Archived decisions

Dear Keith

Children & Young People's Policy Review Committee: recommendations from Hampshire School Admissions Policy workshop

May I take this opportunity to thank you for attending Monday's workshop on School Admissions at Hampshire County Council. The event seems to have been well-received and was a good opportunity for Members of the County Council to understand the forthcoming changes to the Admissions process, gain an appreciation of the key role of the Admissions Forum and the legislative framework it operates in, and offer suggestions for how a Hampshire Code could operate most effectively.

Below you will find the feedback from the event. This feedback contains a combination of recommendations and points requiring further clarification to which we hope you can provide a response. All feedback has been framed around the six questions set at the workshop.

We would very much welcome your comments on this feedback and therefore invite you to respond to the Children and Young People's Policy Review Committee following the meeting of the School Admissions Forum on December 6 2006.

Question One: Each year Hampshire County Council produces its annual prospectus, now has an online brochure, and produces a flyer and poster for parents of the next cohort of Year R children. Do you think that this provides easy access to useful information for parents and carers regarding the schools admissions process?

a) The annual prospectus is a very good document overall.

b) A Choice Advice Service for parents is a good idea, but needs to be actively promoted to parents to ensure uptake by those parents who are unaware of it.

c) It would be helpful to hold meetings for parents at which the admissions process is explained, to ensure that all parents have an equal understanding of the admissions protocol.

d) A view was expressed that there are a few examples of terminology that may need clarification. For example, expressions such as `multiple births' may not be understood by all applicants.

e) All key dates and deadlines in the admissions process should be more clearly emphasised.

f) The availability of information in languages other than English should be more clearly advertised, as should methods of seeking further help.

g) The application form should be simpler and shortened to two A4 pages.

Question Two: The revised Code has the effect of legislation. Will this affect the Hampshire admissions arrangements significantly?

a) The new Code is more prescriptive and therefore allows Headteachers' less discretion. Are parents aware of this?

b) Can we be certain that parents fully understand the concept of `choice' under the new guidance? Parents must be advised that real choice does not exist, although the opportunity to express preference does. This should be clearly explained.

c) What arrangements are being put in place to cater for the extra administration that an Equal Preference System would produce at the centre?

d) Will the Hampshire Code emphasise the importance of Every Child Matters?

e) The over-subscription criterion on distance measurement (`straight line measurement') is not a fair policy: it does not take into account obstacles such as motorways. Will the Forum consider alternative methods to prioritise applications which are more equitable?

f) Catchment areas should be replaced with more environmentally friendly policies based on the school's capacity/number of children within walking distance able to take up places. However, rural areas should be given different consideration in this sense due to access issues. Separate policies for rural and urban areas may be appropriate.

g) Admissions should be based primarily on a school's capacity, but there should be some flexibility in the system regarding admissions from linked schools.

Question Three: Will the adoption of an Equal Preference scheme have the intended effect of being fairer for children and parents? Might there be negative effects from making this change?

a) Overall an EP system seems fairer particularly since siblings will be more likely to be able to attend the same school and priority is given to linked infant and junior schools.

b) However, the issue of increased administration and resources required by the Education Authority to support an EP system needs to be properly addressed.

Question Four: What more might be done to respond to the difficulties caused by in-year admissions at popular schools?

a) Parents should be educated to understand that, when a school is full, it is not possible to negotiate any further admissions (with the exception of Children in Care and Hard to Place Pupils).

b) More evidence is required to prove that requests for in-year admissions are genuine and not a result of parents manipulating the system.

Question Five: How do we ensure that the Admissions Policy and, in particular the hard to place protocol, is implemented effectively in the best interests of Hampshire's Looked After Children and Hard to Place Protocol (HTTP)?

a) The definition of a `Hard to Place Pupil' is unclear. For example, does this include excluded children, bullied children etc?

b) All schools - including Foundation and Faith schools - should participate in the HTTP.

c) Is there a body responsible for overseeing and enforcing the HTTP? If not, how can we ensure that this protocol is being operated equitably?

d) What provision is there in the HTTP to help absent children (not only excluded children) back into school?

e) The HTTP should form part of the main admissions process and not operate as a separate scheme. Is this the case in Hampshire?

Question Six: What information is required to ensure that effective monitoring and evaluation of the Admissions Policy can be undertaken?

a) % satisfaction rate (parents/children) regarding admissions process.

b) Data on the number and type of appeals (with clear `before' and `after' illustrations in the case of a change from FPF to EP).

c) Number of administrative difficulties (mistakes in administering admissions) encountered by parents, with an audit trail of each case.

d) Resources: proof of whether supply and demand tally.

e) Testimonies from parents on their experience of the system (preferably at a type of `Forum' where issues can be discussed openly).

f) Annual report to Members on the operation of the Hampshire School Admissions Policy, highlighting areas where the system has failed parents.

Thank you again for taking the time to consider these points. I very much look forward to hearing from you soon.

Yours sincerely,

Cllr Carol Leversha

Chairman: Children and Young People's Policy Review Committee