Safeguarding - Just4SBMs

SAFEGUARDING

Originally appeared in Just4SBMs magazine.

Subscribe at learning.tribalgroup.com

Safeguarding Alan Cowley, a leading education consultant, looks at two areas of safeguarding that have proved problematic and suggests how School Business Managers can ensure that their experience of Ofsted is a positive one.

16

just4SBMs n Issue 21 SPRING 2010

SAFEGUARDING

H

Originally appeared in Just4SBMs magazine.

Subscribe at learning.tribalgroup.com

ave you heard the one about the primary school receptionist who thought she was being friendly to the Ofsted team as they arrived in her school to start the inspection process and so ushered them into their designated workspace without checking their ID and signing them in?

Or the one about the Ofsted inspector (just happened to be the one checking safeguarding arrangements on the first day of inspection) who entered the school by a back door and engaged pupils in conversation without displaying any identification?

Or the one about the school that was threatened with closure by lunchtime if it couldn’t show that it had evidence of CRB clearance for members of staff in other schools and colleges where pupils were being taught off-site as part of diploma programmes?

I have. I’ve even met senior staff from the schools where these and other similar things have occurred.

Does it worry me? Not if Ofsted are following the letter of the law and there is a clear understanding by both parties about what the rules are and how they should be applied.

Perhaps the starting point for some schools should be the realisation that an Ofsted inspection isn’t so much a hoop to jump through, as a way of providing them with a balanced comparison as to how their school is performing in a number of areas against a set of nationally standardised norms. In the case of the newly defined safeguarding agenda, one of the main drivers is to establish whether what has been enshrined within school policy is actually happening.

Fundamentally, there can be no

more important area to test than whether a school is doing what it says it is to protect young people.

There can be no more important area to test than whether a school is doing what it says it is to protect young people One of the criticisms often levelled against those of us who work in schools, and I speak as a former secondary school teacher and school leader with over 34 years experience, is that we don’t live or work in the ‘real world’.

Whilst I wouldn’t agree with this absolutely, I think that it could be argued that sometimes it is easy to treat the school environment as being separate and apart from the ‘outside world’. As we know, this slightly false world can be a real boon to many children as it can represent a constant, predictable factor in what for them may be a very inconstant and unpredictable world. Some could even argue that by raising an awareness with children of a need to be safeguarded within school, we are undermining the very thing we are aiming to protect – innocence.

I believe that these points represent reasons to approach safeguarding sensitively, rather than not at all. So what should be in place?

Ofsted categorise safeguarding as being not just about protecting children from deliberate harm, but also the consideration of: ■■ pupils’ health and safety

just4SBMs n Issue 21 SPRING 2010

■■ bullying ■■ racist abuse ■■ harassment and discrimination ■■ use of physical intervention ■■ meeting the needs of pupils

with medical conditions ■■ providing first aid ■■ drug and substance misuse ■■ educational visits ■■ intimate care ■■ internet safety ■■ issues which may be specific

to a local area or population, for example gang activity ■■ school security Each of these points is best served by a greater understanding of the school’s place within its community, which is why Community Cohesion, which will be the focus of an article in the next issue of Just4SBMs, has become such a vital part of the specialist schools programme and Ofsted inspection. So, how does your school audit the threat to your pupils, if any, from each of these? How well do you know your communities and the problems and challenges your school faces?

And above all, as far as Ofsted is concerned, how can you prove that you know, and can show evidence, that positive action has been taken to do something about the situation?

With such a short time available for the inspection process, the provision of evidence is vital. For this reason I suggest that schools revisit not just their policies but their practices as well. So when an Ofsted inspector asks you if you can prove that all staff who come into contact with your students have CRB clearance, you can give them concrete evidence, not just reassurance.

Make sure that you have a fully up-to-date Single Central Record (now, not just in time for Ofsted) and that every line is filled in correctly; no short-cuts. Naturally, this should already exist for all

17 3

SAFEGUARDING

Originally appeared in Just4SBMs magazine.

Subscribe at learning.tribalgroup.com

of your permanent and parttime staff but what about your supply teachers, ITT students and teachers in partner schools who teach your pupils? Those schools that use their own pool of supply teachers must ensure that they have enhanced CRB clearance and that the details are recorded on the SCR. However, if you use an agency for your supply staff it is sufficient to have written confirmation from the agency for each individual supply teacher that the CRB check has been done, by whom and the date it was carried out.

This information should also carry the signature of the person from your school who has checked its veracity and the date that it was checked. The same applies to ITT students and teachers from other establishments. The important

18

thing is making sure that you have a hard copy of the evidence.

With so many soft federations being created to facilitate such courses as the diplomas, it makes really good sense for schools to make this an agenda item at federation meetings and agree a short-term date by which letters of confirmation can be delivered to all partner schools. Being a ‘belt-and-braces’ man I would also suggest that any written confirmation of CRB clearance that is sent from one school to another bears the signature of not just the school’s business manager but also the headteacher and chair of governors, and the date that it was checked . Why? If you’re trying to demonstrate that this is an issue you take seriously, what better way than to show that

just4SBMs n Issue 21 SPRING 2010

Make sure that you have a fully up-to-date Single Central Record (now, not just in time for Ofsted) you’ve had the details checked and verified by three of the most senior personnel in the school?

Visitors within school On one hand we have the Community Cohesion agenda which encourages schools to respond to the needs of the local community by making school

SAFEGUARDING

Originally appeared in Just4SBMs magazine.

Subscribe at learning.tribalgroup.com

facilities such as sports halls, swimming pools, theatres and computer suites available for use by the wider public, and on the other we have safeguarding which aims to establish the school environment as a safe haven where children cannot fall prey to predatory adults. School leaders now have to balance these competing demands without sacrificing the paramount responsibility of ensuring the safety of the pupils. How do we manage this?

All schools should by now have adopted the best practice of having all members of staff wearing an identity badge One approach that I’m advocating uses a colour coded system of badges for visitors. All schools should by now have adopted the best practice of having all members of staff wearing an identity badge at all times. These badges should be distinctive, prominently worn and display a recognisable photo of the member of staff. Schools are considered to be very safe places by pupils and it is the very point that there is mutual trust that makes it easier for us all to be off our guard.

Visitors to your school site will fall into two (perhaps three but more of that later) categories: those such as governors and visiting professionals, who we know have an enhanced CRB check; and others, such as parents, for whom we do not carry such information.

Where the school does not

automatically carry evidence of the CRB clearance, for example for social workers or educational psychologists, a protocol needs to be established that when the date and time of a meeting has been arranged, confirmation of CRB clearance is also given. Visitors in this category are issued with a visitors’ badge of one colour – let’s say blue.

Visitors to the school site for whom we cannot prove CRB clearance, such as parents, are issued with a visitor badge of another colour – let’s say white.

Pupils and staff must then understand that as visitors move around school only those wearing the coloured badge should be left alone with pupils or be allowed to engage pupils in conversation.

So if a white-badged visitor stops a pupil on the corridor and starts engaging them in conversation, a polite response should be given that, for safeguarding reasons, this isn’t encouraged and an offer should be extended to lead the visitor back to reception or to their meeting point. Needless to say this rule also extends to visitors who are wearing no badge – and this includes Ofsted inspectors who have just managed to walk in through a back door!

Sadly, the third category I mentioned are those parents who we know will never have CRB clearance as they are on the sex offenders list. How do you manage them? I would suggest that the school makes it very clear that arrangements will be made for full access to relevant staff to be made available, but that all meetings will take place off the school site. The introduction of online reporting and associated online information systems in all secondary schools over the next year will enable a far freer flow of information to parents and assist this process.

just4SBMs n Issue 21 SPRING 2010

The reception area should be the first port of call for all visitors

Of course, the signing-in of visitors is one area that screams out for schools to exploit modern technologies. Cost-effective systems now abound that allow guests to sign themselves in on touch sensitive screens and produce a photo identity badge whilst keeping a permanent record of all the details on the school’s MIS. This frees up receptionists to focus on the act of welcoming, rather than on the business of processing, whilst removing all the cumbersome and time-consuming administration tasks associated with storing old visitor books. The reception area should now be the first port of call for all visitors to your school. We should do everything we can to ensure that the experience is as welcoming and straight-forward as possible for all our visitors.

Make sure that, whatever decisions you make on this issue, they are reflected in policy documents and communicated to the pupils and parents in a simple, non-inflammatory way.

The school’s website could also contain details of arrangements for visiting the school.

The main point that we have to remember is that Ofsted see part of their job as ensuring that policy reflects practice, and practice reflects policy. Schools can often be lulled by the thinking that current security procedures are good because there has never been a problem. Sometimes that is the case and careful planning has made it thus. Sometimes our safety record owes more to luck than good planning. It is these cases that Ofsted will unearth.

19 3