URGENT HELP PLEASE: Challenging council re removal of 'bulge' class

[RestingFebruaryFace]

Sorry for lengthy message, I don't want to drip feed.

Our local secondary catchment area has shrunk this year by over 40% from over 800m to just over 500m. This has left a huge amount of families without any of their choices, and they have instead been allocated either a single sex school or a faith school which is an hour's walk away.

There are a number of reasons behind this - this is the last high birth year and there were a huge number of sibling places allocated this year, meaning very few places left based on catchment. In addition, the school sold off land and two huge housing developments have been built adjacent to the school meaning lots of families have moved in to the area, squeezing others out.

This has left a number of families who have missed out completely devastated not to be getting their local school, which is a real 'community' school. Congestion in our town is already horrific so kids travelling to the faith school will only exacerbate this (there are no public transport options that work).

Apart from the general disappointment, families are angry because for the last 2 years the school added a 'bulge' class to go up from 7 form entry to 8 form entry. The expectation was they would do the same again this year, given the high birth rate and the effect of the new housing developments, but it has become clear only on allocation day that this did not happen. The school have issued a statement saying they wanted to add an 8th form again and for this to become permanent, and they even offered to contribute to the cost but the Council turned them down. This seems to be on the basis that there are places available elsewhere in the town (the faith school and the single sex school), and maybe this is a cheaper option for the Council than adding the bulge class, though I don't pretend to know much about the funding.

Parents are trying urgently to challenge the Council on this, and given the wealth of experience on here I was hoping someone may have some insight.

eg, are there any possible grounds for challenging the decision - should the council have consulted parents about not having a bulge class, or at least made this clear at the application stage so parents could plan accordingly? I'm not hopeful but we need to send something as soon as possible and I'm not sure we'll have time to research the legal detail for the initial complaint.

Thank you if you are able to assist at all.

It's usually very clear how many places are available during the application process. Did they give the numbers for 8 form entry or 7 form entry at that point?

I don't think they have to consult with parents - just inform them. The number of places is the number of places and that's that.

Thanks@reallyworriedjobhunter , for the last 3 years the PAN for the school has remained 210, but until this year the school added a bulge class so accepted 240. This was clear only on allocation day- the official number was always 210.

That said I believe the school consulted its own parents about adding a bulge class for 2 years. But I’m not sure and the parents affected don’t have kids already at the school, so everyone had hoped/assumed they would run another bulge class or it would be made clear, but in retrospect that seems naive. If only the school or Council could have made the position clear at the time of application people could have planned accordingly but they didn’t. I agree there is probably no need to consult, especially not for a temporary extra class.

There is no requirement to consult on either having or not having a bulge class - it's not a permanent reduction in PAN, as PAN hasn't changed in the first place.

Given the published admissions arrangements state there are 210 spaces, so the argument will be there should have been no expectation there would be more than this.

The refusal to allow an increase in PAN will, as you speculate, almost certainly be because there are spaces in other local schools. Birth rates do on average decline from this Y7 onwards, so the LA will be very reluctant to create another 30 permanent spaces if it's forecasts show oversupply already.

Is this a maintained school or an academy? I assume the former.

One way I have seen this resolved in other cases is by a large number of parents appealing, and the school putting up no defence, so all appellants are admitted. If the school is a maintained school this is less likely though, as the appeal defence would be created by the LA not the school itself, as the LA remains the admissions authority.

If there are spaces elsewhere then it isn't economical for the council to put spending into this school to increase the PAN. It's potentially new classrooms etc to build while there are spaces elsewhere.

We've got a similar situation locally where at one point we had 2 oversubscribed schools, and one undersubscribed. They will not increase the PAN of the other two until the undersubscribed one is at capacity too. Why should they? They have a school there which could take 6 form entry and is currently operating half that.

Unless the council have in writing misled you into thinking there would definitely be a bulge class, then I can't imagine you have a leg to stand on. A bulge class is just that, a one off. If they'd been allowed to increase their PAN, then you'd have known about it. If the council doesn't want them to increase their PAN then they're not going to want to continue to do bulge classes, even if the current school building can hold it, which it may well not be able to.

(PS - the appeal route would make the school super unpopular with the other schools though, as they would be taking pupils and thus funding from them. So it's far from a given they would take this route. I have seen it a few times but under different specific circumstances)

It isn't really a bulge is t, as much as a sustained increase.

It’s both/either - the school could have done a third temporary bulge (apparently you can do a maximum of 3 years before you have to make it permanent) but have said they are keen to make it permanent.

Thanks for the other comments above, I understand the Council has arguments for doing what it has done and appreciate we are clutching at straws.

Apparently there Is an obligation to consult when you are proposing to increase the PAN but not if you want to decrease it. Which is rather galling given the huge impact here of the reduction.

*Apparently there Is an obligation to consult when you are proposing to increase the PAN but not if you want to decrease it. Which is rather galling given the huge impact here of the reduction."

That's not correct - all admission authorities must consult on reductions in PAN. However, PAN never changed here, so there is no requirement to consult.

Academies don't need to consult to increase PAN, and can over offer if they want, but do to reduce it. Maintained schools governing bodies need to be consulted by the LA, as the LA is the admissions authority, on PAN, but in reality there is not a lot they can do if they aren't happy.

But as I said, PAN hasn't been changed here.

Whilst I sympathise and understand your arguments about traffic, this presumably comes down to cost. The LA doesn't want to spend more money when they have available places. Also I suspect the fact the school wants it as a permanent increase is part of the issue. By increasing it for a third year, the school could argue there is good reason for it to continue and be made permanent.

It does sound frustrating that the increase of housing has lead to an imbalance of places between different parts of the area, and meant people who would usually get a place haven't, making life more difficult.

I'm pretty sure you are taking about Beaumont in St Albans. I completely understand it's a blow for the families concerned but whilst there are empty seats at schools within the city it doesn't make sense for the council to keep adding places at the most fought after schools.

Beaumont's increase in PAN to 240 was always flagged as a 2 year temporary measure in 2022 - it says so on the school's admission page.

I wish parents would pour their energies into lobbying for and improving the funding and facilities to make every school desirable. This issue will never resolve otherwise.

The bulge year is for when there won't be enough places, if places have been found for all the students, it's not needed. I doubt you'll get anywhere TBH.

I'm also not convinced about the school saying they'd fund it. School funding is per pupil, if the school has the pupils they'll get the funding. We're they going to send it back and if so, they're going to spend money that was designated for other children on this bulge class?

I came here to say exactly the same - sounds like Beaumont. If it's any consolation, there will be a huge amount of movement during the 2 rounds of continued interest, and verulam has a new head coming that people are saying is very highly regarded.

But ultimately this is how st Albans has always been - crazy tight catchment areas for a few schools. Whole swathes of the city don't get allocated anything even in the city.

An hours walk is 4 miles a completely normal and actually quite a short commute to high school. I don't see the issue at all.

There are issues of accomodation, congestion and travel. Two bulge years mean an extra 64 pupils in the building. If the school does not have spare classrooms, this is unsustainable. There are also issues of corridor crowding and canteen space. Extra pupils means extra traffic in the area. They've accommodated two bulge years and can't stretch to a third.

The two new housing estates were prob bought by parents with y5/6s. So in a year or two they will all be in Beaumont along with siblings and the main issue will pass (as I guess they will then not move until child has left).

all the schools are good locally but transport is a pain - stags is great but not easy to get to from Fleetville. I hope people were wise and put down Samuel Ryder and Verulam as they are nearer to most of Fleetville and highfield really

Sorry not the point of thread but on what planet is 4 miles normal to walk to school?!?

I do understand the the arguments in your first points and as I say I know we are clutching at straws.

As to the last point, the main issue is that people don’t want a faith school which is right the far side of town, or a single sex school. Lobbying to improve funding or facilities wont address that.

A lot of people have asked if there is any chance the single sex school will go co-ed as they’d be much happier if it were. Parents have been lobbying for that for a while but the current head and governors weren’t interested.

The school have published a statement on their website which says they offered to contribute to the funding but the council turned them down.

The school is midway through a massive expansion/building programme and has confirmed they have the room and the facilities and they are keen to expand permanently.

I think the expansion has finished apart from the hall. Not aware of any other development plans now

A lot of people have asked if there is any chance the single sex school will go co-ed as they’d be much happier if it were.

I think again you're clutching at straws. There are areas of the country where the single sex schools are the most popular. Ditto faith schools, even if they're far out can be very popular. The local faith secondaries people do all sorts to get in, not because they're faith, but because they're reputation is very good. They're literally miles further than the (pretty good) more local secondaries, but people still want them.

I suspect there's an aspect that people don't want to say "I want that school because it's more academic/nicer people" and think that sounds snobby so they say the thing that they can focus on, but won't be changed.

I can 100% assure you that if either the single sex or faith schools suddenly had a makeover, got wonderful facilities and amazing results (and got an outstanding Ofsted-even while people are saying they pay no attention to it) then you'd find Nomorebulgeclass High School would suddenly drop in popularity and people were complaining that the other schools weren't taking a bulge class on to suit their dc.

It's not about any of those things, you see, it's entirely about the very natural desire to get their child into the school they see as best.

I totally get why op is hacked off, most would be too. Irrespective of the reasons (and the council saying oh well, never mind, plenty of other school places at the other 2 schools, REALLY doesn't help, does it? You feel like screaming, I don't want the other 2 schools, irrespective of his fab they are, I want this one), it just doesn't help, does it?

My dc lived 5 minutes away.

When l was teaching in a massive comp, the only people with that sort of distance were from outside catchment.

Are there no non faith schools for the sex that can't go to the single sex school? How far would those children need to travel? I wouldn't see a faith school as an option personally.

The school is part of the governments school rebuilding programme, so will be getting significant investment and major rebuilding over the next few years.

At present that is predicated on 500 sixth formers and 7 form entry, so if there is a chance they will need to expand, it makes much more sense to build that in to the plans now.

However, falling rolls suggest the local area doesn't need that, so the local council have refused the requirement to increase PAN.