Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the conduct of a review panel that considered the permanent exclusion of Miss X’s child from a school. This is because the school is an academy and we have no legal power to investigate the conduct of review panels for academy school.

The complaint

1. Miss X said the Council failed to make a reasonable adjustment for her to attend an in-person review panel that considered her child’s permanent exclusion from a school. She said the Council declined her request and prevented her from having the assistance of an advocate. She also said the Council failed to support her child to avoid the permanent exclusion in the first place.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The school from which Miss X’s child was permanently excluded is an academy school. Unlike community schools and certain other types of school, academy schools are run by academy trusts or multi-academy trusts. We have no legal power to investigate their actions. That means that, unlike complaints about permanent exclusions from schools that are not academies, we cannot consider the conduct of the review panel. That is the case even though a local council provides the review panel service to academy schools in exactly the same way as it does to other schools. What that means here is that we have no legal power to consider whether Miss X was wrongly prevented from having the assistance of an advocate or whether she was wrongly denied an in-person hearing.
7. We may consider the actions or omissions of a local council relating to the delivery of provision laid out in an Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan that is intended to support a child who may be at risk of exclusion. However, the relevant council for that duty is the council in whose area the child lives. Miss X and her child do not live in Solihull Council’s area. Therefore, we cannot consider the actions of Solihull Council as it was not the council responsible for the delivery of the child’s EHC Plan.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint because:

• We have no legal power to investigate the conduct of a review panel for a permanent school exclusion where the school is an academy; and
• The Council is not the body responsible for the delivery of the provision in her child’s EHC Plan.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman