The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: There was no fault the Council did not allocate a school place to Mr and Mrs X’s child at National Offer Day. Nor was there fault in how it decided Mr and Mrs X’s child was not eligible for school transport assistance. The Council followed its policy and gave reasons which are in line with the evidence I have seen.
The complaint
Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s actions during the schools admission process and how it subsequently considered their application for school transport assistance. In particular they said the Council; did not follow their policy in how it allocated a school; did not provide enough information to inform their school preference decisions, and; the transport appeal was unfair and inconsistent.
Mr and Mrs X said the Council’s actions caused them uncertainty because they did not know what school their daughter may attend. They said it also caused further distress because they had to appeal both the admission decision and the transport assistance decision.
I will refer to Mr and Mrs X’s child as G.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (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 spoke to Mr and Mrs X and considered the information they provided.
I considered the Council’s comments and the documents it provided.
I considered the Council’s policies on admission to schools and transport in place at the time.
Mr and Mrs X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.
What I found
What should have happened Co-ordinated admissions arrangements The School Admissions Code and School Admission Appeals Code, published online, provide statutory guidance about school admissions and appeals.
Under the system of coordinated admissions, parents make a single application for a school place to their home council. This is the council the parent pays their council tax to.
The admissions code says parents can express a preference for at least three schools and on National Offer Day (NOD), the Council will make an offer of the highest preference school, where there is a space available. The code makes it clear that the Council must not give any guarantees that it will meet a preference.
In so far as it relates to this complaint and the Council’s responsibility (see paragraph 15), the code says if the local authority is unable to offer a place at one of the parent’s preferred schools, it must, if there are places available, offer a place at another school. (School admissions code, 2021, paragraph 2.11) The code also says in the case of oversubscribed schools, admissions authorities must rank applications in line with admission arrangements. The code also says for secondary school applications, the local authorities must make an offer on NOD, or the next working day. (School admissions code, paragraph 2.12) Statutory school transport guidance The statutory guidance says parents should consider how their children will get to school at the time they are choosing which schools to apply for. It also says where a child’s nearest school is full, the nearest school with places available becomes the nearest suitable school for travel purposes (paragraph 40).
The Council policy and guidance on admissions The Council incorporates its admissions policy in a document entitled Co-ordinated Schemes for Admissions to Primary and Secondary Schools (2023/2024).
The policy in place for the relevant academic year said, in all cases, parents applying (to the Council) will receive the offer of a school place on the offer date prescribed in the Council’s timetable. If the Council cannot offer a place at any of the preferred schools, it will offer a place at: The designated area school (if there are places available) or The nearest or most accessible school with places available.
The policy said parents can place up to four preferences and points out the Council will draw up a list of those schools applied for in their admission area and send applications for schools in other admission areas in line with parental applications. In addition, the policy highlights it will receive offers to school places in other council areas by mid-February, for parents who had expressed a preference for schools in those areas.
The Council policy on transport The Council’s policy for the academic year 2023/24, states that if there is a school closer to their home than the school that a parent applies for or the school that offers their child a place, it would class this as a parental preference. It says in these circumstances a parent is unlikely to be eligible for travel assistance. The policy highlights that parents can express a preference for up to four schools.
What happened School place application (September 2022) In mid-September 2022, Mrs X applied to the Council for a secondary school place for G, from September 2023 onwards. Mrs X’s application listed one preference, School E only.
On NOD (1 March), the Council sent an email to Mrs X saying they were not able to offer G a school place in line with her preference. The Council did not offer Mrs X another school place at that point. Mrs X contacted the Council the following day and asked it to add G to the waiting list for a further five schools.
School allocation (March 2023) In late March, the Council wrote to Mrs X and said it had not been able to allocate G any of Mrs X’s preferred schools as they were full. It offered G a place at School O.
The Council wrote to Mrs X shortly after this, to offer a place for G at School Y. Mrs X accepted the offer. Mr and Mrs X maintain a view because of the limited school places available, they dispute they exercised meaningful parental preferences at this point.
School transport request (April) In mid-April, Mrs X applied to the Council for travel assistance to support G going to their school. The Council wrote back to Mrs X and said G was not eligible for assistance. It said this was because a child must be attending their nearest suitable school for it to consider transport assistance and in their case, this was School K.
Mrs X then submitted an appeal to the Council’s stage one appeal process. She said she was appealing the Council’s decision for the following reasons: They had applied to School Y because of Council (allocation) failings, and; the initial transport refusal was wrong because her information was that School K did not have spaces.
At its stage one process, the Council refused Mrs X’s appeal. It said the reason for this was because G was not going to their nearest school. It said while it agreed the nearest school was School E, but there were no places available. After this it said the next nearest was school K and it had information there would have been a place available for G, had Mrs X applied for this during the normal admissions application process.
Mr and Mrs X asked the Council to consider their appeal at stage two of its appeal process. The appeal letter has a record of Mr and Mrs X’s representations and the Council’s consideration of these, alongside its policy.
The Council decided to refuse Mr and Mrs X’s application. It said it accepted the nearest suitable school for G was School E, but this was unavailable. It said the next nearest school, was School K and from its information, it said this would have places available for G had Mr and Mrs X applied.
In addition, the stage two appeal decision notice highlighted two aspects of its policy it considered relevant. Firstly, where parents select alternative schools to those designated or nearest, they accept responsibility for making transport arrangements. And, secondly where a parent exercises a parental preference, it will now always provide transport.
The appeal panel said in its decision, Mr and Mrs X had exercised parental preference and this was evident because: They had initially chosen one preference only, and; they accepted School Y after the Council had offered School O.
The Council provided me with information which shows that G would have secured a school place had Mrs X selected School K as a preference in her initial application.
The Council’s response In response to my enquiries, the Council said because of a population growth it was no longer able to guarantee making an offer on NOD. It accepted the existing policy should not say it would definitively make an offer on NOD when it could no longer guarantee this.
School allocation policy amendments The Council told me it was now consulting on a change to its admissions policy. It said it would emphasise to parents it may not always be able to make an offer of a school place on NOD.
School transport policy amendments In so far as it affects this complaint, the Council said it intended to amend its policy to highlight that a ‘suitable school’ means a school that a child would have been offered a place at, if they applied.
My findings
School allocation- complaint 1a)-b) The admissions code says where the Council cannot meet a parental preference it should make an offer of a secondary school on NOD, where there are places available (paragraph 2.11). The code also says (paragraph 2.12), in the case of applications, it should make an offer on NOD.
The Council’s policy reads, on ordinary reading, it will make an offer to parents on NOD. The Council was unable to meet Mr and Mrs X’s only preference but did not allocate any school until around three weeks later, because there were no school places available at national offer day.
I do not find it was at fault for not allocating a school on NOD. The code says at paragraph 2.12, the Council’s responsibility was to allocate a place in line with applications and Mr and Mrs X applied for one school only. The Council then complied with the code (paragraph 2.11) when it later offered a place at a school where places were available.
The Council told me it had not been in this position before, where it was unable to make an offer on NOD and would clarify this further in its policy.
Nor can I see fault in how much information was available to inform Mr and Mrs X’s preferences. The Council’s policy highlights a parent can select up to four preferences and the admission code stresses the point that parental preferences may not be met.
School transport and appeal- complaint 1c) 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 there is disagreement with the decision the organisation made.
Mr and Mrs X applied for a place at their nearest school. Their application was unsuccessful, and they subsequently selected school Y. The Council’s policy makes it clear that if there is a school available closer to their home than the school that offers their child a place, this would be classed as a parental preference. The policy also says that while it will respect parental preference, this does not extend to guaranteed provision of transport.
I have reviewed the Council’s stage one and stage two appeal notes and the Council’s policy. On the available evidence, the appeal notes appear to show a detailed consideration of Mr and Mrs X’s appeal grounds. The Council’s decision making also follows its policy. Because there is no evident flaw in the Council’s decision-making, I cannot revisit it or criticise it.
Policy amendments Mr and Mrs X highlighted their concern, that because the Council have consulted on changes to their allocations and transport policies, this is evidence of fault. I have considered the proposed amendments and do not agree there is evidence of fault. We expect Councils to learn from complaints and make service improvements where appropriate.
Final decision
I am now completing my investigation with a finding of no fault.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman