The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Miss X complained that the school admission appeal panel’s decision to refuse her appeal was unfair and biased. She said this caused her and her daughter upset and anxiety. We do not find fault.
The complaint
The complainant, who I refer to here as Miss X, complains that the school admissions appeal panel’s decision to refuse her appeal was unfair and biased.
Miss X said the decision caused her and her daughter upset and anxiety.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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)
How I considered this complaint
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.
I considered the relevant legislation and statutory guidance, set out below.
What I found
What should have happened School admissions appeals are governed by the School Admissions Appeals Code 2012 (‘the Code’). The Code sets out how appeals should be administered.
Appeals are heard in two stages. The appeal panel is first asked to consider whether the admission arrangements “complied with the mandatory requirements of the School Admissions Code and Part 3 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998”, and also whether they were correctly and impartially applied in the complainant’s case.
The panel then has to decide whether the admission of additional children would “prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources”. Panel members have to satisfy themselves on this point by asking questions and rigorously examining the school’s case.
The admission authority only moves to the second stage of an appeal if it was satisfied the school was full. The purpose of the second stage is for the panel to balance the case for the child to be admitted against the likely prejudice to the school in taking an additional child.
What happened Miss X’s daughter, D, did not get into Miss X’s first choice of school. Miss X appealed for the following reasons: D’s friends were going to the first-choice school, and they would support D’s emotional wellbeing; and, Miss X is a social worker and has worked the least with the first-choice school.
The appeal panel was held in May. The panel considered the school’s case - that the first-choice school was overcrowded - and Miss X’s case. The panel asked about D’s friendships, her emotional wellbeing, and about Miss X’s work.
The panel did a balancing exercise between the two cases and considered the supporting evidence Miss X provided.
The outcome of the appeal was that the panel unanimously refused Miss X’s appeal on the grounds that the school’s case outweighed Miss X’s case. It concluded that admitting D to the school would cause prejudice to the efficient provision of education, or the efficient use of resources.
Miss X then brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
Analysis Miss X complains that the school admissions appeal panel’s decision to refuse her appeal was unfair and biased. She feels the panel had already made its decision before her appeal on the basis that the school was overcrowded. She says the panel already knew this, so she questions the point of appealing. She says it felt like a ‘tick box’ exercise. Miss X also says she feels the panel did not consider her reasons for the appeal.
I have investigated how the appeal panel made its decision. I find there is evidence to show the panel thoroughly considered each part of Miss X’s appeal, including her supporting evidence. The panel asked appropriate questions.
I do not find fault in how the appeal panel was conducted and how it reached its decision. For this reason, I cannot challenge the panel’s decision (see paragraph three).
Final decision
I have completed my investigation and I do not uphold Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is no fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman