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.

Updating my original thread. My fears have been realised and the school in question has issued a 6 week consultation on revised admissions code which grants a second primary school feeder status from 2027 intake.

Previous replies here were useful re the process. As far I can tell the school is abiding by the right process and timescales and the rationale for the change - granting feeder status to a school in its Trust - is sufficient grounds etc. So I wearily assume it's going to go ahead. My own child will have much less of a chance of getting a place here now.

That said the proposal WILL reduce the catchment area. It will prioritise children living further away over those living closer. It will shut out children from local primaries that are not in the Trust and who have historically attended.

I am going to try and oppose this, even though I imagine the odds of success are slim. I'd be grateful for any pointers on tactics that could work, arguments that could hold sway, whether things like engaging local councillors, press, initiating petitions etc will have an impact?

I have a strong logical argument in opposition to this proposal, but I fear it's a done deal. I don't want to waste energy on a losing battle yet I also think if we don't try, we're doing our children and the local community a disservice.

Any practical suggestions are gratefully received.

@Pl242 I have had objections upheld in the past, and have also helped to successfully defend my own school's admissions policy against objections, so I have some experience from both sides.

"whether things like engaging local councillors, press, initiating petitions etc will have an impact"

The adjudicator is not interested in petitions or politics, only in upholding the letter of the national Schools Admissions Code, i.e. in this case whether the change is "fair" and "reasonable".

The change is likely to be seen as reasonable given the trust status.

Fairness is interpreted as whether there is a disproportionate impact on a particular social group, so you would need to use facts and figures to identify a specific socio-demographic group (e.g. people in social housing, or people of no faith, or ethnic minorities) and demonstrate how they will be impacted.

The adjudicator will ask your local authority for their opinion, and it may have some influence but only if it is backed up with evidence. Have you written to your local councillors to find out their opinion? If there are plenty of other schools that your children can reasonably go to then you might not have a leg to stand on (apologies if you have covered this up thread - I haven't re-read it to remind myself).

We have something similar happening with our local secondary, it became an academy couple of years ago with a primary school in the next town, now it is proposing that kids at that school get priority over in catchment kids from schools in our town. As far as I know this wasn’t mentioned when they became an academy.

The reaction has been understandable, as the school is already oversubscribed to the extent that not all kids in catchment get a place, and the town in question has two closer secondary schools than ours.

I fundamentally don’t think that any pupils (except priority groups) should ever be offered a place above kids in catchment, but I suspect that this will go ahead despite objections. It won’t affect me, as my kids are both at the secondary school, but I understand the anger about goalposts shifting.

Thanks @harkinback, I think I'm one stage before the one you are describing perhaps? They have published a admissions code for consultation, so not yet confirmed it will go ahead, after which I think is the point you can appeal it?

So I'm hoping to raise concerns that will make them change their mind and not go through with it.

I think the argument hinges on the "reasonable" point. Yes, ok the trust point works in their favour. But this school has only just joined the trust and now getting swift feeder status and they are proposing priority to children who live up to a mile away, when the last distance offered is usually about 0.5 miles. So my view is that this is not reasonable as it is making it harding for local families to attend it as their local community school as they are choosing to prioritise children a mile away (this is an urban/city school so 1 mile is significant in the context of the usual catchment).

Thanks @SlipperyLizard. Have those in opposition made any headway with the decision? Anything useful that has caused them to pause and change views? FWIW I agree with you entirely on that principle.

Hi @Pl242 the consultation has only just launched, so I think it is likely at the same stage as you are.

In all honesty I don’t think there is any hope of the new policy not going ahead. I’m not familiar with this area of law, but other posters (and you) have mentioned it being “reasonable”. I would take that to mean what is known as “wednesbury” reasonableness - ie it will only be overturned if it is so irrational that no reasonable decision maker could have taken it. That’s such a wide margin for decision makers that I doubt any challenge would succeed.

It does seem that the system allows trusts to do what they want and what works for them even if it doesn’t make sense for the local area as a whole. There doesn’t seem to be anyone taking an overall view of what is best to serve the educational needs of an area.

The LA take "an overall view of what is best to serve the educational needs of an area." They can't dictate to the trust (at least not until the current Labour Government make changes that allow them to), but it's possible that the trust has already consulted with them and knows they will be supportive. You won't know unless you ask your local councillors.

Last year a secondary near here consulted on changing their admissions criteria to prioritise two of their four feeder schools over the others - the two in their Trust. There was a huge public objection from parents at the other schools, councillors wrote letters, two MPs got involved, two LAs. To the MAT'S credit they dropped the suggestion so it's not a done deal.

Find out what your schools think, and get organised with other parents, write to councillors etc. Find out what your LA thinks, anything that displaces local pupils may be a concern to them too.

Are there any spaces at the current feeder school or the planned to be feeder school in year 6. If so could you move your child and play the system? If you really want your child to go to this secondary school.

i think the planned admissions change will go through. It already did for feeder school 1 and may be hard to challenge for proposed feeder school 2.

Still ploughing on with this. Doing our best to try and oppose and stop this. On a point of procedure does someone know the answer to this question please? So the school in question is running a consultation on proposed changes to its admissions process. The consultation closes before Xmas. I know that they have to determine their admissions policy by end of Feb and then publish the admissions criteria (whether that's confirming the new policy or that they're sticking with the old one) by mid March.

My question is whether they have to publish anything re the consultation; i.e. we had 72 responses, 12 in favour and 60 in opposition? Assume I can FOI it but wonder if they need to as part of the process. Thanks.

No, they don't have to.

Remember that a consultation isn't a referendum - the number of responses may show strength of feeling from an upset group of people but that doesn't have to bounce the school into a change of policy. There will also be many people who will be advantaged by the change, and they're much less likely to respond to the consultation than those that feel aggrieved. It is just a fact that admissions policies can't please everyone.

Thanks @harkinback I understand the wider points you make. I just wanted to understand the process/what is required. It’s quite an opaque process to
understand for many. For example local councillor told me they’d have to publish the consultation responses but clearly they don’t understand it either! I imagine I can still FOI it though?

He's only right in the sense that School Governance minutes are public documents. Some schools publish their minutes as a matter of course but for others you have to ask for them - that shouldn't need an FOI, but they may not include all the detail you want.

It will be either the Academy Trust or their Local Governing Body (or both collectively) that consider the responses and make the decision - you can work out who the decision makers are by reading the Scheme of Delegation which should be on the Governance page of the school and/or trust website.

It's worth adding, cynically from experience, that the councillor will be interested in the numbers only because he wants to guage which side of the argument has the weight of public opinion, i.e. would making noise about the issue win or lose him votes.

Just to say that I contributed to a successful challenge to a proposed change in admissions arrangements a few years ago.

Data is your friend in proving that the proposed change is not fair.

We used:

• A detailed socioeconomic map of he area, showing that the new proposed catchment (in you case would be the area round the new feeder school) included new socio-economically advantaged areas and specifically excluded disadvantaged areas.
• Data on the Pupil Premium and SEN percentages from schools serving newly included areas (in your case the new feeder school) vs the existing areas, showing that the new arrangements would disproportionately discriminate against PP and SEN children
• Comparison between new and old proposed areas, showing that a group of (generally advantaged) families further from the school would now have a choice between two of the best schools in town while a group of disadvantaged families closer to the school would only be able to access the further away, much less good school.

The school withdrew the proposal.

Edited to add: prh47 was very helpful in advising on the process and the legalities of the situation. As someone who contributed to the consultation, I did get a summary of the submissions - can’t remember whether that was from the school, the local councillor or the MP (the councillor for the school’s area was ‘for’ the new arrangement; the one for the area removed from the new catchment was very active in the ‘against’. I had no personal interest other than I dislike schools trying to select ‘easier’ pupils by stealth, so my argument was purely on ‘objective fairness’.

There’s no real difference between the demographic being prioritised and the one being displaced. They’re just doing it to boost numbers at the proposed feeder. They’ve taken them on in their trust and the primary is massively under roll in ks1 so they know giving it feeder will make parents flock over for inyear places where there are some and make it massively popular for prospective parents in reception.

Does it give additional realistic / guaranteed school choice to those living near new feeder, leaving a ‘black hole’ elsewhere, likely to be outside all catchments based on historical figures and likely changes?