Summary: The Council was at fault in how it decided to refuse Miss X’s appeal to admit her child, W, to her preferred school. This caused Miss X uncertainty and frustration. To remedy her injustice, the Council will apologise, pay her £100 and hold a new appeal hearing. It should also remind school admission appeal clerks they must keep suitable records of appeal panel’s decision-making.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision not to admit her child, W, to her preferred school. Miss X said this meant W no longer wanted to go to the school they had a place at, and their wellbeing was suffering.

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 have considered:
• All the information Miss X provided and offered to discuss the complaint with her;
• The supporting documents the Council provided; and
• The relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
5. Miss X and the Council 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 law and guidance

School admission arrangements

6. Statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals can be found in The School Admissions Code and School Admission Appeals Code. Both are published by the Department for Education.
7. Under the system of coordinated admissions, parents make a single application for a school place to their home council. This is the council the parent pays their council tax to.
8. All schools must have a set of admission arrangements containing oversubscription criteria. The school’s admission authority uses these to decide which children will receive an offer of a place if there are more applications than places available. The school’s admission authority sets the admission arrangements.
9. A school’s admission arrangements must also contain a Published Admission Number (PAN). This is the number of places the school will offer at each point of entry. The point of entry is when the school normally admits children. In an infant or primary school this is usually the reception year.

Appeals

10. Parents have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.
11. A clerk supports the appeal panel. Parents can submit information in support of their appeal. The clerk must send all papers required for the hearing a reasonable time before the date of the hearing. This includes information from the appellant and the admission authority.
12. The clerk must take an accurate record of the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting and reasons for decisions.
13. 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.
14. The clerk must write to the appellant, the admission authority and the council with the panel’s decision and reasons.
15. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process.
16. Stage 1: the panel examines the decision to refuse admission. The panel must consider whether:
• The admissions arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements set out in the School Admissions Code;
• The admission arrangements were applied correctly; and if
• The admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. The Council administers admissions for community and voluntary controlled schools in its area. This means the Council is responsible for any failings by an appeal panel in relation to those types of school.
20. The Council’s admissions criteria places children in one of seven categories. These include:
• Priority one- children who are, or had been in the Council’s care;
• Priority two- children who have compelling medical or other exceptional reasons to attend the school. The priority applies to children with specific needs that can only be met by one school;
• Priority three- children who have a sibling already attending the preferred school;
• Priority four- children in the school’s catchment area who are eligible for free school meals; and
• Priority five- certain children eligible for free school meals.

What happened

21. Miss X’s child, W, was due to move to a secondary school in September 2024.
22. Miss X applied to school A as her first preference in mid-October 2023. She said there were medical reasons why W should attend school A. She said she was applying for W to have an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. An EHC Plan is a document that sets out the child’s needs and what arrangements should be made to meet them. She also said W had anxiety and experienced panic attacks.
23. The Council assigned W priority five. In early March 2024, the Council allocated W a space at Miss X’s second preference, school B. Miss X appealed the Council’s decision. She said:
• W preferred school A because it was smaller and eased their concerns about moving to secondary education;
• The other schools W visited, including school B, caused them significant anxiety; and
• W was being assessed for autism and for an EHC Plan.
24. Miss X included several documents with her appeal. This included:
• A form she completed when W was referred to the NHS Child and Adolescent Mental Health service;
• An EHC Plan assessment request to the Council, which included her views on W’s needs;
• Letters from a therapist who had worked with W; and
• A letter of support from W’s primary school.
25. The panel held the first stage of the appeal in early May 2024. The school made its case for not admitting more children, which included that it had a PAN of 300 and had admitted that many children. Under the section “panel decision”, the records state “yes [the school] is full”. The reasons the stage one panel listed for coming to its decision were that:
• The school had seen an increase in pupils with EHC Plans, pupils with special needs and pupils who were under the Council’s care;
• The school did not have any special facilities; and
• More children would overcrowd the school’s corridors, increase wait times for the school canteen, put pressure on the school’s safety measures and result in an increase in staffing costs.
26. The panel heard the second stage of Miss X’s appeal the following week. Records show:
• The panel decided that the fact W was being assessed for autism was not sufficient to show that they should have had higher priority on the admission’s criteria;
• W did not live in the school’s catchment area so would not have received priority for that;
• Miss X said W had a language disorder which affected their confidence;
• Miss X reiterated that W’s needs meant they preferred the environment at school A and had struggled to visit school B. She said the fact a family member worked at school A helped help W feel comfortable at school;
• The panel asked about the environment at W’s primary school, if W was able to engage with clubs outside of school and if they had a group of friends; and
• In response, Miss X said W had struggled at their primary school but the school helped them cope. She said W had friends, most of whom were going to school A and that W enjoyed sports. Miss X said W had struggled academically which affected their self-esteem and that the environment at school B during the visit was busy, which meant W felt overwhelmed.
27. The panel decided W’s case did not outweigh the prejudice admitting them would cause to the school. The panel said it was sympathetic to W’s language disorder and difficulty with academia. It noted that W’s family member worked at school A and that W enjoyed sports.
28. The panel told Miss X it had not upheld her appeal in late May 2024. It said it would send a letter detailing its reasons “in due course”.
29. Around the same time, the Council issued its decision not to assess W for an EHC Plan.
30. In late August 2024, the panel sent the letter. It said:
• The first stage of the appeal concluded school A’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been correctly applied to W’s case;
• Admitting more children to school A would prejudice the efficient provision of education or efficient use of resources because the school had a PAN of 300 and had admitted that many children. More children would lead to overcrowded rooms, with health and safety implications. It said this was particularly an issue for practical classes. It also said school A would not be able to cope with more children moving around the buildings between classes; and
• In the second stage of the appeal, the panel considered what Miss X had said about W’s anxiety, ongoing autism assessment and mental health therapy. It considered that W had struggled visiting potential schools and found school A the easiest. However, the panel decided that the argument for admitting W to school did not outweigh the impact of allowing them to attend.

Back to top

Findings

31. The Council was at fault in how the panel considered Miss X’s appeal. The issues were as follows.
• Although the August 2024 decision letter said the stage one panel considered if the admissions criteria complied with the School Admissions Code, there is no evidence of this;
• The decision letter said the stage two panel considered if W’s case outweighed the prejudice admitting them to school would cause. The letter said the panel took into account W’s anxiety, autism assessment, therapy, issues visiting the schools and the fact that W found going to school A the easiest. The records of the stage two hearing do not evidence this.
• Instead, the records of the stage two part of the appeal show the panel considered the impact of W’s language disorder, academic ability and that W’s family member worked at school A. This was appropriate. However, the panel also took into account the fact that W enjoyed sports. W’s interest in sports was not relevant to whether the case for admitting W to school A outweighed the impact of admitting them.
• The panel did not uphold either stage of Miss X’s appeal, but the records do not show how the individual panel members voted.
• The panel completed the stage two hearing in May 2024 but did not send details of its decision making to Miss X until August 2024, three months later.
32. The issues with how the panel heard Miss X’s appeal call its decision into question and caused Miss X avoidable uncertainty and frustration. The delay in sending the decision to Miss X caused her further frustration.

Back to top

Action

33. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will take the following steps.
1. Apologise to Miss X for the uncertainty and frustration she experienced because of the flaws in how the panel considered her appeal and for the delay in sending her its reasons for refusing her appeal. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology.
2. Pay Miss X £100 to recognise that injustice.
3. Hold a new appeal panel with a new clerk and panel members, providing Miss X confirms to the Council that she still wants W to move to school A.
4. Remind the school admission panel clerks it employs that they must evidence the panel’s decision making in full, including the three-stage test at stage one and all the relevant factors the panel took into consideration at stage two.
34. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and prevent reoccurrence of this fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman