29/09/2026
This article was written by Emma Hall and Alex Horan.
Introduction
School attendance remains a significant priority for Government, with persistent absence continuing to present challenges for schools and local authorities. While attendance levels have improved since the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, levels of persistent and severe absence remain above historic levels.
For local authorities, improving attendance is not simply a matter of enforcement. Regular school attendance is closely connected with educational attainment, safeguarding and children’s wellbeing. As a result, the current policy direction places increasing emphasis on early identification of attendance concerns, partnership working and targeted support alongside the use of formal enforcement powers.
The legal framework
The primary responsibility for ensuring that a child receives suitable education rests with parents. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 requires parents to secure an efficient full-time education suitable to the child’s age, ability, aptitude and any special educational needs.
Where a child is registered at a school, section 444 of the Education Act 1996 places a further duty on parents to ensure regular attendance. Failure to do so may result in prosecution, either under section 444(1) where regular attendance has not been secured, or the more serious offence under section 444(1A) where a parent knowingly fails to secure attendance without reasonable justification.
Schools have responsibility for maintaining accurate attendance registers, recording absence and working with families where concerns arise. However, the role of Local Authorities has become increasingly prominent. Councils are expected to provide strategic oversight of attendance across their area, work with schools and trusts, and ensure that children who are not receiving suitable education are identified.
The Department for Education’s statutory guidance, Working Together to Improve School Attendance, reinforces the principle that attendance is a shared responsibility between parents, schools, local authorities and wider partners. The guidance promotes a “support first” approach, requiring early intervention before formal enforcement is considered in most cases.
Authorised and unauthorised absence
The distinction between authorised and unauthorised absence is central to the attendance framework.
Authorised absence occurs where the school accepts that there is a legitimate reason for a child not attending. This may include illness, medical appointments that cannot reasonably take place outside school hours, religious observance or other exceptional circumstances.
Unauthorised absence occurs where no satisfactory explanation has been provided, or where the school does not consider the reason given to justify the absence. A common example is term-time holidays. Following changes introduced in 2013, headteachers may only grant leave during term time in exceptional circumstances. Cost savings, family convenience or parental work commitments will not normally justify authorisation. An unauthorised absence can also be recoded if a pupil arrives at school after the school registers have closed.
The distinction has practical consequences because enforcement action, including Penalty Notices and prosecution, depends upon unauthorised absence. Accurate attendance recording and consistency between schools are therefore essential.
Enforcement options
Where attendance concerns are not resolved through support and intervention, local authorities have a range of enforcement options.
Penalty Notices
Penalty Notices are the most frequently used enforcement measure. Significant changes came into force in August 2024, introducing a national framework intended to improve consistency across England.
The new regime provides that a Penalty Notice should ordinarily be considered where a child has accumulated ten sessions of unauthorised absence within a rolling ten-school-week period. The first penalty notice issued to a parent in respect of a particular pupil will be charged at £160 if paid within 28 days. This will be reduced to £80 if paid within 21 days.
A second Penalty Notice issued to the same parent for the same child within three years is charged at £160, with no discounted rate.
However, the reforms do not create an automatic requirement to issue a Penalty Notice. Local Authorities must continue to exercise judgement and consider whether enforcement is appropriate in the circumstances. A Penalty Notice may be ineffective where absence is driven by unmet needs, SEND issues or wider family difficulties. . Every local authority must draw up, and is expected to publish on their website, a Local Code of Conduct for issuing fixed penalty notices which must be adhered to by all schools, the police and any Local Authority officer issuing a penalty notice.
Prosecution
Where attendance does not improve (or fixed penalties are not paid), prosecution under section 444 of the Education Act 1996 remains available.
Before pursuing prosecution, councils should be able to demonstrate that appropriate support and interventions have been offered, unless the circumstances justify immediate action. Decisions should be proportionate, evidence-based and consistent with the authority’s prosecution policy.
While prosecution can provide an important enforcement route, it will not always address the underlying cause of absence. Authorities should consider whether alternative interventions, including Education Supervision Orders, may provide a more effective long-term solution.
Practical challenges for local authorities
Although the statutory framework is well established, attendance cases are increasingly complex. Many persistent absence cases involve children with SEND, mental health difficulties or safeguarding concerns. Councils should ensure that enforcement decisions take account of these factors and that attendance services work closely with SEND teams, children’s services, schools and health partners.
For children with SEND, absence may reflect unmet needs, unsuitable educational provision or difficulties accessing appropriate support. While SEND does not automatically authorise absence or prevent enforcement action, authorities should consider whether underlying issues have been properly addressed before taking formal steps.
Similarly, emotionally based school avoidance and anxiety-related absence require careful consideration. A purely punitive response may not improve attendance where a child requires additional support to return to education.
Consistency is also important. Councils should ensure that schools understand local attendance procedures, apply absence codes appropriately and make referrals in line with agreed thresholds. Clear guidance, training and effective communication with schools will help reduce inconsistency and support defensible decision-making.
Good record keeping remains essential. Authorities should retain clear evidence of attendance patterns, interventions offered, engagement with families and the reasons for any enforcement decision. This will be particularly important if decisions are challenged through complaints, appeals or judicial review.
Looking ahead
The direction of travel is clear: local authorities are expected to take a more proactive role in improving attendance while using enforcement powers where necessary.
The challenge for Councils is to maintain the right balance between support and enforcement. Effective attendance strategies will combine accurate data, early intervention, strong partnership arrangements and proportionate use of statutory powers.
As attendance remains a key Government priority, Councils that can demonstrate consistent, evidence-based and child-focused decision-making will be best placed to improve outcomes while reducing legal risk.
Key takeaways
Attendance is a shared responsibility. Parents, schools and Local Authorities each have distinct statutory duties, with Councils playing an increasingly strategic role in coordinating improvement activity.
Enforcement must be proportionate. The availability of Penalty Notices and prosecution does not remove the need for Councils (and Schools) to consider the circumstances of each case and whether enforcement is likely to improve attendance.
Early intervention remains central. The current framework expects authorities to identify barriers to attendance and provide appropriate support before formal action is taken.
Complex cases require partnership working. SEND, mental health and safeguarding issues are frequently connected with attendance difficulties and require coordinated responses.
Good governance reduces legal risk. Clear policies, consistent thresholds, accurate records and evidence of support offered will be essential if enforcement decisions are challenged.
How can we support you?
If you require any support we are here to help. See our Corporate Crime team for further details and follow our dedicated Central & Local Government page for local authority legal insights.
