FOI Review - Deferral Rates and Related Questions

FOI Review 101002905740

I am writing to request an internal review of Moray Council's handling of my FOI request '2021-2022 P1 Deferral Rates & Related Questions - Moray'. A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2021_2022_p1_deferral_rates_rela_15

Please could the responses provided to questions 1 -3 be reviewed as the totals do not match up. The answers to Q2a, b and c should match the total provided in question 1 but they do not. This is the same for questions 3a, 3b and 3c.

Also, please could you reconsider your decision not to provide numbers fewer than 5 for some answers.  I have received responses from various other councils this year, and in the previous two years I have sent these FoI requests, which contain numbers smaller than 5.

Furthermore, the Information Commissioner's Office upheld my appeal against Moray Council's decision to withhold this information last year, see here :

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/scottish_las_discretionary_defer_17#incoming-1754179

I would therefore be very grateful if you could provide this data.

Original Request - Deferral Rates and Related Questions - Request 101002874119

Response 11-11-21

Following your request for review of our response to the FOI you submitted, Deferral Rates and Related Questions 101002974119, a review meeting was held remotely on 8th November 2021. In attendance were the Acting Records and Heritage Manager, Moray Childcare Partnership Admin Assistant and Relief Information Co-ordinator, in consultation with the Senior Solicitor.
Your questions regarding the figures we provided for questions 1 – 3 were discussed, and it was agreed that, within the set of figures we initially provided, some children who were split-funded were represented twice within the totals. Please see revised figures below:
1) 53
2a) 22
b) 28
c) 3
3a) 22
b) 28
c) 3
Our response to question 4) – ‘How many of the children applying have a December birthday?’ – was discussed. Initially, we applied exemption 38(1)(b) – personal information – due to the low numbers involved in our response. Our initial answer for Q4 was for split placements for children with December birthdays: it was agreed that a total number of requests for discretionary funding is being requested. We can therefore provide the revised total below:
4) 31
Finally, our decision to apply exemption 38(1)(b) – personal information – to our responses for questions 7a) and 7b) was discussed. After further discussion we have decided to supply the requested information. The requested figures are provided below.
7a) 3
b) 2