Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council considered her application for delayed entry to reception for her summer born daughter, Y. Mrs X said the Council failed to follow the guidance and applied the wrong tests. We find fault with the Council’s decision making. We recommend the Council apologise to Mrs X and reconsider her application.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council considered her application for delayed entry to reception for Y. Mrs X says the Council has failed to properly understand the guidance, has applied the wrong tests, and has not explained why it would be in Y’s best interests to bypass reception and go straight into year one. Mrs X says this has caused distress and upset to her and Y.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke to Mrs X about her complaint and considered information she provided. I also considered information received from the Council.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

School Admissions Code

6. The School Admissions Code (‘the Code’) requires school admission authorities to provide for the admission of all children in the September following their fourth birthday. Parents can decide not to send their child to school until they reach compulsory school age which is the term following their fifth birthday.
7. The Code also allows parents to seek a place for their child outside of their normal age group. This includes situations where the parents of a summer-born child (born between 1 April and 31 August) choose not to send their child to school until the September following their fifth birthday. The parents can ask the admissions authority to admit their child to reception rather than year one.
8. The Code states, ‘Admission authorities must make decisions on the basis of the circumstances of each case and in the best interests of the child concerned. This will include taking account of the parents’ view; information about the child’s academic, social and emotional development; where relevant, their medical history and the views of a medical professional; whether they have previously been educated outside of their normal age group; and whether they may naturally have fallen into a lower age group if it were not for being born prematurely. They must also take into account the views of the head teacher at the school concerned.’
9. When informing a parent of their decision, admission authorities must set out clearly the reasons for their decision.

Non-statutory guidance

10. Non-statutory guidance is intended to support councils in decision making. Admission authorities should follow the advice given in non-statutory guidance or explain their reasons for not doing so.
11. To help admission authorities deal with requests for summer born children to be educated out of their normal year group, the Department for Education has published non-statutory guidance. This is in the document “Admission of summer born children: advice for local authorities and school admission authorities” (‘the guidance’).
12. The guidance states that admission authorities will be required to take account of the child’s individual needs and abilities and to consider whether these can best be met in reception or year one. This should involve taking account of the potential impact on the child of being admitted to year one without first having completed the reception year. The head teacher’s views are an important part of this consideration.
13. The guidance says that in general, children should be educated in their normal age group and they should only be educated out of their usual age group in very limited circumstances. However, it goes on to say that parental requests for summer-born children are different from any other request for admission out of the usual age group. Parents of summer-born children must be able to make a decision about whether their child is ready to go to school before compulsory school age confident that, if they decide not to send them to school until age five, the decision about the year group they should be admitted to at that point will be made in the child’s best interests.

What happened

14. Y is a summer born child. While living in a different area, Mrs X decided she wanted Y to delay entry to primary school and start in reception in September 2023, after she had reached compulsory school age. The Council whose area Mrs X lived in at that time agreed to this.
15. Before Y started school, Mrs X moved into this Council’s area and submitted school applications.
16. The Council wrote to Mrs X in February 2023 explaining she had applied for Y to start reception in September but, going by her birth date, she would actually be due to start year one. The Council asked if the previous borough’s Council had agreed a delayed entry for her.
17. Mrs X responded to the Council the same day to explain Y had an agreed delayed entry due to being summer born and provided a copy of the previous Council’s decision letter. Mrs X asked the Council to consider her application for delayed entry.
18. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 22 March. It explained it had considered her delayed entry application and considered the view of the headteachers at School A and School B. The Council explained children should generally be educated within their normal age group, with the curriculum differentiated as appropriate, and they should only be educated out of their age group in very limited circumstances. The Council said neither schools’ headteacher agreed to delayed entry. On this basis, the Council refused Mrs X’s request for delayed entry saying there was no evidence it would be in Y’s best interests. The Council said Mrs X should submit an in-year application for Y to start in reception at that point.
19. Mrs X responded to the Council on 27 March. She explained it was not for the Council to decide when Y starts school. Mrs X said, by law Y was entitled to begin school the term after her fifth birthday and this decision had already been made. Mrs X explained the Council’s duty was to decide if Y should be placed in reception or go straight into year one, in September 2023. Mrs X explained if the Council decided to place Y into year one, it had to be able to show the reasoning behind this and why it is in her best interest to miss out on reception. Mrs X asked the Council to reconsider her application.
20. The Council wrote to Mrs X the following day. It explained her application for delayed entry was considered by the relevant headteachers who had decided it was in Y’s best interest not to delay and to start school now. If Mrs X chose not to send Y to school during the current academic year, she would need to start in year one in September 2023. The Council said it would reconsider Mrs X’s application if she could provide new information that it had not already seen.
21. Mrs X complained to the Council on 31 March. She explained the admissions team had misunderstood how summer born delayed entry requests should be processed and the Council had not met the legal requirements of the legislation. Mrs X explained it was her legal right to delay Y’s entry to school and the Council seemed to have made a decision on when Y should start school, not which year group she should be placed in.
22. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint on 12 April. It said:
• Councils are not required to honour decisions made by other councils about delayed admissions and so it asked the headteachers on Mrs X’s school applications to re-evaluate Mrs X’s request.
• The headteachers considered Mrs X’s request and concluded it would be beneficial for Y to start school in the current school term, with her chronological age group rather than delaying her start until September 2023.
• The Council gave its decision to Mrs X on 28 March and invited further supporting information if she disagreed with it.
• If Mrs X chooses to delay Y’s start until September 2023, she will be placed in her chronological year group for year one.
23. Mrs X responded to the Council on 26 April asking it to reconsider her complaint as the Council had not addressed it properly. Mrs X explained:
• The decision on when Y starts is hers to make, and she has decided it is in Y’s best interest to start school in September 2023. The Council’s duty is to decide whether Y starts in reception or year one, with clear reasons why its decision is in Y’s best interests.
• The Council has not assessed which year group would be in Y’s best interest to start in September 2023, but instead whether she should be starting at that point or in September 2023.
• A Subject Access Request shows no discussion of which year group would be in Y’s best interest when she starts in September 2023.
24. The Council wrote to both schools again on 12 May explaining it had a duty to clearly set out the reasons for its decision on which year group Y should be starting in. It explained its previous decision letter did not set out why the schools felt it was in Y’s best interests to start in year one rather than reception. The Council asked the schools to provide reasons why it felt it would be in Y’s best interest to start school in year one and miss reception.
25. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 22 May. It explained it had upheld her complaint as it had not provided a clear outcome of the decision around which year group Y should be admitted into in September 2023. However, it said it had now discussed this with the headteachers and its decision that Y should be admitted to year one in September 2023 still stood. The Council agreed it had previously suggested Mrs X apply for an in-year admission for Y in the current year and it should have been clear that decision was for Mrs X to make. It explained:
• School A told the Council it had reviewed the application and believed Y should be kept in her actual year group. It takes a number of summer born pupils each year within their chronological age group and they are able to access the provision provided. The school fully supports pupils and supports individual learning needs.
• School B told the Council it had reviewed the application and did not see any health or medical reasons why Y should need delayed entry other than that she was summer born. It felt it was in Y’s best interests to be placed in her correct year group. If Y started in reception, future transition points, such as starting secondary school, may be problematic as Y would be a year older than her peers. It felt an adaptive curriculum would mean Y could adapt to year one.
26. The Council said it agreed with the headteachers’ opinions.
27. Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in June 2023.

Analysis

28. Parents of summer born children can ask for their child to start school at age five in reception. If a parent makes that decision, the Council must decide if, after reaching compulsory school age, it would be in the child’s best interests to start in reception or year one. When reaching this decision, it must take account of all relevant considerations. It must consider the potential impact on the child of being admitted into year one without first completing reception.
29. When the Council wrote to Mrs X, it explained it had decided delayed admission for Y was refused as there was no evidence to indicate this would be in her best interests. The Council appears to be commenting on Mrs X’s decision to delay Y’s entry to school rather than what is in Y’s best interests when she starts school. The Council repeated that in its initial response to Mrs X’s complaint. This is fault and would have caused uncertainty for Mrs X about whether the Council has fully understood the guidance, which is injustice.
30. Councils must consider the potential impact of a child being admitted into year one without first completing reception and why it would be in the child’s best interest to miss reception. The evidence does not show the Council gave proper consideration to this. This is fault and would have caused further uncertainty for Mrs X, which is injustice.
31. The Council attempted to address that decision retrospectively by asking the headteachers for comment, but my view is that is not a sufficient remedy to the injustice caused. I say this because the decision had already been made by that point. In any case, I do not believe the complaint response is clear in giving the Council’s view on why it is in Y’s best interest to start in year one without first having completed reception.

Back to top

Agreed action

32. To remedy the injustice identified above, I recommend the Council carry out the following actions:
33. Within one month:
• Provide Mrs X with an apology for the identified injustice
• Reconsider Mrs X’s request in line with the Code and guidance
34. Within three months:
• Remind staff who deal with requests for delayed entry to reception for summer born children to ensure they adhere to the requirements set out in the Code and the guidance
35. The Council accepted these recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

36. I find fault with the Council’s decision making. The Council accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman