Attainment and Attendance in Chichester

What the national model behind How to Pull the Right Lever says about the district’s secondary schools, within West Sussex and alongside Brighton and Hove. Draft for discussion.

Author
Affiliation

Adam Dennett

Bartlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London

Published

November 2, 2026

WarningDraft for discussion

One of the district documents for Sussex. It sits beneath the West Sussex document, and the district summary compares all of the districts. Every figure comes from published Department for Education data and the national models of How to Pull the Right Lever. Nothing uses pupil-level records. The commentary is written to a common pattern from the figures; read it as a starting point for discussion.

Summary

Chichester’s results are among the weakest of England’s districts, on an intake less disadvantaged than England’s. Its 6 state secondary schools are in Chichester, Emsworth and Midhurst.

  • Overall results: 43.6 in Attainment 8 in 2024/25, 208th of 264 districts in England.
  • Disadvantage: 17.8% of pupils are disadvantaged, against 28.3% nationally.
  • Disadvantaged pupils average 31.0, below the national 37.8 (252nd of 264).
  • The gap between disadvantaged pupils and the rest is 15.0 points, the 56th widest of 264.

The other findings:

  • For all pupils, Chichester is 2.5 points below England. The largest pieces in the national model are prior attainment (-1.4) and the level of disadvantage (+0.9). The district’s schools take 0.8 points beyond what the model expects.
  • For disadvantaged pupils it is 4.8 points below England. The largest pieces are West Sussex’s county-wide effect (-1.5) and being in the South East (-1.3), and the schools take 0.3 points beyond what the model expects.
  • No district effect can be found. Once intake, West Sussex’s county effect and the schools themselves are accounted for, nothing is left that all Chichester schools share.
  • 1 of the 6 schools is above expectation over 2021/22 to 2024/25. The strongest is Midhurst Rother College (+1.4); the weakest Chichester Free School (-3.1).
  • Absence was 8.0% in autumn and spring 2025/26 (8.4% a year earlier), against 8.0% for England and 8.1% for West Sussex. Over 2021/22 to 2024/25 its schools ran 0.1 points above what their intakes predict, and Chichester High School more than a point above.
  • Reduced timetables run at 1.6 times the national rate, and suspensions at 0.9 times (19.8 episodes per 100 pupils, against 21.2). That counts episodes, not pupils: 7.0 pupils per 100 were suspended at least once, about 2.8 times each, against 7.3 per 100 and 2.9 times in England.
  • Disadvantaged groups are small, 17 to 54 pupils a year per school. Every school-level figure for them moves from year to year and should be read over several years.

1 About this analysis

Chichester is a district of West Sussex, not a local authority, and that shapes what can be said:

  • The national models place schools in local authorities. The “local authority effect” in this document is West Sussex’s, shared with every school in the county.
  • What is particular to Chichester shows up in its schools’ own residuals, and in the district test of Section 6.
  • Absence and exclusions are summed over the district’s 6 schools, followed through any change of URN.

The methods are described in full in the East Sussex document.

2 The district’s schools

Chichester’s state-funded secondary schools, coloured by overall absence in 2024/25. Choose another measure from the menu above the map; circle size is the school’s roll. Hover for figures and who runs each school.

Every state-funded secondary school in the district, 2024/25, with the size of its disadvantaged Year 11 group. Ofsted (model) is the rating the model uses, from the last graded inspection before September 2024. Ofsted, latest is the most recent judgement in Ofsted’s data as at 30 September 2026, which is a report card’s achievement and curriculum grades, the quality of education grade for an inspection between September 2024 and November 2025 that gave no overall grade, or otherwise the last graded inspection.
School Town Type Pupils FSM % Disadvantaged in Year 11 Absence % KS2 Att 8 Att 8 disadv. Ofsted (model) Ofsted, latest
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester Chichester Academy 1579 8.9 21 6.9 5.8 52.5 28.5 Outstanding (Nov 2022) Outstanding (Nov 2022)
Chichester Free School Chichester Academy 1078 14.5 17 8.1 3.6 44.6 35.5 Good (May 2024) Good (May 2024)
Chichester High School Chichester Academy 1258 23.5 54 10.7 3.5 38.9 30.3 Good (May 2019) No overall grade (Nov 2024): quality of education Good
The Academy, Selsey Chichester Academy 501 22.7 20 11.1 2.5 37.9 31.7 Good (Apr 2019) No overall grade (Jan 2025): quality of education Good
Bourne Community College Emsworth Maintained 729 22.4 33 8.6 3.4 39.0 25.5 Good (Nov 2021) Report card (Jan 2026): achievement Needs attention, curriculum and teaching Needs attention
Midhurst Rother College Midhurst Academy 1158 14.8 31 8.1 3.9 48.6 34.7 Outstanding (May 2024) Outstanding (May 2024)

1 of the 6 schools is maintained by West Sussex County Council. The academies are run as follows:

  • Bishop Luffa School, Chichester, in Bishop Luffa Learning Partnership;
  • Chichester Free School, in Sussex Learning Trust;
  • Chichester High School, in The Kemnal Academies Trust;
  • Midhurst Rother College, in United Learning Trust (sponsored);
  • The Academy, Selsey, in The Kemnal Academies Trust (sponsored);
Figure 1: Who ran each school in 2024/25, and how far its results sat above or below the national model’s expectation over 2021/22 to 2024/25.

3 How Chichester compares

Chichester against West Sussex, Brighton and Hove and England, 2024/25. Means of school-level figures.
Measure Chichester West Sussex Brighton and Hove England
Attainment 8, all pupils 43.6 46.4 45.5 46.8
Attainment 8, disadvantaged 31.0 33.5 33.9 37.7
Attainment 8, non-disadvantaged 46.0 48.9 49.6 49.9
Disadvantage gap (points) 15.0 15.4 15.7 12.2
Disadvantaged (FSM6) % 17.8 17.1 28.8 28.4
Overall absence % 8.9 8.7 11.3 8.6
Persistent absence % 24.9 23.9 30.6 23.9
Mean KS2 (centred) 3.78 4.26 4.71 4.47
EAL % 6.0 11.0 13.0 18.4
Figure 2: Attainment 8 for disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils in West Sussex’s districts, 2024/25, school means. The gap between the two is printed on each district’s line; Chichester is in bold.

Across the years the model covers, the gap was 15.1 points in 2021/22 and 15.0 in 2024/25. Chichester’s non-disadvantaged pupils were above England’s average in 0 of 4 years, and its disadvantaged pupils in 0.

4 What explains attainment in Chichester

Figure 3: Why average Attainment 8 differs from England’s, by factor, all school-years 2021/22 to 2024/25, for Chichester, West Sussex and Brighton and Hove. Approximate Attainment 8 points; the pieces sum to the total in each panel.
The decomposition for Chichester, in Attainment 8 points. ‘Place’ is West Sussex’s effect plus the South East’s; ‘unexplained’ is what the district’s own schools add beyond everything the model accounts for.
Factor All pupils Disadvantaged Non-disadvantaged
Prior attainment (KS2) -1.38 -0.90 -1.28
Place (region and local authority) -1.20 -2.79 -1.48
Unexplained (school residual) -0.84 -0.27 -1.00
Absence -0.54 -0.58 -0.42
English as an additional language -0.24 -0.65 -0.35
Teacher workforce -0.12 -0.02 -0.11
Other model terms +0.18 -0.26 +0.16
Ofsted rating +0.67 +0.64 +0.65
Disadvantage (% FSM) +0.92 -0.32 +0.48

For all pupils, Chichester is 2.5 points below England. The pieces of at least a quarter of a point:

  • prior attainment (-1.38);
  • the level of disadvantage (+0.92);
  • West Sussex’s county-wide effect (-0.74);
  • Ofsted ratings (+0.67);
  • absence (-0.54);
  • being in the South East (-0.46);
  • and the district’s schools themselves (-0.84), beyond what the model expects.

For disadvantaged pupils, Chichester is 4.8 points below England. The pieces of at least a quarter of a point:

  • West Sussex’s county-wide effect (-1.47);
  • being in the South East (-1.32);
  • prior attainment (-0.90);
  • English as an additional language (-0.65);
  • Ofsted ratings (+0.64);
  • absence (-0.58);
  • the level of disadvantage (-0.32);
  • admissions (-0.30);
  • and the district’s schools themselves (-0.27), beyond what the model expects.

The level of disadvantage counting against disadvantaged pupils is the Lever report’s most contested finding showing up locally. Across England, disadvantaged pupils do slightly better in schools with more disadvantaged pupils, once everything else is accounted for. The likely reason is that such schools organise around them, and spend pupil premium on provision that a handful of pupils cannot sustain. In Chichester, with 17 to 54 disadvantaged pupils in a year group, that is harder to do.

5 The disadvantaged gap, school by school

Figure 4: Each school’s value added for its disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils, mean over the years available (2021/22 to provisional 2025/26). Above zero means better than the national model expects for similar pupils.

No Chichester school is above expectation for its non-disadvantaged pupils while more than a point below it for its disadvantaged ones. Midhurst Rother College is above expectation for both groups. The table below gives each school’s own persistent effect, from the model with a school term, which is the steadier measure.

Table 1: Each school’s own persistent effect on the national model with a school term (%), for each group of pupils and for absence beyond what its intake predicts. Positive absence is worse.
School All pupils Disadvantaged Non-disadvantaged Absence (stage 1)
Bourne Community College -0.3 +1.0 -0.3 +0.4
Midhurst Rother College +2.9 +3.0 +2.9 +0.6
The Academy, Selsey -2.9 +4.1 -4.3 +3.9
Chichester Free School -4.9 -1.5 -4.8 -11.4
Chichester High School -2.3 -2.6 -1.7 +21.9
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester -1.5 -7.8 -0.1 -7.0
Table 2: Attainment 8 of each school’s disadvantaged pupils, year by year (2025/26 provisional), with the size of the group in 2024/25. Small groups make single years unreliable.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Disadvantaged pupils, 2024/25
The Academy, Selsey 23.9 39.4 34.3 31.7 27.3 20
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester 42.3 34.2 31.7 28.5 41.7 21
Bourne Community College 34.0 33.3 35.6 25.5 26.2 33
Chichester Free School 28.8 30.6 37.4 35.5 30.7 17
Chichester High School 31.9 26.3 30.3 30.3 28.8 54
Midhurst Rother College 41.2 37.9 32.7 34.7 39.9 31

6 Is there a Chichester effect?

The district test of the East Sussex document adds a district level to the national model, with and without each school’s own record.

Table 3: The Chichester district effect, over and above West Sussex’s, with 95% intervals.
Specification Outcome Effect (%) 95% interval Significant
Published specification All pupils -1.6 -4.8 to +1.7 No
Published specification Disadvantaged -1.0 -4.8 to +2.9 No
Published specification Non-disadvantaged -2.1 -4.9 to +0.7 No
Published specification Absence (stage 1) +0.9 -5.9 to +8.1 No
With a school term All pupils -0.6 -3.8 to +2.7 No
With a school term Disadvantaged -0.3 -3.3 to +2.9 No
With a school term Non-disadvantaged -1.3 -4.6 to +2.0 No
With a school term Absence (stage 1) +0.2 -5.5 to +6.1 No

None of Chichester’s district effects can be told apart from zero on either specification. The district’s results are explained by its intake, West Sussex’s county effect and its individual schools.

Figure 5: Each school’s own persistent effect, from the model with a school term: Attainment 8 for all pupils, and absence beyond what its intake predicts.

7 Absence

Figure 6: Overall absence, autumn and spring terms, 2016/17 to 2025/26. Sessions-weighted; 2019/20 not collected.
  • 8.0% absence in autumn and spring 2025/26, against 8.0% for England and 8.1% for West Sussex. A year earlier it was 8.4%.
  • Persistent absence is 22.2%, against 21.6% for England.
  • Against its intake, the district’s schools run 0.11 points above what their pupils’ profiles predict, on average over 2021/22 to 2024/25.
Table 4: Each school’s absence against what its intake predicts, mean 2021/22 to 2024/25, and its reasons in the latest year (percentage of sessions).
School Absence % Predicted by intake % Above prediction Illness Unauthorised Reduced timetable Suspended
Chichester High School 11.5 9.5 +2.0 3.0 3.3 0.17 0.47
Midhurst Rother College 8.8 8.7 +0.1 2.7 2.3 1.02 0.05
The Academy, Selsey 10.3 10.3 +0.0 5.1 2.6 0.27 0.23
Bourne Community College 9.6 9.8 -0.2 4.7 2.2 0.88 0.35
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester 7.4 7.7 -0.3 3.9 0.5 0.30 0.02
Chichester Free School 7.8 8.8 -1.1 5.2 1.0 0.19 0.05
  • Chichester High School runs more than a point above its predicted absence.
  • Chichester Free School runs more than a point below its prediction.

Reduced timetables account for 0.45% of sessions, against 0.29% in England, 1.6 times the national rate. Midhurst Rother College’s rate is the highest in the district.

Table 5: Predicted Attainment 8 gain if each school’s absence fell to the national school average (2024/25). Indicative only.
School District Absence % FSM % Gain, all pupils Gain, disadvantaged Gain from FSM to area average
The Academy, Selsey Chichester 11.1 22.7 +2.1 +2.6 +0.5
Chichester High School Chichester 10.7 23.5 +1.8 +2.0 +0.5
Bourne Community College Chichester 8.6 22.4 +0.0 +0.0 +0.5

3 of the 6 schools are above the national average absence in 2024/25. Bringing them to it would add up to 2.1 points for all pupils, as an indication of scale.

Suspensions were 19.8 episodes per 100 pupils in 2024/25, against 21.2 for England and 16.2 for West Sussex. A rate per 100 pupils counts suspension episodes rather than pupils, and one pupil can be suspended several times in a year, so it is not a percentage of children: 7.0 pupils per 100 were suspended at least once, about 2.8 times each, against 7.3 per 100 and 2.9 times in England.

Table 6: Suspension episodes per 100 pupils, pupils suspended at least once per 100, and permanent exclusions, by school, latest year. One pupil can be suspended more than once, so the first rate runs well above the second.
School Pupils Episodes per 100 Pupils suspended per 100 Permanent exclusions
Bourne Community College 729 43.9 12.5 0
Chichester High School 1258 37.2 11.4 8
The Academy, Selsey 501 28.7 12.6 2
Midhurst Rother College 1158 15.6 6.0 3
Chichester Free School 1078 8.3 4.3 2
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester 1579 2.7 1.8 1

8 Contextual league tables

Value added, all pupils: observed Attainment 8 minus the national model’s expectation. 2025/26 is provisional.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
Midhurst Rother College +1.4 +4.1 -1.1 +0.8 -0.7 +0.9 5
Bourne Community College +0.4 -0.9 +2.8 -4.0 -2.5 -0.8 5
Chichester High School -0.1 -1.1 +0.5 -2.9 -2.5 -1.2 5
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester +0.5 -2.0 -2.5 -2.2 -0.7 -1.4 5
The Academy, Selsey -2.5 -3.0 +1.2 -1.2 -2.3 -1.6 5
Chichester Free School -2.1 -7.5 -2.3 -0.6 -1.9 -2.9 5
Value added, disadvantaged pupils. Small groups; read across years.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
Midhurst Rother College +5.1 +3.2 -1.9 -0.4 +2.9 +1.8 5
The Academy, Selsey -8.0 +8.6 +5.0 +2.6 -3.7 +0.9 5
Bourne Community College +1.1 +2.4 +4.6 -6.3 -5.1 -0.7 5
Chichester Free School -6.4 -3.6 +3.9 +2.6 -3.1 -1.3 5
Chichester High School +0.7 -5.2 +1.0 -0.6 -6.0 -2.0 5
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester +3.6 -3.8 -6.3 -10.1 +0.8 -3.1 5
Value added, non-disadvantaged pupils.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
Midhurst Rother College +1.1 +4.3 -1.0 +0.8 -1.2 +0.8 5
Chichester High School -0.2 +0.3 +0.3 -3.6 +0.0 -0.6 5
Bishop Luffa School, Chichester +0.8 -1.5 -1.5 -1.1 -0.1 -0.7 5
Bourne Community College +0.3 -1.8 +2.4 -2.9 -1.6 -0.7 5
The Academy, Selsey +0.1 -6.1 -0.1 -2.6 -1.7 -2.1 5
Chichester Free School -0.7 -7.6 -3.1 -1.4 -1.7 -2.9 5

9 Questions for discussion

  1. Disadvantaged pupils. They average 31.0 in Chichester against 37.8 in England, and the district’s schools take 0.3 points for them beyond what the model expects. What do Midhurst Rother College and The Academy, Selsey, above expectation for these pupils, do that the district’s other schools could share?
  2. Attendance is a modest lever. Absence costs the district 0.5 points against England for all pupils, and Chichester High School run more than a point above what their intakes predict.
  3. Schools, not the place. There is no Chichester district effect: the differences that matter are between its schools.
  4. Practice. In Chichester, reduced timetables run at 1.6 times the national rate. These are choices made within schools, and neighbouring districts make them differently.
  5. The county. West Sussex’s own effect for disadvantaged pupils is -3.8% (131st of 151), distinguishable from zero, and it applies to every school here. The county questions in the West Sussex document apply here as well.

Notes on method

Methods and sources are those of the East Sussex document. District membership comes from each school’s postcode (ONS postcode directory, via postcodes.io). Absence and exclusions for the district are summed over its schools, including any predecessor or successor URNs. This document is generated from templates/district_report.qmd by R/20_district_reports.R, from data built by R/17_area_analysis.R, R/18_district_effects.R and R/19_trust_effects.R. Its format is described in AREA_REPORTS.md.