The difficulties faced by vulnerable children in gaining school places if they have been forced to change schools mid-year have been laid bare by a new official report on admissions.

The annual report from OSA (Office of the Schools Adjudicator) states that more than 300,000 children started a new school during the first two terms of the past year (at both primary and secondary), for reasons including family trauma, being taken into care, having special educational needs, being newcomers to the country and being excluded from another school.

Chief adjudicator Shan Scott highlights a process known as “capping”, which contravenes the Department for Education’s School Admissions Code. In this process, schools that are their own admissions authorities, including academy trusts (as well as foundation schools and voluntary-aided schools), say they do not have places available in a year group, despite their PAN (pupil admission number) not having been met. 

“It is extremely concerning that local authorities report again that securing places for these [vulnerable] children in year can be difficult and that some schools, without good reason, appear unwilling to admit them,” she said.

“In addition, there is a particular reluctance noted by a number of local authorities on the part of admission authorities to admit any child in Year 6 (Y6) or in key stage 4.”

The report states that around 40 local authorities out of a total of 152 in England said that growing numbers of schools, mainly secondaries, were reluctant to admit children during the year on the grounds of their potentially challenging behaviour, while others were reluctant to admit SEND children over concerns about resources.

Schools off-rolling pupils

The report, which states that admissions are becoming harder to scrutinise, also highlights how some parents are being “coerced” into educating their children at home in cases where the children are being bullied, at risk of being permanently excluded or are not having SEND needs met.

But Ms Scott said there were concerns among local authorities that, in some cases, this was “not appropriate and in the best interests of those children”. She said some parents had reported instances where schools had prepared a standard letter for them to sign advising of their decision to electively home educate. 

She also said that she was “very concerned” that some local authorities reported difficulty in establishing whether a child had or had not been previously looked after.

“A child’s status as previously looked after is a matter of fact, with no room for the exercise of discretion: a child either falls within the code’s definition of previously looked after or he or she does not,” her report says.

On selection, Ms Scott warns that the proportion of children eligible for the pupil premium securing places at grammar schools had “not increased in the ways hoped for”.