Alternatives to exclusion

Guidance

• School suspensions and permanent exclusions
• School exclusions: guide for parents
• Behaviour in schools
• Alternative provision
• Elective home education

Introduction

Suspensions and permanent exclusions should typically be considered as a last resort. Behaviour in schools outlines a range of acceptable disciplinary measures that schools may use, aside from exclusions. In addition to these, schools and parents should also consider preventative or alternative options, such as off-site direction, managed moves, and elective home education.

What is a managed move?

A managed move is used to initiate a process which leads to the transfer of a pupil to another mainstream school permanently. They are designed to give pupils at risk of permanent exclusion a fresh start at a new school.

Managed moves should be voluntary and agreed upon by all parties involved, including the parents, the ‘home’ school, and the receiving school. If a parent feels they are being pressured into a managed move or is unhappy with the process, they can raise the issue through the school’s formal complaints procedure.

How does the managed move process work?

Before recent updates to school exclusion guidance, it was common practice for managed moves to involve a pupil temporarily transferring, on a trial basis, to the receiving school while remaining on the roll of the ‘home’ school. If the trial was successful, a formal transfer would follow. If unsuccessful, the managed move would end and the pupil would return to their ‘home’ school.

However, this practice of using informal trials has been phased out. Guide for parents on school behaviour and exclusion now states the following:

In some cases, your child’s school may decide it is best for your child to move to another school permanently following an off-site direction placement. This is known as a managed move.

Schools should not use a ‘trial period’ or ‘trial admission’ for managed moves, as a managed move is a permanent move to another school.

Therefore, if the parties wish to explore whether a new placement is suitable before making it permanent, they should use an off-site direction, prior to the managed move, to simulate a trial period within the boundaries of current guidance. Some local authorities have introduced a process known as ‘Direction Off-Site With Intent to Managed Move’ (DOWIMM), though this approach is not applied consistently across the country. One local authority describes the process as follows:

This process wherein a pupil is directed off-site to another mainstream setting for a time-limited period and where the receiving school has the intent to offer a managed move when this period comes to an end.

Throughout a DOWIMM, the ‘intent to managed move’ requires that the receiving school welcomes the pupil as a member of the school community, and as such they will usually be placed on a full-time timetable and wear the receiving school’s uniform. Furthermore, whilst a DOWIMM, as a form of Direction Off-Site, does not require pupil and parent/carer consent, a managed move does. Therefore, the Local Authority requires all schools to gain consent from the pupil and their family in advance of the DOWIMM taking place.

 If at the end of the DOWIMM the receiving school agrees to take the pupil on roll as a permanent Managed Move, then the Managed Move Agreement should be signed by both schools and the pupil, as well as their parents/carers. The Fair Access and Exclusions Team should be sent a copy of this agreement.

This approach appears to be consistent with the revised guidance, in the absence of more detailed direction from the DfE.

What is off-site direction?

Off-site direction is when a school requires a pupil to attend another educational setting to improve their behaviour. This usually occurs when interventions and targeted support have not been successful in improving the child’s behaviour at their home school. It can be done without the consent of the parents or the pupil, and there is no statutory right to appeal the decision. Provision can be full-time or a combination of part-time support in alternative provision and continued mainstream education.

Information can be found in Exclusion guidance (pgs 20-22), Alternative provision guidance (pgs 29-30), Section 29A of the Education Act 2002, and Regulation 3 of the Education (Educational Provision for Improving Behaviour) Regulations 2010 as amended.

Can Academies direct off-site?

Under the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is likely due to receive Royal Assent in autumn 2025, academy schools will be placed on the same statutory footing as local authority-maintained schools regarding the power to direct pupils off-site for the improvement of behaviour.

The current position is that Academies can direct off-site, but this is done under their general powers by virtue of their funding agreement and/or articles of association.

What information must be provided?

Where a school determines that it will impose a requirement on a pupil under Section 29A of the Education Act 2002, it must give the pupil’s parents notice in writing of the decision to direct the pupil off-site, along with the following information:

• the address at which the educational provision is to be provided for the pupil;
• particulars identifying the person to whom the pupil should report on first attending that address for the purposes of receiving the educational provision;
• the number of days for which the requirement is to be imposed; and
• the reasons for, and objectives of, imposing the requirement.

Reviews

The pupil’s home school should conduct regular review meetings, to which the parents and the pupil are invited to attend, and must decide following each review meeting whether the off-site direction should continue to have effect and, if so, for what period of time. The home school should also receive regular reports from the provider on the pupil’s achievements and progress, including on their attendance and behaviour management, during the placement.

Reintegration

The home school and provider should agree a plan and process at the beginning of the placement that aims to reintegrate the pupil successfully back into their home school. The plan should include details of how to assess when the pupil is ready to return to their home school and should provide an appropriate package of support, from both provider and home school, to assist their reintegration.

Mandatory off-site schooling for the purposes of safeguarding separation

In 2021, a High Court case considered the legal position for mandatory off-site education for the purpose of keeping pupils apart for safeguarding reasons. This case involved allegations of child-on-child sexualised behaviour by young pupils in a primary school setting. The school was a small, single‑form‑entry primary school. This made it difficult to physically separate the children while on the same site. After taking advice, the school decided against the permanent exclusion of the pupil concerned, but still wished to keep the pupils involved apart.

Initially, an off‑site direction was issued. It was later conceded that this was not the appropriate statutory power, given that off‑site directions are intended to improve behaviour, whereas the matter here was safeguarding separation.

The Local Authority subsequently issued a formal notice under Section 19 Education Act 1996, directing the pupil concerned to attend a specified alternative school.

What decision did the court reach?

The High Court held that a school and local authority may enforce a ‘safeguarding separation’ by sending a pupil to another site, and that this power comes from multiple sources:

• Section 175 Education Act 2002 – Local authorities and school governing bodies are required to make arrangements for ensuring that their education functions are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children.
• General management powers – The court held that it would fall well within the powers of “general management” of the school for a headteacher to inform parents of some situation constituting a pressing reason why a pupil, or a group of pupils, or for that matter a class, year-group or even the entire body of the school, should not attend the school and will not be admitted.
• Section 19 Education Act 1996 – If a pupil cannot attend their registered school, the local authority may, under section 19 of the Education Act 1996, arrange suitable alternative education.
• Principles of public law – The court held they can assume particular prominence in circumstances where there is an absence of a bespoke statutory power, and in a context where there are carefully calibrated safeguards and limitations of other statutory powers.

This remains an uncommon situation, and the extent to which this power may be exercised in practice is not yet clear. With limited guidance available on its application, the decision nevertheless establishes an important precedent.

What is elective home education?

Parents have a legal duty under Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 to ensure that their child of compulsory school age receives a suitable full-time education. Most parents fulfil this duty by sending their child to school. However, elective home education refers to the decision by some parents to educate their children at home rather than at a school setting.

Elective home education guidance for parents can be found here.

How is this relevant in the context of school exclusion?

When a child is attending school and is at risk of exclusion, parents have the option to de-register them and provide elective home education. This can be a pre-emptive measure to prevent the exclusion from being applied and recorded on the child’s educational record. However, it is a significant decision, as the responsibility for ensuring the child receives a suitable education then falls entirely on the parent.

Schools should not exercise undue influence over a parent to remove their child from the school under the threat of a permanent exclusion, nor should they encourage elective home education as an alternative in such circumstances. This is considered a form of off-rolling and is not acceptable. Off-rolling refers to the practice of removing a pupil from the school roll without formally excluding them, where the decision is made primarily in the best interests of the school rather than those of the pupil.