Summary: We have completed our investigation into the school admissions panel’s decision not to offer Miss X’s child a school place. This is because we find no fault in the way the panel made its decision.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the school admissions appeal panel failed to properly consider her child’s individual circumstances.
2. Miss X said this caused her and her child distress, and impacted her mental and physical health. She said her child is out of school, and she is having to pay for private tuition to maintain their education.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way a school admissions appeals panel made its decision. If there was no fault in how the panel made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. 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)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information and documents provided by Miss X and the Council. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint. I considered the relevant guidance, set out below. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

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. Parents/carers have the right to appeal an admission authority’s decision not to offer their child a school place.
8. A clerk supports the appeal panel. The clerk must take an accurate record of the hearing, including the proceedings, attendance, voting and reasons for decisions.
9. Panels must follow a two-stage decision making process. 
10. Stage one: 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,
• the admission of additional children would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources.  

11. 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. 
12. Stage two: balancing the arguments. The panel must balance the prejudice to the school against the appellant’s case for the child to be admitted.  
13. Appeal panels must either uphold or dismiss an appeal, and must not uphold an appeal subject to any conditions. Appeals must be decided by a simple majority of votes cast.
14. The clerk must write to the appellant, the admission authority and the council with the panel’s decision and reasons.

What happened

15. Miss X’s child, O, attended School A. O’s year group was reorganised which had an impact on O. Miss X removed O from School A. O started at School B.
16. O struggled with the change to a new school. Miss X then applied for O to return to School A. The Council refused Miss X’s application. She appealed.
17. The panel heard Miss X’s appeal. It decided not to offer O a place at School A.

Analysis

18. Miss X complained the appeal panel failed to properly consider her child’s individual circumstances. She said the panel refused to offer O a school place based on general pressures - such as budget, other pupils’ needs, and space - rather than O’s specific circumstances. Miss X said O spent two years at School A before she removed O. Miss X said O had thrived at School A.
19. I have investigated the way the appeal panel considered School A’s submissions and Miss X’s submissions about O. I find the panel balanced the prejudice to School A against Miss X’s case for the O. It decided Miss X’s case did not outweigh the prejudice to the other children’s education that admitting O would cause. This was a decision the panel was entitled to make.
20. The Ombudsman’s role is not to ask whether a council could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
21. I find no fault in the way the panel made its decision. For this reason, I cannot question the panel’s decision.
22. Miss X complained that another child, who had severe behavioural issues, was admitted to the same year in School A around the time she appealed. She said this shows inconsistency and undermines the Council’s reason it refused O a place.
23. Allowing another child a place at a school, or allowing another child’s appeal, is not evidence of fault. Panels need to consider each case individually.
24. For these reasons, I do not find fault.

Back to top

Decision

25. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman