Secondary appeal - not offered place from feeder school

[JimJamJim]

Trying to work out if we have the basis for an appeal.

Child attends a primary on the same site as secondary.
Primary school has been designated as a feeder school for the secondary - in practice this means children from the primary are a priority group within the oversubscription criteria (after SEN and siblings).

The published rationale for having feeder school status is talks about things like facilitating curriculum alignment between the schools and primary school children "knowing they can join [secondary] in Y7". At various points we have received written communication from the primary saying things like children will have an "automatic" place at the secondary.

Easing the adjustment between primary and secondary was a key reason we chose the primary, child has always assumed they would go there.

We haven't been offered a place! Currently no reason to believe the admissions criteria haven't been applied correctly (though we are looking into it).

There's various other secondary reasons that the school particularly suits the child in terms of ethos, curriculum etc. But would the simple fact of it being a feeder we were encouraged to assume was a guarantee, and both us and the school preparing the child for that transition, be a case we could argue?

I'm back again, helpful mumsnetters!

Finally got all our paperwork in for the appeal, I think we've made the best case we can.

We've also now received the case from the school. Most of the school's argument is that it's highly disadvantageous for them to go over PAN. But also that they've accepted what they describe as "bulge class" of 20 over PAN, which they're not planning to accommodate as a separate class, but as 33-34 children per class.

I don't know if there's anything we can do to unpick their case. On the one hand it seems very contradictory - arguing that they can't accommodate over PAN, but then saying they're accepting 20 over PAN. But on the other hand 33-34 per class seems at the max end of possible class sizes so that seems hard to argue against?

Also I'm curious as to how accepting over PAN works in practice - I've read somewhere that schools can accept over PAN in this first round but then aren't then under any obligation to take additional children from the waiting list until they fall below PAN. So does this mean that any movement now (within the children in the PAN+20 offered a place) may not result in anything being offered to the waiting list?

"But on the other hand 33-34 per class seems at the max end of possible class sizes so that seems hard to argue against?"

@JimJamJim yes, this is difficult to argue against. Teachers will not like these numbers and may move to schools where they have more reasonable numbers. They may have been forced into this position by a financial deficit, as no school would do it willingly.

"I've read somewhere that schools can accept over PAN in this first round but then aren't then under any obligation to take additional children from the waiting list until they fall below PAN. So does this mean that any movement now (within the children in the PAN+20 offered a place) may not result in anything being offered to the waiting list?"

No, if they informed the council they could take the extra 20, they will need to honour that for subsequent admissions.

It is only when they have been forced over PAN by mandatory extraordinary admissions (e.g. EHCPs, FAP admissions, successful appeals) that they are able to wait until they drop back below PAN before admitting from the waiting list.

Appeal panels cannot force schools to change the way they organise their classes and are generally unwilling to push classes beyond 34, so yes, this does make it more difficult. It doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it harder.

I disagree a little with the previous poster regarding what happens re the waiting list. Under the Admissions Code paragraphs 1.4 and 1.5, a school can admit over PAN without increasing PAN. They can, therefore, manage the number back down to PAN by not admitting from the waiting list. However, in general that will only happen once the school is in control of its own waiting list, which is usually from the start of term in September. Up to then, the LA is likely to keep them at the increased number.

"However, in general that will only happen once the school is in control of its own waiting list, which is usually from the start of term in September. Up to then, the LA is likely to keep them at the increased number."

@prh47bridge this assumes the school manages its own in-year admissions. In my experience, most don't, but of course it may vary in other areas.

@JimJamJim do you know if this school manages its own in-year admissions?

Sigh. I thought it would make it harder.

I know it's not how it works because it all follows the admissions criteria, but it just seems so unfair I could scream: they've created an extra 20 spaces and they don't benefit the children from their own on-site feeder school who have been squeezed out. In fact it just makes it much harder for us.

Honestly they said they were creating an "all through" education and that we'd automatically be able to move up and then because they did really well on one test they've basically been kicked out. It's just...arrgh!!!

I agree with @prh47bridge- voluntary over offering does not commit to this school to sticking to that. If they want, They can not offer until it gets down to under PAN again.

In my area, this happens frequently; a handful of schools will over offer to help the local authority ensure every child gets an offer on offer Day. This is because we are an area in which a very high percentage of secondary school children go to private school but many also apply for a state school place; So there is normally quite a dropout between after day and first day in September.

So schools are happy to over offer because historically they have normally dropped back to somewhere much nearer PAN. The vast majority of secondary schools in my area run their own waiting lists.

If they are still at an accepted number of 20 over, that is going to make the appeal harder as few panels would want to increase form sizes even more. If a few of them have dropped out but not being replaced that is more interesting because some panels may take the approach that the school was at least somewhat prepared to take the full 20. (They may not of course!)

The school will argue however that it always expected to drop back, and admitting any more would still cause significant detriment though.

@all5ofyou - I'm not sure if they manage in-year applications, though for various reasons moving in-year would be the very last thing we'd want to do so I'm not sure we'd even consider it.

That's interesting @PatriciaHolm - this is what I was wondering about how it worked: i.e. whether PAN+20 is a true reflection of where they expect to end up in September or a somewhat artificial number because they expect movement and they won't fill the "empty" spaces.

That might also make more sense of the apparent contradiction in the school's case that they are arguing about the detriment of managing numbers over PAN whilst also having accepted PAN+20

I agree with others that if the over-offer was at the LA's request, rather than because the school wanted it, they might not need to drop below PAN. (My personal experience has been with a school that over-offered for financial reasons and intended to permanently increase the PAN the following year, which is different).

Potential question: how were these extra spaces allocated to the bands?

I've already checked this as the information was provided in the appeals pack - they were allocated in line with the same distribution that would have been used for the PAN. In fact it very marginally advantages the outer bands (as the number of spaces in these bands is increased by 1 which is a little bit more than they proportionally should be increased, as you can't add half a place!).

So alas no argument to be found for us there.

Sorry I've not quite understood you here.

It sounds like the over-offer was requested by the LA in this case. I'm not sure what you mean by "might not need to drop below PAN"? Do you mean that they are likely to continue to re-fill those additional spaces from the waiting list?

I'm not at all optimistic about us getting a place via the the waiting list at all, but I'm curious about the argument that @PatriciaHolm mentions that it's possible the school don't actually expect they'll have 20 additional pupils come September, which might help our case somewhat.

Good question.

Apologies, I meant that they might not need to justify waiting to drop below PAN before re-offering.

It might depend on whether it’s an academy or not but in our case the school was ~15 over PAN and we wouldn’t get a space until they were under PAN. In the end we got in on another category.

Hi @JimJamJim best of luck with your appeal. I am sure you know this already but if it’s the school I named and then had deleted, you’re not the only one in your position - I’d heard there were a couple of others too. Not sure if this helps or hinders but letting you know in case.

Thank you! A week to go and I’m feeling nervous about the hearings.

I know the others appealing from the primary, we have been pooling our knowledge!

There is a sibling as well from another primary, I assume they are appealing.

But the appeals are being held over four days so I assume there’s a good few others appealing as well. We shall see!

Another question for the admissions/appeals experts:

I presume places offered due to successful appeals and EHCPs contribute towards PAN? For e.g. if a school offered 150 places, then 5 people turned down the offer and they gained 5 via EHCPs, they're still at PAN/don't need to offer spaces via the waiting list?

I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this argument...something along the lines that given the school is likely to lose a few children to taking up other offers/moving before September, isn't it likely to all even out if they accept a few appeals?

Yes, if they go above PAN for any reason including EHCPs and appeals, they don't have to offer to the waiting list until they are back down to PAN. However, this doesn't help you. The appeal panel is specifically prohibited from taking pupil turnover into account. They cannot admit on the basis that they expect some people not to take up the places they've been offered.

Generally, EHCP places are allocated by March 31st for Secondary Phase transfer, so unless someone has got a new EHCP or they were going to mediation, then EHCP numbers should be known prior to allocation day.

That said, you are right that any EHCP places offered after allocation day would take the school numbers beyond PAN, and admissions authorities could wait until they are below PAN to start offering again. Similarly, every successful appeal makes it harder for the next appellant to argue that the school can take more pupils.

I don't think you'll get anywhere arguing the 'what could happens'. The panel has to consider the school as it stands (bar the case of future prejudice where KS1 PANs of 15 contribute to future classes of 30, for example).

Thanks - I assumed that must be the case but good to have it confirmed.

Hypothetically...given this school has offered 20 places over PAN but could (as per the scenario that @PatriciaHolm outlined where the school over offers in expectation of movement to private/grammar ) drop back down again to PAN - would that count as a material change that would allow for a second appeal?

Dropping down to PAN wouldn't count as a material change in circumstances. However, if they offered 20 over PAN, nobody moved to private/grammar, and they were left with a class of 20 that would normally hold 30, you might be able to argue that it's a material change because there is one more class than expected, which isn't full.

The reality is, if they have accepted 20 over and they are running class sizes of 33-34, I'd be surprised if your appeal would succeed. I'd also think about whether you'd want your child in a class size of potentially 35 students. It's a lot!

OK thank you!

So if we lost our appeal because the school was already at class sizes of 34, but they subsequently dropped back to 30, that makes no difference?

Though to be fair I'm not actually expecting this to happen - it looks like the school did the same/similar things last year, the year before and the year before that and has more or less held on to the pupil numbers.

I'm somewhat baffled to why the school (as an academy that is its own admissions authority) would voluntarily put itself at 34 pupils per class. Presumably the local authority is pushed for places, but there's another school up the road that's historically undersubscribed (starting to fill up to PAN now but has much greater capacity within the school overall vs. the one we are talking about) that's never taken any extra.

I'm somewhat baffled to why the school (as an academy that is its own admissions authority) would voluntarily put itself at 34 pupils per class.

Funding. More pupils = more money.

Income is per child so of they have 4 extra in a class they have 4 x income per child extra for year with very little extra cost as the existing teachers pull in.