Sibling priority screwing over local kids

[SJ1987]

We missed out on getting in to our (extremely popular) local primary school. It’s an extremely good school, multiple ‘outstanding’ oftsteds, amazing pastoral/SEN provision. We live 0.38 miles and the max distance this year is 0.32 miles. The area we live in isn’t desirable for the amazing school. It would be considered rough by a lot of people.

Following a FOI request only 8/30 places went to children on distance criteria. 19 places went to siblings. Siblings are prioritised over distance.

We’ve submitted a further FOI request to clarify average and furthest sibling distance. But I know for a fact that kids attend the school from many miles away - often maybe having lived near the school before moving to ‘better’ places.

Are we able to challenge this? It seems grossly unfair that local kids are missing out to siblings who live in different towns. Is there a distance at which people are supposed to move schools if they move house? Or is this just the game when it comes to the best schools?

It’s been like this forever where I live. Lots of single form entry primary schools in the city centre. As you say, families get their first kid in and then move out to the burbs for a bigger house/garden. Then the families who replace them can’t get into the school.

Even from an environmental point of view it’s not great, families driving when local families could walk there.

Not sure there is anything you can do - I think there might be some mileage if they move to the next town but not if it’s only a couple of miles.

Do you have another local school you fit into the distance criteria for?

The sibling rule seems unfair from the outside, but placing siblings at multiple schools would be a nightmare for parents to try to navigate, especially if in opposite directions! It would be unfair to force an older child to move schools just to avoid the sibling rule too (assuming they could swap at will). It's a bit of a conundrum!

It won't help your children, but many areas have Priority Admissions Areas and the Admissions order is PA siblings, other PA, then out of PA siblings.

It’s very normal for siblings to have a higher priority than those in catchment. Many of those siblings will live near to the school.

100% should siblings be prioritised imo. I can see why it’s frustrating for you, but imagine your 2nd/3rd child being denied a place at their siblings school, and having multiple children in multiple primary’s. My DD’s school was catholic and very oversubscribed, people were getting their children baptised just to get into the school. The baptised children came before siblings. I know the year my dd left, at least 4 families had to leave the school as younger siblings didn’t get in and they couldn’t physically get their children to separate schools

The school could decide to admit siblings only within say 2 miles, then distance, if they wanted to.
Or have a defined priority admission area, and do siblings in catchment, others in catchment, siblings out of catchment, others.

You could only challenge for future years though, your time to challenge 24-25 was a couple of years ago.

To clarify, I’m not saying siblings shouldn’t be prioritised. Local siblings absolutely should. But in a school that regularly has a distance criteria of 0.3-0.4 miles, when families are moving 2+ miles away but clinging on to their primary place, this just seems really unfair to future kids.

Siblings out of the area shouldn’t be prioritised. If you move out of the area, it’s a risk that you take to either move your child or potentially juggle two different schools.

Children in the local area should be the priority.

Siblings absolutely need to be prioritised, you can't logistically have children at 2 primary schools easily. What if a family are in temporary accommodation, why should those children have more disruption? It's something you just have to factor in to your school choices and research, and manage expectations accordingly

This is exactly it. We are the city limits. Beyond us is suburbia. They move out for the better high schools (our local ones aren’t great) but cling on to the primary for their 3 or 4 kids. The amount of cars every morning for a 1 form entry school with a distance criteria of 0.3 miles is obscene.

Siblings should definitely have priority, sorry.

Having had to deal with trying to be at two primary schools twice a day is extremely difficult (My son was moved to a SEN school, so we had this situation).

Could you lobby to have the school size increased as it's obviously very successful?

You can try and get the school to change their admissions criteria but it’s not going to help you now. All you can do is make sure that you’re on the waiting list.

probably should be

looked after/SEN
in catchment siblings
in cachment
out of catchment siblings
out of catchment

Where I live priority goes to siblings in catchment, then catchment, then siblings out of catchment-unless the firstchild wasn't offered their catchment school, siblings qualify then as in catchment siblings.
That's about as fair as you can make it though.

Our local schools do siblings in catchment, non- siblings in catchment, siblings outside catchment, non siblings outside catchment

That’s just life though. I think they’ve made it as fair as possible, but they can’t control people’s actions afree admission. Is it less or more fair for a child in year 5 or 6 who has been there from the beginning, to have to leave as the parents have moved an extra mile away, and now their sibling has been turned down? I absolutely hate that the majority of good schools by me admit pupils by their religion, I don’t find it fair at all. I had to put my children through a year of tutoring to pass the 11 plus exam to get into the only other good school, which is a grammar. No doubt loads of parents will think my actions were unfair, as I could afford a tutor to get my children in, when they couldn’t. Complaining won’t change your circumstances, and I don’t doubt for a second that you’d be taking advantage of the sibling rule if you were in that situation instead

The area I live catchment area comes first. Siblings in catchment are higher than just catchment, then siblings out of catchment and then out of catchment. I think the fact it’s very rural and if the catchment school is first choice you’ve a right to free transport. So if you don’t get a place the LA have to sort you out transport. It might be worth looking and seeing if you’re eligible for school transport

Thanks all for your thoughts. The issue is out LA doesn’t have formal catchments. It’s purely distance. Theoretically the ‘catchment’ could be 100 metres or 10 miles depending on the year.

Wont help us this year but I’ll get in touch with my MP. Seems so unfair that local kids (who are poorer) are being forced out by people moving 4 miles down the road after reception.

Siblings should absolutely get priority at primary school, otherwise families wouldn't be able to move for five years plus (over a decade for some with more than two DC) regardless of their circumstances including job changes, marriage breakdowns, redundancies etc. Multiple drop offs, pickups and holiday calendars are completely impractical at primary level.

They briefly removed sibling priority in a friend's area (not UK) and given birthday is one of the key criteria there her three children born five years apart nearly ended up in three different schools.

That really sucks though OP, I hope you get a place from the waiting list, or end up very happy with the school you end up.

If they have applied the listed criteria correctly you have no grounds for appeal as far as I understand.

Ours have always been

1. LAC, EHCP etc

2 siblings in catchment 3 children in catchment 4 siblings out of catchment 5 children out of catchment

Of course siblings need to get priority.

You can't expect families to split kids over different schools cause someone else lives a few metres closer to the school.

That does seem unfair. Most of the primary schools here have looked after children, then siblings in catchment, then catchment children, then siblings out of catchment, then distance as their criteria, which I think is much more reasonable. I think it works well as siblings are given some priority, but parents are aware that if they move out of catchment, any children not yet at the school won’t have the same priority.

The policy is there to prevent children having their education disrupted if their parents have to change house for some reason. And obviously to allow mums to get their children to school in time.

The reasons for the policy are completely reasonable so appealing isn't going to work.

A local school (with primary and secondary) has moved to this after it got ridiculous with the number of people getting one child in and then moving miles away. Annoyingly having one child there allowed both younger and older siblings in (into the secondary bit of the school). It got silly in the end so they have now sorted it out.

Remember what you wish for op! You may end up with a brilliant school in the next town, then when your next children come along are you going to want siblings outside the town de-prioritised after local first borns?