Fort RoyalAbigail's Place

Inspection, results, pupils and attendance side by side in Worcester.

Summary of the comparison

This page compares Fort Royal and Abigail's Place.

  • Neither school has a composite score. Our score needs published attainment data, which is not available for every school or every nation.

  • Fort Royal was judged strong and Abigail's Place was judged Good.

  • The share of pupils meeting the expected standard at Key Stage 2 has held broadly level at Fort Royal (0.0% in 2022-23, 0.0% in 2024-25).

Side-by-side comparison

Fort Royal versus Abigail's Place compared on inspection, results, pupils and attendance.
Measure WorcesterFort RoyalAbigail's PlaceEngland average
Overview
Our score Not scored Not scored
Local rankingNot rankedNot ranked
InspectionOfsted: StrongStronger figureOfsted: Good
School typeCommunity special school Other independent special school
Age range4-11 5-17
GenderMixed Mixed
Pupils on roll208 22
Capacity200 25
LocationWorcester, WR5 1DR WR5 1RS
GCSE results
CohortNot reported2
Key Stage 2 (SATs)
Reading, writing & maths at expected standard0.0% Not reported62.0%
At higher standard0.0% Not reported8.0%
Pupils
Pupils in the census232 18
Free school meals (ever 6)35.3% 0.0%
English as an additional language7.8% Not reported
SEN support0.0% 0.0%
SEN with an EHC plan100.0% 100.0%
Attendance
Overall absence9.4% Not reported6.2%
Persistent absence27.7% Not reported15.8%

marks the stronger figure on measures with a clear direction. Rows describing a school's intake, such as free school meals, English as an additional language and SEN, carry no marker: they describe who a school serves, not how well it serves them.

Historical trends

Each solid line is one school; the dashed line is the national average.

Pupils on roll

Ethnicity over time

One panel per school: the largest groups across this comparison, one colour per group, on a shared scale.

Fort Royal

Full profiles: Fort Royal · Abigail's Place