Ombudsman takes school to task over errors in admissions appeals process

The Local Government Ombudsman has called on a secondary school in Wigan to offer fresh hearings to families in front of a new clerk and panel after finding its admissions appeals process to contain a number of errors.

The LGO investigation was prompted by the receipt of three separate complaints about St Edmund Arrowsmith RC High School’s admissions appeal panel.

The Ombudsman said the errors identified included:

• not coming to a firm decision on whether the school was full;
• allowing the presenting officer to make positive personal comments in support of individual children’s circumstances; and
• not giving clear reasons to families why their children were not being admitted.

According to the LGO, at stage one of the appeal process, the panel needed to decide whether St Edmund Arrowsmith was full. But the Ombudsman concluded that the panel did not properly make the decision that the school was full.

“Instead the panel decided to admit some children at stage one, and decided to consider each child’s case on its own merit,” the LGO said. “However the panel was not consistent in the reasons for admitting children.”

The report noted that some of the letters sent to the families did not make reference to any arguments made by the parents, while other letters made only passing reference.

The Ombudsman revealed that the school did not accept there had been fault. It has agreed to offer fresh appeals for the three children who complained to the LGO, but not for other unsuccessful applicants.

Dr Jane Martin, Local Government Ombudsman, said: “Throughout my investigation the school and the local council, which provided the panel, have not acknowledged the faults I have identified with the appeals process.

“A number of families were left uncertain about whether their children should have received a place, because of the panel’s poor handling of the appeal. The school now has the chance to restore the families’ faith in the fairness of the system by properly considering fresh appeals for those who complained to us. I would now urge them to extend this to all the families who were unsuccessful at appeal so that they can demonstrate that they have applied the wider lessons from the complaint.”