The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council refusing to allow her child a place in the school year above her cohort. It is unlikely we would find fault.
The complaint
Ms X says the Council is wrong to say her child D cannot attend School Y in the year above her cohort.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X, which includes the Council’s responses to her and the original decision. I also considered the School’s Admissions Code.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X applied for a place for her child D to start in reception at School Y. There were more applicants than places. The Council applied its admissions criteria and Y did not get a place. Y started attending School Q. Within weeks Ms X says the placement broke down and D stopped attending. D has remained at home with Ms X since.
Ms X discovered School Y had a place available in Year One. She asked School Y to give that place to D meaning D would be in the cohort above her age. The Council as School Y’s admission authority, refused. Ms X asked for a review. She provided medical evidence, an educational psychologist’s report and other evidence in support of her claim that Year One at School Y was in D’s best interests.
The Council’s coordinated admissions panel considered her application and refused. It believed it was in D’s best interests to be in reception. The Council says there are other schools within a reasonable distance with places available in reception. Ms X says they do not meet D’s needs nor her logistical needs. She says the decision has caused her own health to decline.
Analysis In cases where a parent asks for admissions to a school out of year group, the school admission authority must decide on the basis of the circumstances of each case. They must inform parents of the reasons for the decision.
The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding not to allow D to be in Year One. In making its decision, the organisation took account of the relevant guidance, information from Ms X and its own policies. It is likely we would say the organisation followed the appropriate procedures when making this decision. It is unlikely our investigation would find fault in how it took the decision and we are therefore unlikely to question whether that decision was right or wrong.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman