Seeking advice on 'objection to school admission arrangement'

[Hodel]

(Sorry this is very long!)

I'm hoping one of the very helpful and skilled experts on here could provide some tips.

I'm filling out the form for the Schools Adjudicator to object to my neighbouring LA's new admission policy (Sept 2013). They are introducing catchment areas. My road is included, but my house number is not. I live a few roads from the border so their schools are very accessible.

The LA did not publish criteria it used to determine which houses in my LA would be included/excluded. In fact, it did not even published a detailed map that shows catchment roads in my LA, only in theirs. I had to call to ask. I was told my house is not included because there is another school in my LA that is marginally nearer to my house.

So, assuming that was their criteria, I would like to raise an objection on the following grounds:

1. The nearest community school to my address, with an open admissions policy (i.e. non-faith based), is in their LA.

1. The 'nearer' school in my LA is a church one. It prioritises all applications by faith. It has 30 places and 8 admissions priorities: #1 Care, #2-6 Church based, #7 Other Faiths, #8 Distance. Looking back as far as I can, it has never accepted students in the distance category. (So, someone miles away who can demonstrate faith is prioritised over someone like me who is 360 metres away). This does not allow for equal access.

1. The LA usually uses walking distance rather than 'as the crow flies' for admissions. Yet, for catchment allocation they used as the crow flies to determine nearest school. Had they used walking distance, their school is closer to my house.

These are the grounds for my objections. Does it sound reasonable?

The reason I am keen to object is that there is a major lack of school places in my area. We live in an admissions "black hole" for our own LA schools. Whereas our roads have been within the intake area of the school across the council border. The alternative schools in my LA with places are literally miles away. (Should I include this in my objections?)

Any feedback would be most appreciated.

I think it is perfectly valid argument that the nearest school is the nearest community school not the nearest faith school. However you do need to be sure that you are talking about a faith school that is a voluntary aided school and therefore their own admission authority rather than a voluntary controlled school which is actually a community school for which the LA is the admission authority.
I also think that the LA has to be consistent in their application of distances for admission purposes. I can understand why they used straight line distance because it will have been far easier to work out which is the nearest school but then they need to use the same measurement for the actual admission categories not change back to walking distance.
You frankly have nothing to loose and everything potentially to gain by making these arguments.

Thanks admission! As per usual you are extremely helpful and kind to provide feedback. I really know very little about all this and am just figuring it out as I go.

I did check and yes the school nearest to me is Voluntary Aided, so I understand from your comments that supports my objection.

Wish me luck!

That whole situation beggars belief. I hope you win, I was very impressed with the way the independ adjutacator dealt with Surrey LEA when they were lying to try and shut schools.

I agree with Admission.

Is 'nearest school' going to be part of the LEA's oversubscription criteria or is is only something that they've taken into account in drawing up catchment areas?

Either way, practice in LEAs that use 'nearest school' as an oversubscription criteria is usually (as I understand it, as it's not used in our LEA) the nearest community school. The aim is to give children at least one school at which they have a good chance of getting a place, so it would be illogical to include amongst 'nearest schools' schools that are not community schools, set their own admissions criteria and where the child might stand little or no chance of a place. So, I would certainly argue that it's unreasonable to count a VA school as your nearest school.

I would also argue that the LEA has to choose between walking distance and straight line and then use the same measurement system for both catchment areas and admissions. Most LEAs have moved or are moving over to straight line.

I would certainly go farther in arguing that the LEA has (with your LEA) a duty to do as much as it can to deal with the problem of 'black holes'. If there simply aren't enough school places to give every child a place at their nearest (or reasonably local) school, they at least have to minimise the problem and, by the sound of it, for you they would be making the situation worse.

Is the neighbouring borough Tower Hamlets by any chance?

tethersend well spotted! Yes it's TH.

PanelChair thanks for the helpful information! As far as i can see, nearest school will not be used as oversubscription category, but nearest alternative school will be used as a tie break:

"in the event of oversubscription, priority will be given to the child who lives the furthest walking distance to the nearest alternative school within the catchment area."

I will include mention of the "black hole" situation as well.

I live in TH and DD is due to go to reception in Sept 2013, so am affected.

The 'nearest alternative school' refers only to community schools although I am not sure how they apply this rule for out of borough applications.

I was a great supporter of the catchment system for the reasons tiggy describes above; however, I am very disappointed that they have chosen to go with nearest alternative school instead of random allocation/electronic ballot as a tiebreaker, which was the other option being discussed. That would have ensured a fairer allocation of places, and diversified the schools' intake; something desperately needed in TH.

We are on the border of a catchment, and now stand no chance of getting DD into our nearest community school, which is annoying but just unlucky. However, in reality, this tiebreaker will mean that in 9/10 cases, places are effectively allocated by distance- albeit with even more restrictions! It sounds to me like a logistical nightmare. I wonder how it will affect appeals?

Thanks tiggytape and tethersend - all useful information. There is has been no transparency on how TH are dealing with catchments across council borders. Furthermore, when I asked Hackney Learning Trust about it, they told me that they didn't review or respond during consultation as they didn't feel it was relevant to their residents. And yet, this year they are telling local families with no school offer to contact TH for school places. It's contradictory and slightly bonkers!

Hackney is faced with the same scenario as TH: schools with places and children without offers are miles apart. Unlike TH, Hackney are NOT offering free transport at all. Faced with the choice of nightmare journey to a so-so Hackney school 2-3 miles away, or a so-so school in TH 0.3 miles away, I know which I would prefer!

Interestingly, Hackney will continue to use distance (as crow flies) not catchment for admissions in 2013. So TH children nearer to Hackney schools will have priority over Hackney children slightly further away, (who could likely end up with no school offer at all). But Hackney children will have no access to TH schools. It seems to me there should be reciprocity... but I do understand that you can never please everyone!

FWIW I think the TH plan is a very good one. I wish Hackney would do similar to deal with the ridiculous situation they have (200 children with no school offer!). I just would like my area to be included in the catchment, thus the objection.

Perhaps the situation in the London Boroughs needs to be taken up with the mayor so the boroughs are forced to work collectively to reduce the number of black hole areas.

At our primary school in Surrey (similarly affected with an increasing shortage of spaces) reception class 2012 has 27 of 30 places going to siblings

I hate tie breakers like that ("priority will be given to the child who lives the furthest walking distance to the nearest alternative school within the catchment area"). Whilst it is undoubtedly well intentioned, it can lead to unexpected results.

Interesting update. Today I was told that the criteria for determining whether out of borough houses were included/excluded from catchments was: nearest community school by safest walking distance.

In other words, a completely different criteria than I was told originally.

However, I do not belive this to be true because I was also told that the catchment area includes the other end of my road - and yet those houses are significantly closer by safest (or any possible) walking route to a community school in our LA rather than in theirs. If that criteria had been applied they would not be in catchment.

However, if the criteria I was orginally told was applied: nearest school (community or VA) "as the crow flies", it would make sense for them to be included.

Also, in my original discussion with the LA, they justified their decision to exclude my house based on the fact that the VA school is nearer to my house (in straight line distance), because they said they checked to make sure that the VA school accepts non-faith children. That is completely irrelavent if the criteria is safest walking distance, as it is not the nearest school to me by that measurement.

I have already submitted my objection, but I am thinking about contacting the OSA tomorrow to amend it... to include the fact there has been zero clarity on this criteria (it is not published anywhere) and essentially it sounds like they are making it up as they go along.

Thoughts?

I would place a 2nd objection.

Do you have these 2 sources of criteria in writing?

It is ridiculous that they cannot tell you what criteria was used as the catchment doesn't bear up to what they have said.

If they have changed it at some point that may be a technical point that means the catchment areas can be declared invalid type of thing.