Summary: We find the Council at fault for failing to make its own decision on Miss X’s request to delay her summer-born child’s start at school. This caused Miss X frustration, distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and improve its service.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about how the Council handled her admission application for her summer-born child. Miss X said the Council applied the wrong test and failed to follow non-statutory guidance.
2. Miss X said this caused unnecessary and avoidable distress and frustration, and uncertainty about her child’s future.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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(1), as amended)
5. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information and documents provided by Miss X and the Council. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments received before I reached a final decision.
7. I considered the relevant legislation and guidance, set out below. I also considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

8. ‘Summer-born children’ are children born between 1 April and 31 August. These children are not required to start school until the September following their fifth birthday. Ordinarily, they would then start school in year one with their ‘chronological year group’.
9. Parents can request their summer born children are admitted to a reception class in the September following their fifth birthday rather than year one. This means they are educated outside their normal age group.
10. Parents decide when their children start school. The admission authority decides whether they start in reception or year one.
11. The Government issued guidance for admission authorities deciding which year group a child should be admitted to. The guidance says an admission authority must:
• make decisions in the best interests of the child;
• take account of the child’s individual needs and abilities and consider whether these can best be met in reception or year one; and,
• take account of the potential impact on the child of being admitted to year one without first having completed the reception year.
12. The guidance says, “In effect, this means that the authority is making a decision about whether it would be in the child’s best interest to miss the reception year.”
13. There is no prescribed process admission authorities must follow. The admission authority must, however, give reasons for its decision.

What happened

14. Miss X asked the Council to delay her summer-born child B’s school admission for a year. Miss X wanted B to start in the reception year in September 2026 instead of September 2025.
15. The Council told Miss X that the schools’ headteachers did not agree to her request. The Council told Miss X:

“Whilst we are the admission authority for the school, for out of year group admission requests we ask the Headteacher to review the request made by the parent(s) and make a decision based on their educational knowledge and expertise.”

16. Miss X complained. The Council said it had considered Miss X’s request but refused it.
17. An internal Council email said:

“The Headteachers of each of the schools [Miss X] has applied for were the ultimate decision makers and … the Senior Admissions Officer for Starting School and Middle communicated the decisions from each of the schools.”

18. Miss X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

19. The School Admissions Code says admission authorities “must make decisions on the basis of the circumstances of each case and in the best interests of the child concerned … When informing a parent of their decision on the year group the child should be admitted to, the admission authority must set out clearly the reasons for their decision.”
20. The Code is clear that it is the admission authority that makes the decision, not headteachers.
21. The Council confirmed to the Ombudsman that its practice is for headteachers to make these decisions. The Council then communicates this decision to the parents.
22. I find this practice is not in line with the Code or the guidance. Our view is that councils should follow guidance or justify why they are departing from it. The Council has not done this.
23. The Code says the admission authority’s decision should take into account :
• the parent’s views;
• information about the child’s academic, social, and emotional development;
• where relevant, their medical history and the views of a medical professional;
• whether they have previously been educated out of their normal age group;
• whether they may naturally have fallen into a lower age group if it were not for being born prematurely; and,
• the views of the head teacher of the school concerned.
24. The Council should have made its own decision taking account of all relevant considerations above. The Council should also have taken into account the potential impact of admitting B to year one without first having completed reception. The Council should then have set out its reasons for its decision to Miss X.
25. The Council did not do this. I therefore find the Council at fault.
26. The Council believes others use this same practice (of relying solely on headteachers to make admission authority decisions). This does not change my decision.
27. I find this fault caused Miss X injustice because it caused unnecessary and avoidable distress, frustration, and uncertainty.
28. The Council said Miss X later changed one of her preferred schools, and the headteacher of that school agreed to delay admission for B. I therefore do not consider it necessary to recommend the Council should make its own decision in this case.

Back to top

Action

29. Within four weeks of this decision, the Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X in writing for causing unnecessary and avoidable distress, frustration, and uncertainty.
30. Within three months of this decision, the Council has agreed to:
• remind staff, including managers, senior officers and department heads, that the Council should make its own decisions, in line with the Code. It should not rely on headteachers to make Council decisions; and,
• share this decision with relevant staff, including managers, senior officers and department heads, and discusses the learning at a team meeting.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

32. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take actions to remedy injustice and improve its service.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman