Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son (Y). Miss X says the panel failed to properly consider information about her son’s autism and mental health needs. Miss X refers to another parent whose appeal was successful.

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 Cardinal Heenan Catholic High School (Cardinal Heenan / the School).
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Background

5. Miss X applied for Y to start year 7 at Cardinal Heenan. Because there were more applications than places available, the School used its oversubscription criteria to decide which children it would offer places. The School refused Miss X’s application. The Council offered a place at an alternative school. Miss X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place at Cardinal Heenan.

The appeals process

6. 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. They need to decide if admitting a further child would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources”. If they think it would, they need to consider if an appellant’s arguments outweigh the prejudice to the school.

The appeal

7. The clerk’s notes show the School’s representative presented their case. They explained the difficulties offering further places would cause. The panel and parents could ask questions.
8. Miss X presented her case. Miss X explained why she wanted Y to attend the School. Miss X had sent an Educational Psychology report in support of her case. Miss X referred to Y’s diagnosis of autism. Miss X said Cardinal Heenan was the only appropriate setting for Y. Miss X was impressed with the School’s Ofsted report and had concerns about the support the school offered could provide Y. Miss X explained three of Y’s cousins attended the School and there would be logistical advantages from him attending. Cardinal Heenan was the only school Y felt comfortable in.
9. The panel did not identify any issues with the School’s admission arrangements or how they had been applied. The panel decided admitting a further child would cause the School prejudice. The panel decided the evidence put forward in support of Y’s appeal was not strong enough to outweigh the prejudice admitting Y would cause the School. The panel refused the appeal. The clerk’s letter explained the panel’s decision.

Assessment

10. We are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions when the proper process was followed, and decisions were properly taken.
11. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider the appeal.
12. The evidence I have seen shows the panel considered the information submitted and presented by the School and Miss X. The panel balanced Miss X’s case against the School’s. It took into account all the information provided, and this includes information about Y’s autism and mental health needs. The panel decided not to uphold the appeal. This is a decision the panel was entitled to reach. The clerk’s notes record the panel’s deliberations and match the decision letter. Panels need to consider each case on their merits. The panel upholding another appeal is not evidence of fault here.
13. While I understand Miss X is unhappy the appeal was unsuccessful, there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to become involved. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman