Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

New Admissions Code

33 replies

prh47bridge · 20/07/2021 20:29

An updated Admissions Code has been published and comes into effect on 1st September. This isn't a major overhaul but there are some changes:

  • PAN now only applies to the normal year of entry. Admission to other years cannot now be refused on the basis that the year is full to PAN. However, admission can still be refused on the basis that it will prejudice the school. I doubt this will make any practical difference.
  • The requirement to give top priority to looked after and previously looked after children has now been extended to include children who were in state care outside England and were adopted from state care. State care in this instance includes being cared for by a religious organisation or some other care provider whose purpose is to benefit society. This change applies to 2022 admissions so existing published admission arrangements must be amended to comply.
  • The current Code makes it clear that schools cannot prioritise based on practical or financial help parents give to the school or any associated organisation. The new Code clarifies that this includes donations, paid work or voluntary activity that supports or benefits the school, associated organisations or employees either directly or through work in the community.
  • When measuring distance, the selection of a "nodal point" from which distance will be measured must be made on reasonable grounds and clearly explained.
  • A clarification has been added explaining that the requirement to notify parents of the outcome of selection tests before the closing date for applications does not extend to banding tests.
  • Determination of the admission arrangements must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the governors/trust at which this occurs.
  • The admission arrangements must be published on the school's or LA's website by 15th March.
  • A school cannot give priority to someone just because they have completed a Supplementary Information Form. So, if it is clear from the information submitted to the LA that the child falls into a particular admissions category, they must be placed in that category even if no SIF has been submitted. I doubt this will make much practical difference - most SIFs are to record attendance at church and have to be signed by the priest/minister, so you won't get priority on faith grounds without that.
  • It has now been clarified that, where a school is its own admission authority, the committee that decides whether to admit children can meet virtually.
  • A footnote informs readers that most applications for summer born children to be admitted out of their normal age group will come from parents of children born in late summer or prematurely. I have no idea why they felt it necessary to add this statement. It does not alter anything.
  • The arrangements for children of UK service personnel and crown servants have been clarified. Previously the Code suggested that a unit postal address or quartering area address was needed. It is now clear that an application must be processed even if the parents don't have an intended address. If the parents can provide some evidence of an intended address, that can be used for admissions purposes. There is no longer any requirement for a unit or quartering address, although parents can still ask for that to be used.
  • The LA's co-ordinated admissions scheme must now cover late applications, which are defined as those made before the start of the school year but too late for an offer to be made on national offer day (this definition is not new but, worryingly, the LGO recently got it wrong, accepting an LA's argument that an application made in May was an in-year application).
  • Several paragraphs have been added covering in-year applications. The only real change here is that LAs and admission authorities are required to publish on their website information as to how in-year applications can be made. I think most, if not all, LAs already do this. It also clarifies that in-year applications must be determined using the school's current admission criteria.
  • Parents should be informed of the outcome of an in-year application in writing within 10 school days and must be informed within 15 school days. For grammar schools, the clock starts running when the child takes the entry test. If the application is successful, the child must be admitted as soon as possible
  • When dealing with in-year applications for a year other than the normal year of entry, a school with a high proportion of pupils with challenging behaviour or pupils who have been permanently excluded can refuse admission if it has good reason to believe the child may display challenging behaviour. Previously they could only refuse pupils who had been permanently excluded from two or more schools.
  • There are a number of tweaks around Fair Access Protocols of which the most significant is that, whereas the Code used to list 7 categories of children that must be included and left it open to LAs to extend this list, the new Code lists 13 categories but makes it clear that these are the only categories that can be included.
  • The deadline for LAs to produce their annual report on admissions has been moved from 30th June to 31st October.

That pretty much covers it. If anyone has any questions I will be glad to answer them if I can.

OP posts:
titchy · 20/07/2021 22:12

Thanks prh. Does this mean that Stockport now won't be able to put late applicants to the back of the waiting list even if they are in the highest criteria?

Floppythedog · 20/07/2021 22:27

Thanks for this.

In regards to the PAN for secondary schools.

For massively oversubscribed schools, because the PAN only applies to Y7, does that mean they have to accept a Y8 into the school regardless of how many children they already have on roll?
Or could you technically put an in-year application in after the start of term in September and you would get a Y7 place after a couple of weeks?

Aroundtheworldin80moves · 20/07/2021 22:31

Does this mean schools can no longer have a 'children of staff' category?

prh47bridge · 20/07/2021 22:31

@titchy

Thanks prh. Does this mean that Stockport now won't be able to put late applicants to the back of the waiting list even if they are in the highest criteria?
Unfortunately no. I think the Adjudicator got this one wrong but their decision turned on the fact that there is no ban on them having a specific admissions category for late applicants. It seems to me that drives a coach and horses through paragraph 2.15 but, unless the government makes a suitable amendment or someone takes Stockport to judicial review and wins, Stockport will continue punishing people with their approach. They seem to genuinely believe that what they are doing is fair.
OP posts:
prh47bridge · 20/07/2021 22:34

@Floppythedog

Thanks for this.

In regards to the PAN for secondary schools.

For massively oversubscribed schools, because the PAN only applies to Y7, does that mean they have to accept a Y8 into the school regardless of how many children they already have on roll?
Or could you technically put an in-year application in after the start of term in September and you would get a Y7 place after a couple of weeks?

No, it doesn't. They can still argue that admitting an additional pupil will cause prejudice. And no, you can't put an in-year application in after the start of term and get a Y7 place as PAN definitely applies throughout Y7.
OP posts:
prh47bridge · 20/07/2021 22:37

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

Does this mean schools can no longer have a 'children of staff' category?
No, that hasn't changed. I have seen a write up that says the "children of staff" category has become more restrictive but that is not true. The only change is the addition of a clause saying that admission authorities must specify how priority for children of staff will be applied, e.g. which groups of staff it will apply to.
OP posts:
awishes · 20/07/2021 22:41

Thank you, very helpful.

TeenMinusTests · 21/07/2021 07:52

Thank you. Very interesting.
I am glad they have included children adopted from state care elsewhere. It really is a tiny number, and their needs are just as great as children adopted from within the UK. It always seemed a bit mean spirited to not include them.

... a school with a high proportion of pupils with challenging behaviour or pupils who have been permanently excluded can refuse admission if it has good reason to believe the child may display challenging behaviour. Previously they could only refuse pupils who had been permanently excluded from two or more schools.

Do they define high proportion, or is it worded so a school can just argue that 1 more would be too many?

Coronateachingagain · 21/07/2021 21:45

Thank you very helpful!

AOwlAOwlAOwl · 21/07/2021 22:01

Thank you @prh47bridge

In regards to this section:

The current Code makes it clear that schools cannot prioritise based on practical or financial help parents give to the school or any associated organisation. The new Code clarifies that this includes donations, paid work or voluntary activity that supports or benefits the school, associated organisations or employees either directly or through work in the community

Does this mean that employees of the school can no longer be given priority?

AOwlAOwlAOwl · 21/07/2021 22:03

Sorry - I've just seen you've already answered that!

Councilworker · 21/07/2021 22:04

I think the changes are good although I do wish there was a requirement for LAs to coordinate all In Year Admissions. Some areas don't oversee it and it's much harder to identify CME kids as a result.
I also wish they would clarify the summerborn arrangements and just make a bloody decision in it. Nick Gibbs letter was in 2015 and still not resolved. The LGO guidance helped a lot in clarifying what should be considered but it's still a pain for heads, parents and the admission authority to have to go through.

Lougle · 21/07/2021 22:12

Thanks prh, great summary.

prh47bridge · 21/07/2021 23:24

@AOwlAOwlAOwl

Thank you *@prh47bridge*

In regards to this section:

The current Code makes it clear that schools cannot prioritise based on practical or financial help parents give to the school or any associated organisation. The new Code clarifies that this includes donations, paid work or voluntary activity that supports or benefits the school, associated organisations or employees either directly or through work in the community

Does this mean that employees of the school can no longer be given priority?

No, staff can still be given priority.
OP posts:
prh47bridge · 21/07/2021 23:26

@TeenMinusTests

Thank you. Very interesting. I am glad they have included children adopted from state care elsewhere. It really is a tiny number, and their needs are just as great as children adopted from within the UK. It always seemed a bit mean spirited to not include them.

... a school with a high proportion of pupils with challenging behaviour or pupils who have been permanently excluded can refuse admission if it has good reason to believe the child may display challenging behaviour. Previously they could only refuse pupils who had been permanently excluded from two or more schools.

Do they define high proportion, or is it worded so a school can just argue that 1 more would be too many?

It is defined as a high proportion compared to other local schools. So if local schools have, say, 5% of pupils with challenging behaviour, a school with only 3% of such pupils could not use this to refuse admission.
OP posts:
prh47bridge · 21/07/2021 23:26

@AOwlAOwlAOwl

Sorry - I've just seen you've already answered that!
And I've just seen that you've just seen that Grin
OP posts:
10brokengreenbottles · 22/07/2021 10:41

Thanks.

I'm concerned this could disadvantage pupils with SEN. Is the level of challenging behaviour defined? Is there anything to stop schools using this as a way of picking and choosing which pupils to admit based on things other than their challenging behaviour?

For example, a pupil (male, academically struggling, single parent working class family who won't be able to pay the voluntary contribution) applies, the school reject the application based on challenging behaviour. Then another pupil (female, academic high achiever, middle class two parent family who is willing to make the voluntary contribution and more) applies with the same level of challenging behaviour but is accepted.

prh47bridge · 22/07/2021 11:05

@10brokengreenbottles

Thanks.

I'm concerned this could disadvantage pupils with SEN. Is the level of challenging behaviour defined? Is there anything to stop schools using this as a way of picking and choosing which pupils to admit based on things other than their challenging behaviour?

For example, a pupil (male, academically struggling, single parent working class family who won't be able to pay the voluntary contribution) applies, the school reject the application based on challenging behaviour. Then another pupil (female, academic high achiever, middle class two parent family who is willing to make the voluntary contribution and more) applies with the same level of challenging behaviour but is accepted.

No, the level of challenging behaviour is not defined. If a school takes advantage of this to refuse admission and the parents appeal, it will be up to the appeal panel to decide whether the school's decision is justified. Schools cannot use this provision to refuse admission to a looked after or previously looked after child or a child with an EHCP naming the school.

The main thing that is likely to stop schools behaving in the way you describe is that they can only refuse admission if they have a higher proportion of pupils with challenging behaviour than other local schools. By definition, most schools won't be in this situation.

On balance I am against this particular change, but I can understand why it has been made. It gives schools a way of ensuring they don't become the dumping ground for all the problem pupils.

OP posts:
mpsw · 22/07/2021 11:40

What are the 13 categories covered by the FAP?

I'm wondering specifically if the link to the Military Covenant still stands, and am generally nosey about the others!

prh47bridge · 22/07/2021 13:36

The old code doesn't mention the military covenant directly. It comes in indirectly in the provisions for children of UK service personnel and the fact that such children are excepted for infant class size regulations if they are admitted outside the normal admissions round (which is not changing). None of the categories mentioned in the Fair Access Protocol section of the old code is related to the military covenant.

The categories of children covered by the FAP going forward are:

  1. Children subject to a Child in Need Plan or Child Protection Plan or who have had one of these in the previous 12 months
  1. Children living in a refuge or similar accommodation intended for victims of domestic abuse and their children
  1. Children from the criminal justice system
  1. Children in alternative provision or who have been permanently excluded who are being reintegrated into mainstream education
  1. SEND children who do not have an EHCP and children with medical conditions (that one strikes me as a bit vague - does that mean that my child's asthma entitles them to be considered under the FAP?)
  1. Children who are carers
  1. Homeless children
  1. Children in formal kinship care arrangements
  1. Children of, or who are, Gypsies, Roma, Travellers, refugees, and
asylum seekers
  1. Children who have been refused a place due to challenging behaviour by a school with a high proportion of such pupils

  2. Children for whom a place has not been sought due to exceptional circumstances.

  3. Children who have been out of school for 4 or more weeks where there are no places available within a reasonable distance from home (unless a suitable place has been offered and rejected)

  4. Previously looked after children where the LA has been unable to secure a place promptly

For all categories, the FAP can only be used when they are unable to get a place through the usual in-year admissions process.

Hope this helps.

OP posts:
10brokengreenbottles · 22/07/2021 14:02

I appreciate you taking the time to respond prh.

I do hope it is not abused.

10brokengreenbottles · 23/07/2021 19:35

Prh, another question if you don't mind. How does the removal of PAN for in years admissions work with ICS regulations?

For example, with a PAN of 15, and a Y1/2 composite class. 14 in Y1 and 15 in Y2. Could a Y2 applicant be admitted or would potential future prejudice still be a problem?

Lougle · 23/07/2021 20:31

Removal of PAN doesn't affect ICS regulations. They still couldn't admit if there was future prejudice.

prh47bridge · 23/07/2021 20:57

Lougle is correct. If this has any effect at all, it might make it a little easier for schools to admit beyond PAN in KS2 where they are no longer constrained by ICS regulations. It cannot make any difference to Reception or KS1 as they are still constrained by ICS.

OP posts:
10brokengreenbottles · 23/07/2021 21:41

Thanks both. I didn't know if where you said PAN no longer applies to in year admissions meant the school could admit the Y2 child then refuse to admit a potential future Y1 pupil. Or whether the changes only allowed admission above PAN but not the ability to refuse if below, and therefore future prejudice would still be a problem.