Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about an unsuccessful school admission appeal for her son (Y).

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 the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

The appeals process for grammar schools

5. Grammar schools can select children for admission based on academic ability – usually determined by a selection / entrance test.
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.
7. In appeals for selective schools, the panel needs to decide if the appellant’s child meets the necessary academic standard. If they decide this is not the case, then the panel cannot uphold the appeal.
8. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school can offer them a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, then they must offer a place.
9. If the child meets the academic standard and the panel decides the school cannot offer a place without it causing ‘prejudice’ to the school, they need to balance the appellant’s case against the prejudice to the school.

Background

10. Mrs X was moving into the Council’s area and originally applied for a year 7 school place for her son (Y) through her previous authority. Mrs X’s first choice of school (School Z) is within Redbridge’s area. School Z is a grammar school and selects students by ability – assessed via performance in a selection test. Y scored the required mark to be considered grammar school ability. School Z did not offer Y a place due to the number of applicants who achieved a higher mark in the selection test. Mrs X appealed the decision not to offer Y a place at School Z.
11. Mrs X is unhappy with how Redbridge handled her application which included preferences in other council areas. I have not considered that as part of this complaint – only the appeal for School Z.

Mrs X’s appeal

12. The clerk’s notes show that during the appeal, School Z’s representative presented their case. They explained how places had been offered. The panel and parents could ask questions.
13. In Mrs X’s appeal she explained why she wanted Y to attend School Z. Y had excelled academically and Mrs X had moved close to School Z so he could attend. Mrs X explained she had health issues and wanted Y to attend a school close to home. Y was unwell during the week of the exam. While he had achieved the required mark, it did not reflect his true capabilities.
14. The panel considered Y’s case. The panel decided School Z’s admission arrangements were lawful and had been properly applied. The panel decided admitting further children would cause prejudice. The panel noted that Y had achieved the pass mark for the school but decided Mrs X’s case did not outweigh School Z’s. The panel therefore refused the appeal and the clerk’s letter explained the decision.

Assessment

15. I understand Mrs X is unhappy her appeal was unsuccessful. But we are not a right of further appeal and cannot question decisions which were properly taken.
16. The evidence I have seen shows the panel followed the proper process to consider and decide Mrs X’s appeal. The panel considered the relevant tests set out in the School Admission Appeals Code.
17. The evidence shows Mrs X had the chance to present her case in line with the written information she provided.
18. Each panel needs to reach a decision based on the information before it. The evidence I have seen shows the panel considered all the information presented. Its decision not to uphold the appeal was made in line with the decision-making process set out in the Appeals Code.
19. In her complaint to the Ombudsman Mrs X raised concerns about the schools shown as her preferences in the appeal bundle and the Council not including certain emails. But there is no evidence these issues affected the panel’s consideration of Mrs X’s appeal for School Z.
20. Based on the evidence available there is not enough evidence of fault in how the panel considered Mrs X’s appeal to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

21. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman