Primary school admission under medical criteria

[Faz2015]

Hi I need some advise Plz. My daughter has a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. She is currently attending a school nursery, which is not the closest to my home. I applied to keep her at the same school( reception) u set the medical criteria or the LA admission criteria( medical is second on the criteria). I supported her application with letter from paediatrician, gp, speech and Lang therapist, health visitors, and family support workers. All supporting my application to keep her at that school for continuity.

They refused her a place, staying that we live too far and it was parental choice to put her tgere, so they won't take medical evidence into consideration.

I asked the admissions to review my application again and gave more information as to why my daughter needs to stay there. They wrote to all the 6 professionals asking if they think it is necessary for her to stay on. They all said it will be detrimental to her development if she is taken out and put into another school. Admission team has again disregard the doctors advise. Now they want proof as to why I put her there in the first pkace( we were looking to relocate at that time.)

I am appealing but I don't understand what the admission team is doing. As They won't take consultant and professional opinion into account but want proof of us trying to buy a house?

I don't know what to do.. As I'm worried we might not win on appeal cod of infant class size.pleasr advise

I think they're saying in effect that you chose to take the risk that she might not be able to stay on at the same school when you chose that nursery, because it wasn't near to you and it's an over-subscribed and popular school.

That presupposes, of course, that you knew at the time you chose the nursery all the details of her condition, which I suspect is not the case. I think they're wrong anyway; however you got to where you are now, the fact is that they have strong medical evidence moving her would be detrimental to her, and they can't ignore that. However, if you can find proof that you were house hunting in the area at the relevant time that might simplify matters.

when all of this started, I honestly told admissions team that I had put her in as we thought we would move. the thing that annoys me now is that, instead of looking at the facts at hand the letters from the doctors and others, they are hung up on the fact as to why I had put her in there to begin with. they recently wrote to all the doctors again, and all of them stated again that my dd needs to stay on.. instead of giving any consideration to that, asked me for proof the purchase and then they would consider my application again. they are refusing to tell me under what capacity was the medical evidence disreagarded and what are the specific reasons to why they don't think that my dd requires a place. all I need is for the evidence to be considered fairly under their admissions criteria. I feel that instead of looking at the case objectively, they are trying to do everything to undermine this application, as if they have a personal grudge against us.

tiggytape.. would you know how are the panel members chosen? are they fully independent of the LA and how do they review the cases? also for infant class size, I know that the school took on 30+1 last year.. do I just talk about this in the appeal or do I need to show more evidence regarding the school's capacity?

many thanks!

Tightrope... Thank you for the clarification x

Sorry.. That was a typo... It's tiggytape and not tightrope loolz

Hi sorry for asking so many questions... About the infant class size.. I've only found out that tge school took on 30+1 in only two occasions, one being last year... Will this information be enough or do I need to find out more about the school's capacity? Thanks!

That is a blind alley. The fact that they took more than 30 in previous years is irrelevant in an infant class size case. Similarly arguments about the school's capacity are not going to get you anywhere. There are limited grounds under which you can win an infant class size appeal. Your case appears to meet one of them in that it seems admissions have not been administered correctly. Don't muddy the waters by bringing in other issues that won't help you win your case. You need the panel to focus on the way they have dealt with your application for priority on medical grounds. Nothing else matters.

I was under the impression that tge appeal is two parts.. First to prove that the criteria wasn't followed and then to prove that tge school had capacity to take on extra children???

Faz,
As the appeal is an infant class size appeal, the only circumstances that you can win are by proving that the LA made a mistake in not allowing you to be in the medical criteria or that the decision the LA made was unreasonable. Unreasonable is actually in law a very high threshold and is in effect, totally perverse decision. I have yet to see such a decision so it is all about proving the LA is wrong and has go their process wrong.
I have suggested on PM some questions that need to be asked. The panel will all be completely independent of the school and LA and make their own decisions but which way the panel makes their decision is all about why they did not accept the medical evidence you submitted.

thank you for the clarification prh47brigdge and admission...

hi everyone...

Today I recieved, the documents which the LA has submitted for the appeal hearing for my DD. i was really surprised as they had no information about why they refused her under medical grounds. All they provided was information about admission criteria, the school PAN, information about school capacity, distance between the school and our house, the distance between our house and school offered, and the letters that they sent out to me and to the doctors/ social professionals.

i think they will be arguing that they cant take on my DD based on infant class size. However, i did manage to get a letter from the school head, that they took on one extra child last year to make it 30+1. However, no mention of that from the LA.

so no im not sure how to counter argue the infant class size..also should i submitt all paper trails between them and us..?

and to add a twist to all of this.. i have just found out that one of the panel members is the chair of governer at the school where my dd has been offered a place!!!

any thoughts and advise will be very appreciated!!

You don't need to argue against infant class size. The LA are trying to pretend that is the issue, but it isn't. The issue is that they made a mistake and failed to apply the criteria correctly - they didn't consider your DD under the medical criteria, despite having a huge amount of evidence that it applied. Please don't get sidetracked.
Your case is: you applied for your DD under criteria 2. You supplied evidence that she met criteria 2. I believe the LA have admitted that she met this criteria, yet they failed to apply it. Therefore she was wrongly deprived of a place and should immediately be given a place as an excepted child (meaning the class size rules don't apply).

And to add, definitely submit all relevant parts of the paper trail, particularly the letter you quoted from earlier. I think the key parts to focus on are:

"As advised in the letter dated the 16 April, The Admissions Committee did not dispute Dds medical/psychological condition;"
"The Admissions Committee do not dispute the benefits that dd would receive by having continuity into full time school from nursery. "

And "The docs/ professional have stated that she needes to remain in this school as taking her out would be detrimental to her"

So, basically the LA are saying they disagree with all the medical professionals. You need to sho w them that the evidence is clear- she needs that school and they considered her under the wrong criteria.

thank you.. yes i have submitted all the letters from professionals and their email to me... yes they are basically saying that they arent taking the medical advise into consideration. I was really hoping that i would get to see thier arguments as to why they didnt consider the professional letters...but again it was all about distant and nothing about her medical needs.. but i am hoping that is good news and we can win the appeal.

You do not need to counter argue the infant class size. It is an infant class size appeal. That is a fact. Nothing you can say will change that. And the fact they took on an additional child last year is completely irrelevant. The LA is quite right not to mention it.

One of the ways of winning an infant class size appeal is to show that admissions have not been administered correctly. That is exactly what you are arguing. They have rejected your medical evidence on entirely spurious grounds. Stay focussed on that. Nothing else matters.

Just curious here....have your medical professionals actually named the school that you want? If they have then surely you have a very strong case. But I'm just wondering if they have actually named it or if they've referred more generally to LittleFaz needing to remain in the same setting for continuity, but with no name?

We attempted to use the medical/social rule to get DS1 into the primary school of our choice, and even though our paed entirely agreed with us that our catchment school was unsuitable and put this in writing for us, he said that he was unable to name our chosen school specifically as LittleEeyore didn't at that time have a Statement. He said that the only way of naming a specific school was on a Statement (or now it would be an EHCP).

Our LA informed us in writing that there was nothing exceptional about DS's medical or social circumstances, and implied that they rarely if ever admit children under this rule. I asked them under the Freedom of Information Act (get me!) to tell me how many children had applied and been admitted under this rule over the past few years - and they refused!

Good luck OP and I really do hope you win your appeal.

I think that although you have all this supporting evidence that this school would be better, you don't have evidence that it's the only school that can meet her needs.

As a PP said. If your daughter had a wheelchair and this was the only school with accessible facilities - then fair enough.

But although continuity would be good for your daughter, her needs could also be met in your nearest school. This isn't the only school that deals with children with ASD.

You could have ten letters from professionals saying 'I believe this school offers continuity and is therefore the best school for X'. But what you need is supporting evidence stating why this is the only school that would meet her needs. I'm guessing that your supporting letters don't actually state this.

I wish you lots of luck with your appeal, but I'm not sure it's as clear a win as others are encouraging you to believe.

Frizzy her need IS for continuity. It's hard to imagine exactly how another school can support that need. It's not about supporting her ASD - it's about supporting her continuity.

But continuity isn't a medical need, is it?

The child will eventually go to a different secondary school. She will also be with a different class/ room/ teacher in September anyway.

Certainly in my school, the nursery is a separate unit and there is no continuity at all from nursery to reception - apart from the fact that some of the same children are in the class.

The school probably feel, not that this should have any bearing on their decision, that if OP was so worried about continuity, she would have sent her DD to a nursery school she knew she had a chance of getting a Reception place in.

As I said, I really hope you win the appeal for your DD's sake. However, I don't think it's as definite a win as others have said.

I have said to Faz, that I am somewhat in FrizzyPigs camp here and am not sure that it is a slam dunk win.
I do fully accept that the LA seem to be ignoring the whole of the evidence base that Faz has submitted and to then not even mention it in their appeal documentation seems to me to be a major blunder on their behalf. The panel will have to consider the medical situation as that is the basis of Faz's case. The admission authority is therefore apparently arguing that we ignored (or possibly took note and then rejected) the medical evidence base and so they only considered the application for a place on a much lower category and were not therefore offered a place. It is an infant class size case because of the pupil numbers in the year and always was going to be an infant class size case.
To me the appeal hinges on what the admission authority say at the appeal but to have not even mentioned the medical submissions in their written document seems a large over-sight or totally arrogance.
One thing that has not been mentioned so far is the Chair of Governors of the school you have been allocated a place at. You need to go back to the admission authority and say that you cannot accept this person on the panel as they have a clear conflict of interest.

Eeyor... The school has been named... As she us currently attending there in nursery. My issue is that its fine if the LA doesn't think that my dd however, how did they come about this decision? Did they take other medical opinion. Or is this solely on their discrestion? If it is how can they disregard letters from consultants and gps stating that of she doesn't recieve continuity then it's deterimental( consultant used the word and so did gp) to her overall well being? How can a panel of ppl disregard professional opinion without valid reasons. Will the LA take responsibility if her behaviour deteriorates as the docs outlined? Because as I see it... The medical professionals have told LA that my dd will be subjected to anxiety and distress and they are knowingly inflicting IT on her... And without any valid reason.

Admission I have asked for another panel member.. Although they were a bit reluctant to change him.. I stood my ground and I think they will let me know about a possible replacement Tom..:-)) I have pmed you.