Do academies have to consult on changes to admissions policies?

[Pl242]

The closest secondary school to us and what will likely be our first choice is an academy. A few years ago it set up its own primary school. I think the first year of that school entered year 7 last year. Pupils from that school have priority, not over siblings, but before children by distance.

another local primary school, previously a community/lea school has now joined the trust. For 25/6 secondary transfer they don’t have priority but I’m worried they will do in the future.

the reason for my worry is that the last place offered by distance is fairly small. Where we live in relation to the school we would usually be ok but I’m worried we wouldn’t if this school is given priority as per the other feeder school. Between them they could take up to 60 of the 260 PAN.

I know there’s some really knowledgeable people in this community so asking for insight/advice on how likely it is that they’ll look to give this school priority in admissions and if so do they have to consult on that change and how (ie beyond the trust schools) and on what timescale.

my eldest will start secondary in September 27.

thanks.

Yes, academies need to comply with the national school admissions code, which is available online if you google. It includes rules about consulting on changes to policy.

There is a strict timetable for consultations and the publication of policies. Their September 2025 policy should already be determined and published. If they want to consult on changes for September 2026 then they will need to start that consultation before late December and the policy needs to be formally determined by the end of February.

There are rules about who needs to be notified about the consultation, including local primary school parents. However, often consultations aren't as well publicised as they should be. In our LA, secondary schools send the info to primary heads, and rely on them to share the information with their parents - but they usually don't.

Thanks. Really helpful re timescales and the need to be proactive not to miss any consultations.

Are these consultations meaningful or just a box ticking exercise?

Obviously I’m motivated to get my child into the right school for them but if they go ahead with putting this school in as a feeder I think it will be really unfair on the local community. When my child started primary, this school was not popular and last distance offered was miles away. So you can see that this would mean kids from afar with other secondary schools near them could get a place whilst those of us less than 0.5 miles away could be denied a place.

But I worry that the response to this could just be tough s*it.

You will be able to find the consultations on your LA website. I googled ‘consultation, admissions, Lancashire’ for these details locally.
Information gives a link to explain the policy around free schools and academies.
This will also show you the process that has to be followed.

https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/council/strategies-policies-plans/children-education-and-families/school-admissions/proposed-2025-26-admission-policies-for-consultation/

Are these consultations meaningful or just a box ticking exercise?

In my experience, just a box ticking exercise - the decision will already have been made before consultation. If you disagree with any changes you can make a formal objection to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator who will then consider whether the changes comply with the admissions code.

"Are these consultations meaningful or just a box ticking exercise?"

They are not a referendum. The school will propose changes that they want, and read any responses that come in. That will give them a temperature check, but they are not obliged to backtrack so long as the proposed changes are in line with the code.

The LA's view, and the views of local school heads, will carry some weight. Although academies are their own admissions authority they usually like to maintain good relationships.

Can you find your LA's school place planning strategy online? That may give you a clue as to how they are likely to feel about it. Will the change help them to fulfill their duty to make sure all local children get get a secondary school place, or make it more difficult, or neutral?

Thanks everyone. Will take a look at the resources mentioned.

re overall school places there probably are enough but this will funnel some schools into the most popular leaving the rest of us with the rest. The area also straddles two leas so I don’t know if that makes things more complicated or not re lea views.

does Anyone know if there are any parameters by which a secondary school can launch a new feeder into its admissions policy? Ie can they just add in a feeder school straight in or does it need to be phased/certain amount of notice given etc?

the current feeder was a new school so at least everyone had a lot of notice re what impact that might have on secondary transfer. But if they just put in a second feeder it really blindsides current primary parents. I mean I could have got my kid into this school easily if I had known it would become a feeder school. But now we may be shut out. It seems unfair but my feelings aside are schools permitted to do this?

"Anyone know if there are any parameters by which a secondary school can launch a new feeder into its admissions policy?"

There's a section on it in the code. They just have to rationalise the link. Being part of the same trust will be sufficient rationale.

The neighbouring LA's view will need to be taken into account too.

The LAs may be pleased to see more 'good' families steered towards less popular schools, as it can help to improve those schools' reputations. (But LA's also like to maintain their preference stats - the ones they publish on offer day to say how many families got their first preference).

Just a thought - it may be worth you writing to your local ward councillor about your concerns. If they write to the school to "seek reassurances" about future intentions, the response from the school will either be decisive or on the fence. That will give you a clue.

Academies are a law unto themselves and should never have existed. They are run by boards of the unelected and unaccountable, who are empire builders rather than educators. The whole system is a disaster.

This is not true. You've gone down a political rabbit hole with that view.

The boards have the same sort of people who used to run LA schools (including many former heads), plus people who bring other skills into the mix. They are highly regulated and completely accountable.

the current feeder was a new school so at least everyone had a lot of notice re what impact that might have on secondary transfer. But if they just put in a second feeder it really blindsides current primary parents. I mean I could have got my kid into this school easily if I had known it would become a feeder school. But now we may be shut out. It seems unfair but my feelings aside are schools permitted to do this?

If they follow the timetable above in terms of consultation, yes. They don't need to give any more notice than that I'm afraid.

If the one primary in the Trust is a feeder, from experience I would imagine the other one will become so as well if both are local.

Is there any mileage in contacting secondary school direct and asking? Ie note that x primary school is now in the trust, do you have plans to make them a feeder school in your admissions policy?

Re my last post I mean at least trying to find out as much in advance will help re understanding our likely options.

Yes, you can do that. I suggested prodding your councillor to ask because they are likely to publicise the answer and that will help to raise the stakes. But if you want to find out 'on the quiet' so you can strategically move your child to a different primary before others catch on, then write yourself. Address it to the secondary school Head and/or Chair of the Board and/or Chair of the Local Governing Body.

Hi OP,
I think it's always worth asking. You sound like the sort of thoughtful and helpful parent headteachers don't meet very often!
If your enquiry landed in my email I would do my utmost to help. I'm not a headteacher thank god, but I do get stuff like this delegated to me sometimes.
Be aware though that secondary schools change their rules, length of day, uniform and character sometimes very quickly. The schools you like now may not be the same when you want to use them.

Schools / LAs publish data on admissions, so you can compare the admissions policy for recent years with school offers. Remember to keep an eye on the Published Admission Number (PAN) as an increase / decrease could make a big change as will any changes in the surrounding schools, such as PAN changes, Ofsted reports / School Report Card, changes in attainment, changes to their oversubscription criteria or even school closures (fairly rare at secondary phase).

You don’t have to wait until nearer the time, if you think the admissions policy is flawed on the next consultation / when next approved, you can raise the matter with the adjudicator. For example, if you think siblings are getting in from miles away / out of catchment if that applies and children living very near are excluded, you could suggest siblings in catchment have priority, then in catchment children, then siblings out of catchment, then other applicants. The school adjudicator publishes their decisions on the website so you can get an idea of the issues people raise and how the decisions are reached.

Oh gosh I really don't agree. The boards at the top of the academy pyramid re totally unaccountable to anyone .... and the appointments of these individuals are not based on any sort of proper procedure. Who do you believe they are accountable to?
The expansionist aims of MATs are not related to educational quality but to empire building.

I agree with you. We call them ‘Mates MATS’.

"you can raise the matter with the adjudicator. For example, if you think siblings are getting in from miles away / out of catchment if that applies and children living very near are excluded, you could suggest siblings in catchment have priority, then in catchment children, then siblings out of catchment, then other applicants."

This misrepresents the role of the adjudicator. They decide whether a policy is in line with the code. They don't make judgements on whether alternative suggestions would be better.

The code does say that policies should be fair and reasonable, but there is nothing (yet) in the OP's posts to suggest that a linked primary policy would be unfair (i.e. discriminatory against specific demographic groups) or unreasonable (i.e. cannot be logically justified).

"Who do you believe they [academies] are accountable to?"

Mischance, they are accountable to the DfE via their funding agreements, which mandate that they adhere to a wide range of statutory legislation, just like maintained schools do.

They are also accountable to Ofsted.

They are not accountable to their local communities or to the pupils and parents. Clearly there are edicts about sructural/legal matters but when it comes to providing a real service to the pupils and the local area they are a law unto themselves. I have seen awful "jobs for the boys" behaviour from academy managers resulting in bullying of staff and an exodus of teachers. On the ground they can do what they like.
The takeover of small brilliant rural primaries by MAT empires has destroyed autonomy and responsiveness to community needs in many places, and destroyed staff morale. These MATs are not breaking any rules ... their negative effects are simply the nature of the beast where they are unaccountable to the community needs. I have seen what happens to small schools ... MATs come hunting like dogs sniffing round a pitch... it is unedifying to watch.

Agree

"They are not accountable to their local communities or to the pupils and parents."

Of course they are! I've seen schools handed over to poor academy trusts in my area (in the early days of the academy programme). Parents voted with their feet and avoided those schools, the schools developed a bad rep on social media, teachers avoided working there, they got inadequate Ofsted reports, which triggered an intervention. The funding agreement was torn up, the schools were handed to a much better academy trust, and now they are Good in the eyes of Ofsted and have regained the confidence of local parents. If they had been run by a poor LA (yes, they do exist!) there would have been no mechanism for the DfE to step in. The school leadership team would have been dependent on their LA, many of which have been inadequate in the past. If an LA's education service receives a poor Ofsted report it impacts all of the schools in their area, and parents have less ability to vote with their feet. (Unfortunately, voting with their ballot paper is not as effective).

And I have seen some appalling things going on - truly appalling - I am glad that your experiences have been better.
The reason that LEAs are so poor is because they have been virtually phased out - that is not their fault. Schools have lost the local support that once existed and are left floundering around touting for support services that were once a given from the LA.
There is nothing about the MATs system that is child-based.