Primary PAN & Admissions without appeals

[FitzLinson]

Hi All,

Firstly thanks for all the information on this board, it has been super useful. I'll outline our situation below and hope that someone could point us in the right direction.

Our DD is due to start reception in September.

We applied through the admissions authority and were awarded our third preference school, we're not mega happy but it won't be the end of the world if she has to go there.

My wife and I both work in education so have a fairly robust understanding of what goes one, suffice to say that we won't be appealing our first preference as it is an ICSP case. We won't appeal because it is practically unwinnable and that I know that classes of 30 are enough and the quality of the education could be compromised for all. We are so disappointed, but, knew there was a risk with putting this first.

The second preference school is different however. They have an advertised PAN of 45 but 2 FTE over two reception classes. The same structure exists in Y1 and Y2, later in in school it moves to Y5, Y5/6, Y6, so 1.5 form entry.

The reason for not getting a place is Prejudice, I am guessing that they mean that because the number of FTE per year reduces from 2 to 1.5 later on in the school they wouldn't be able to maintain ratios once the classes start to move through the school.

Last year 8 people appealed. All 8 appeals were withdrawn before they were heard. All 8 children (or another 8 children, no way of knowing if they were the ones who appealed) were admitted and the reception class was 52. (26 per FTE)

I have spoken to admissions appeals who have said they can't explain it as it didn't go to appeal. I have requested a call back from the admission people to quiz them on this.

My question is - what questions should I be asking them?

Previous years they have admitted an extra one or two at the second stage and refused others.

Am I right in thinking that they have now set a precedent?

The school has a Net capacity of 350 and is currently at around 330, their pan is 90% of max - 315. Over the past 5 years the max has been 336 and minimum 324.

I am minded to focus our appeal on the size of the school, the teaching capacity and the fact they have admitted more to try and prove at stage 1 that they have sufficient extra capacity before listing the reasons why our daughter should be the child that balances the classes - currently a reception class of 22 and one of 23. We want her to be the 23 child in class 1.

Why are we appealing?

If we appeal and win it means that our daughter can settle in reception with some friends in a school walkable from home, opposed to starting a new school with no one she knows a short drive. (it is also a RC school and we aren't RC, We have sort of come to terms with this) The fourth choice is a school which is currently at war with it's head. I know several people who work there and their advice it to avoid it!

Thank you in anticipation of any help. It'll be greatly received.

I know a school with a very similar structure. The school themselves are usually more than happy to accept additional local children into reception. But the PAN stays the same so parents have to ask to appeal at which point the school says they will not object.
Obviously i can't say how it works at this particular school, but I'd speak to the school to find out more about their current view on admitting additional pupils.

It is called future class size prejudice but the appeal could be upheld if they don't move to split year group classes in Yr1 or Yr2. I would appeal. The school might be waiting to see how many appeals it gets before deciding whether to have split year groups. If the number of appeals mean that they can fund two classes then tgey may offer places to all if them. This would mean the appeals would be withdrawn. A school can admit over PAN if circumstances allow.

They have not set a precedent per se, appeals refer to the circumstances for those particular admissions, so that's not the language to use.

The thing to check is whether in yrs 1 and 2, (each with PAN of 45, so 90 pupils) there are three teachers, or if (as I read it) there are 4.

If the former, it will be an ICS appeal (because of the future prejudice to numbers in yrs 1&2). If the latter, then it is more winnable. You can point out that the school has cooed in the recent past with class sizes of the size they would become if your DC was admitted (weakens there case for saying that there would be prejudice to the school from having a bigger cohort). But you also need to show why your DD would benefit from being at that school rather than any other local one.

Now everyone wants a school within walking distance, and transport issues aren't going to form a winning argument for an appeal. Nor is staying with friends (so many children go to different schools that that is considered normal). So unless you have supporting evidence form a HCP or social worker saying that your DD's need to remain with current friends is much greater than typical for that age, that, like transport, is more of a footnote of other reason why it's good.

You are appealing for this school, not against your current allocation. So what does the school you want offer that isn't offered by others, and why is that of particular benefit to your DD?

There is clearly information that you need to establish as to whether the school are running with 3 classes in year 1 and 2 (which would be the normal procedure with a PAN of 45) or whether the school are running with 4 classes, which in theory are 22 and 23 strong.
If it is the former then it is an infant class size case based on future prejudice and you have little chance of being successful at appeal. If it is however the latter then you have more chance at appeal. However the area where the panel will then be looking very carefully at is the junior end of the school. By letting extra pupils above the 45 PAN it is very easy to end up with classes of 35 or so in the junior classes if they are running with 3 classes across years 5 and 6. Most panels tend not to want to get to that situation and therefore will possibly not be happy to admit, even though the classes are at 22 and 23 in the infant year groups.
I would certainly not raise the potential issue at appeal, let the panel work it out for themselves as to where they are putting the weight of the argument as to whether to admit or not admit.
The situation for last year where they admitted 8 over PAN is either because the school as the admission authority made a mistake in some way in the allocation of places and did the decent thing and admitted the pupils that could have been affected.
The other alternative is that the school made a conscious decision to admit over PAN. That may have been simply because the school needed the funds that the extra pupils bring in or it may have been because of some other reason that is known to them. If it is the first alternative then they corrected a mistake and there is no precedent. If however it is the latter then it does set some level of precedent. Panels are however told not to take precedent into account in making a decision. So rather than suggest the decision last year has set a precedent you should be saying that the school have proved by the fact that they have admitted an extra 8 that they can run with 8 extra pupils and they can therefore not prove prejudice to efficient and effective education. In the end it comes down to the same thing but it is making the panel consider carefully whether the school can prove prejudice to effective education.

Thank you for your comments so far.

The LA have made the distinction between ICSP and Prejudice on our offer letter. The first preference was refused on ICSP and the second preference reason was Prejudice.

The school has 15 FTE teachers, so that is roughly two per year and a head. Assuming PPA and management time is covered my TAs.

As it currently stands there are two classes in reception, year 1 and year 2. Then it moves to a 1.5 form with a Y3, Y3/4, Y4, Y5, Y5/6, Y6.

I imagine that their concern is that if they admit over the pan when the class reaches juniors they may have some groups exceeding the notional 1:30 ratio. This happened last year, it was also the first admission round under a new head - don't know if that makes a difference.

As we are only seeking one space I think the chances of there being movement and children leaving the school will be quite high but hard to prove conclusively .

Another question, who sets the PAN? Is it the LA or the school? Could it be that the new head wants to grow the school and the LA don't want this, as it could compromise the viability of neighbouring schools. They are, like all schools, set to lose funding and the students admitted last year would have covered much of the short fall.

Thank you again.

The 1;30 ratio does not matter in KS2. Appeal panels won't want to push it too high but most will be happy with going a little over 30.

Appeal panels cannot take into account the possibility of children leaving the school when deciding the appeal. They have to assume that no-one will leave and that any vacant places will be taken up.

PAN is set by the admission authority. For community schools and VC schools that is the LA. For other types of school (VA, academy, free school, foundation school) that is the school itself.

I have now had a quick chat with admissions and tried to tease out the reason why more were admitted. She suggested 'from memory rather than absolute fact' that the school decided to let in all those who had siblings at the school rather than make them appeal.

Does this sound right? Or does it sound like a load of cobblers?!

It sounds peculiar, but if there was a group of DC who should have been in a sibling category (if there was one) but who were wrongly placed in a lower priority group (thus depriving them of places they would otherwise have been offered), then it does make sense. Error by admission authority is appeal-winning even under ICS.

You need to keep a paper trail of all exchanges you have with the school/LA/etc. So do email the person you spoke to and state what you understood from the conversation and ask them to confirm if your understanding is correct.

It is possible that they had a very large sibling cohort in the year and under those circumstances most schools would try and take them if they could.
However if the school has siblings as an admission criteria above catchment zone and distance then that is a lot of siblings (53 to be exact). I think that my suspicion would be that the reason the pupils were admitted was not just the number of siblings but was something else like the school made a mistake and did not include these 8 siblings in the admission criteria order at the right place.
You might find out when the admission authority sends you their case but more likely it is a question that will have to be asked at appeal to tease an answer out of them.

The school can make a decision to admit more children than their PAN. In my school's case, it was because we were changing the structure of the classes for the next 3 years, which means that we can take 5 additional children in Reception for this year. We may or may not take extra children next year.

The LA are happy for us to do this as long as it doesn't cost them any money with regard to classroom extensions etc.

Sorry - I meant to say that we are taking the extra children because it is a high birth year in our area and all these children have put us down as first choice.

Thank you, can I ask one more question?

Will the admissions authority respond to our case or will they provide a generic reason as to why the school allocated the first 45 places. For instance if we make certain claims in our appeal letter will they respond to them or will their opportunity to do this be at the hearing?

Thanks again

if you are stating that an error has been made relating to the offers already made, then yes that should be put to the admissions authority in advance, on the general principle that they can only investigate and remedy errors if the potential error is made known to them.

Their written case is likely to be the same for all appellants, although they may tailor it if they know you are making claims that need a response. If there are a number of appeals they may hold a single hearing covering stage 1 (where the authority presents its case) for all appeals, in which case matters that only affect you are unlikely to be brought up by the authority.

As it is an RC school also ask for information as to what the percentage of non-Catholics are.

When my son joined reception we successfully appealed on the basis that the guidelines were that to receive state funding the school had to take 15% non-Catholic children. We worked out that they could take one extra child and be within the 15%. We were offered the place the day before the appeal hearing!

I am not aware of any such guideline in England. New free schools must admit at least 50% of pupils without reference to faith but there is no restriction on existing faith schools.

It was in 1996 in Berkshire so I guess they must have changed the rules regarding admission % since then. Sorry.