How to implement a Low-Level Concerns policy - guide by Farrar and Co.
Updated: 29th April 2024:
"Keeping Children Safe in Education (Part 4)" advises educational institutions to establish specific procedures for handling safeguarding concerns or allegations involving individuals working within or on behalf of the institution, including paid and unpaid personnel. Farrar and Co, an independent law firm in London, have updated their guide on low-level concerns to align with current best practices and ensure its relevance to KCSIE.
Introduction:
Creating a culture where all safeguarding concerns and allegations involving adults, even those not meeting the harm threshold, are shared responsibly and reported is crucial. This approach fosters an open and transparent environment, helps identify inappropriate behaviour early, minimises abuse risks, and ensures adherence to professional boundaries in line with the organisation's ethos and values. Any behaviour not aligning with the organisation's standards and values outlined in the staff code of conduct should be addressed, ranging from inadvertent actions to those that may facilitate abuse intentionally. Clear guidance is provided on reporting, recording, and managing incidents when concerns or allegations about an individual's behaviour might reach the harm threshold.
Concerns/Allegations
In practice, terms like "concern" and "allegation" are often used interchangeably, with some individuals preferring one term over the other. However, the focus should be on whether the behaviour described has the potential to meet the harm threshold, regardless of the terminology used. This distinction is crucial in determining whether the concern necessitates referral or falls into the category of a low-level concern. Emphasising the behaviour described rather than the specific terminology chosen by the reporter is important. A concern or allegation meets the harm threshold when the indicated behaviour suggests that an individual may pose a risk of harm if they continue in their current role involving children, whether through employment or voluntary activity. A concern or allegation is raised if the person:
· Behaved in a manner that has harmed or may have harmed a child.
· Potentially committed a criminal offense against or related to a child.
· Exhibited behaviour toward a child indicating a potential risk of harm.
· Behaved, or may have behaved, in a way that suggests they may not be suitable to work with children.
In cases where behaviour, termed as "transferable risk," occurs outside of the school or college setting and could render an individual unsuitable to work with children, it is recommended to evaluate the risk to children associated with the person's work. If uncertain, guidance should be sought from the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). Safeguarding concerns or allegations about staff members (including supply staff, volunteers, or contractors) that do not meet the harm threshold should be shared following the procedures outlined in the school or college's low-level concerns policy. However, if there is a safeguarding concern or allegation regarding harming or posing a risk to children involving a staff member, the matter should be referred to the headteacher or principal. If the concern involves the headteacher or principal, it should be reported to the chair of governors, chair of the management committee, or proprietor of an independent school. In cases where the headteacher is also the sole proprietor or if there's a conflict of interest, the matter should be reported directly to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).
Sharing low-level concerns:
Organisations serving children should foster openness, enabling staff to freely share concerns about colleagues' conduct, ensuring sensitive handling of issues. Educating adults to recognise concerning behaviour empowers proactive intervention, focusing on code of conduct violations rather than identifying dangerous individuals. This approach emphasises early detection of subtle signs preceding child abuse, integral to preventing grooming. A clear staff code of conduct, enforced consistently and led by committed leadership, is essential. Training should familiarise staff with expected behaviour standards, encourage reporting of concerns, and include real-life examples of the consequences of not reporting.
Learning from serious case reviews:
The reviews highlight the paramount importance of two key elements for organisations in safeguarding children: fostering a culture of openness that acknowledges the possibility of abuse in any organisation, and establishing a robust structure to facilitate the effective reporting and handling of concerns regarding behaviour.
Designing and embedding a low-levels concerns policy:
Organisations are urged to adhere to Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) guidelines by implementing a written low-level concerns policy. This policy aims to empower staff by providing clear procedures for sharing concerns and ensuring compliance. It should be integrated into existing staff codes of conduct or safeguarding policies. Organisational leaders should prioritise designing a tailored policy, ensuring buy-in from all staff. They play a crucial role in effectively communicating the organisation's values and expectations. This approach fosters a culture of responsibility and transparency in safeguarding children.
The low-levels concerns policy should:
· consider their use of terminology, including how they name their policy
· engage and consult with all staff
· engage with trade union or professional association
· deliver high quality training
· incorporate into staff induction
· regular opportunities to discuss policy and provide feedback
· review the policy every 12 months to measure impact
Data Protection Law:
The Data Protection Act permits organisations to process sensitive personal data to protect children from harm. In schools, KCSIE states that recording low-level concerns is necessary, a principle applicable to other organisations with safeguarding duties, supported by inquiries and serious case reviews. Headteachers and designated safeguarding leads must adhere to subject access principles when recording concerns about adults, ensuring children's identities remain protected. While 'mixed data' issues aren't unique to low-level concerns, accuracy and safeguarding value are paramount in record-keeping, with confidentiality maintained even in the face of subject access requests.
How should low-level concerns be held?
While Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) provides clear instructions for record-keeping on concerns meeting the harm threshold, it's less prescriptive about low-level concerns storage. However, it advises organisations to maintain a central file, whether electronic or hard copy, for all low-level concerns, arranged chronologically with a timeline for multiple concerns about one person. The Headteacher/Principal or Safeguarding Lead may store this central file with other safeguarding records, ensuring comprehensive documentation.
Where should the central low-level concerns be kept and for how long?
The recommendation is to maintain a separate, central low-level concerns file. Although KCSIE does not prescribe the storage of records for low-level concerns, it offers guidance, allowing schools and colleges in England to decide where to keep these records. The records must be confidential, securely held with role-based access restrictions, and comply with the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) and the UK GDPR. While legislation doesn't specify retention periods, a purpose-based approach is required. Schools and colleges are advised to decide on the duration of retaining records of low-level concerns, with a recommendation to keep them at least until the individual leaves their employment.
Should a low-level concern be referred to in a reference?
KCSIE emphasises that schools and colleges should only include substantiated safeguarding concerns or allegations in references if they meet the harm threshold. This includes a group of low-level concerns about the same individual. Low-level concerns should not be included in references unless they pertain to issues typically covered in a reference, such as misconduct or poor performance. Therefore, a low-level concern exclusively related to safeguarding (and not misconduct or poor performance) should not be mentioned in a reference.
What is the role of the governing body?
The Governing Body should possess the necessary knowledge to strategically challenge and ensure that the safeguarding policies and procedures in their school or college are effective. This involves verifying that these policies support the implementation of a comprehensive whole-school approach to safeguarding. The Headteacher/Principal or Safeguarding Lead is responsible for regularly updating the Governance Body on the implementation of the low-level concerns policy and providing evidence of its effectiveness.
Finally…
There is ample factual and observational evidence of the need to implement a low-level concerns policy in organisations that work with children. The recording of such concerns is deemed essential for practical reasons to ensure effective and informed safeguarding. Successfully implemented, this policy is expected to foster a healthy, informed, and more effective protective culture for ALL children.
Resources:
The full document can be found here: https://www.farrer.co.uk/globalassets/clients-and-sectors/safeguarding/developing-and-implementing-a-low-level-concerns-policy.pdf
Safer Recruitment Consortium: https://www.saferrecruitmentconsortium.org/
Working Together to Safeguard Children: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children--2
Comments
Post a Comment