appeal panel’s decision not to offer her son (Y) a sixth form place. She says the panel failed to follow the correct procedures and act fairly in Y’s case. The panel’s failings mean Y is now having to attend a school further away and he cannot study his chosen subjects.

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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 considered information from Mrs X and the School.
5. Mrs X and the School had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant guidance

6. Statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals can be found in The School Admissions Code and The School Admission Appeals Code (the Appeals Code). Both are published by the Department for Education.
7. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.
8. The Appeals Code contains a contains a section on appeals for admission to sixth forms. It states that where a child did not reach the specific entry requirements, the appeal panel must not make its own assessment of a child’s ability. The panel instead needs to decide if the admission authority’s decision the child was not of the required standard was reasonable.
9. The appeal panel must write to the appellant with its decision and the reasons for it. The decision letter must be easy to understand and must contain a summary of relevant factors raised by parties and considered by the panel. It must also provide clear reasons for the panel’s decision.

What happened

10. Mrs X applied for Y to attend the School’s sixth form. Y had been a student at the School since Year 7. The School’s admission arrangements for the sixth form require a student to achieve an average GCSE grade of 5.7 across all their subjects. Y did not achieve this and so the School did not offer him a place.
11. Mrs X appealed the School’s decision. She said Y experienced challenges in studying German due to factors outside his control. If he had achieved one more mark in German, he would have received an average GCSE grade of 5.81. She also said the School failed to make her aware Y could have sat a foundation paper, rather than the higher paper. If he sat the foundation paper, and he received the same mark he achieved in the higher paper, he would have achieved the required average grade.
12. The appeal panel considered Mrs X’s case in a hearing. The School said it made a mistake, and it should have entered Y into the foundation paper. He would have been successful if it had done so. However, it could not offer Y a place because he had not met the 5.7 grade. Mrs X explained she repeatedly tried to contact Y’s German teachers to discuss his performance during the academic year, but they did not respond. She said staff declined a meeting to discuss Y’s mock exam result, and they did not offer the phone call she requested to discuss her concerns. She said Y received a strong set of results apart from German, and it would be unfair to penalise him for one subject.
13. The panel discussed Y’s case. Members decided the School’s admission arrangements complied with the School Admissions Code. They noted Y had experienced disruption, and the School admitted its mistake, but Y had not reached the required standard and they could not uphold the appeal because those were the rules. One member also commented if they had been the teacher with all the available information, they would have entered Y into the higher paper. The panel decided the School’s decision was reasonable as the admission arrangements to sixth form are based solely on the average GCSE grade.
14. The clerk asked the panel to revisit its decision on Y’s case the following day. Members of the panel noted the teaching staff thought Y could have taken the higher paper, there was nothing wrong in the process and the rules had been followed. There was a discussion about the School’s mistake, but the majority vote was not to uphold the appeal.
15. The clerk sent a letter to Mrs X detailing the panel’s decision. The letter states the panel were aware of the School’s mistake and that Y had been penalised. However, the panel could not justify making an exception in Y’s case and members were satisfied the School’s decision to refuse a place was reasonable.

Back to top

Analysis

16. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. In cases such as this, our role is to consider whether the panel followed the correct process in line with the Appeals Code.
17. I have some concerns with the panel’s consideration of this case. One member commented that if they were the teacher with the information available, they would have entered Y into the higher paper. However, the School had accepted its mistake and confirmed it should have entered Y into the foundation paper. The comment also appears to be straying into commenting on Y’s ability, which is not the role of the panel and against the guidance in the Appeals code.
18. The notes of the panel’s deliberations state it could not uphold the appeal because those were the rules and Y did not meet the required standard. However, the panel can decide if the admission authority’s decision the child was not of the required standard was reasonable. I am not satisfied the panel fully understood its role in this case and the circumstances of Y’s case.
19. The clerk’s decision letter also states the panel could not justify making an exception in Y’s case and members were satisfied the School’s decision to refuse a place was reasonable. However, there is no detailed explanation of why the panel could not justify an exception and why the School’s decision was reasonable. This is against the guidance.
20. The faults identified call into question the decision reached. This has caused Mrs X an injustice as she cannot be certain the panel properly considered her appeal properly and she understandably now has reduced confidence in the appeals process.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. By 2 December 2024 the School has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused the identified fault in this statement.
• Arrange for Mrs X’s appeal to be re-heard with a new panel and clerk.
• Issue written reminders to panel members to ensure when dealing with sixth form appeals, they must not make their own assessment of a child’s ability. Instead, they need to decide if the admission authority’s decision the child was not of the required standard was reasonable.

22. The School should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation. I uphold Mrs X’s complaint with a finding of fault causing injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman