In borough passes, for those about to submit their CAF

[liceo_classico]

Thanks for the replies - it is reassuring to see 214 published on their website. But I am worried that this is the official spreadsheet to be used by schools. I've emailed Bexley and I'll chase them by phone tomorrow. I'll let you know what they say. Backstop would be to appeal - but I'd really prefer not to have to ...

Thanks also to whoever made the FOI request in the first place. I wouldn't have thought to do so, and catching this error early could make a huge difference to us. It's so good to have people out there who dig for information.

I'm sure this is an error from the person that compiled the spreadsheet. Their site and email say 214, so I cannot imagine the uploaded file being correct.

[Uncle Buck]

Evening All! Last years passmark was 216 so I'm thinking maybe the person who put together the data got their passmark mixed up with last years? I'm hoping my note here calms anyone having understandable form filling jitters tonight!
All the best
Uncle Buck

[Mich895]

Could the "2017" information relate to the 2017 intake? As Uncle Buck says, 216 was the pass mark last year, so the children who would be the 2017 intake.

[Sorrel]

Could the "2017" information relate to the 2017 intake? As Uncle Buck says, 216 was the pass mark last year, so the children who would be the 2017 intake.

The spreadsheet linked to was this year's results; I found my son and his friend. Hopefully just a mistake by the person who compiled it for the FOI but if it is related to something more central, great that you've spotted and flagged it.

[bondgirl]

I found DD and one of her friends too who sat this year.

[NetsofCubes]

I have had an email conversation with various people at Bexley today. They have now confirmed that the spreadsheet is wrong and that the information passed to the schools is not based on this spreadsheet. They are looking into what happened and will reissue the spreadsheet with the correct information.

So all is well. Thanks, everyone, for the replies.