Monday, October 22, 2012

Dealing with allegations of abuse against teachers and other staff ...

For up to date statutory guidance on dealing with allegations of abuse, visit the DfE website. The following information was published on 1st October 2012.

This is statutory guidance from the Department for Education. This means recipients must have regard to it when carrying out duties relating to handling allegations of abuse against teachers and other staff.

This guidance is aimed at all schools, local authorities, governing bodies and the FE sector. This guidance relates to all adults working with children and young people, whether in a paid or voluntary position, including those who work with children on a temporary, supply or locum basis. (Note that ?All schools? includes academies, Free Schools, independent schools and all types of maintained schools.)

C2G says: If you are a Chair of Governors dealing with allegations against the headteacher:

  • Inform your local authority designated officer (LADO) as a priority, to get advice on the action to take. (See point 9). (Tip: Find the LADO?s telephone number?by googling ?lado + your local authority? ? this should bring up the local safeguarding board?s contact details:?eg Devon and Wigan)
  • Do NOT automatically suspend the person against whom the allegation has been made. (See point 13)
  • Do not share information about the allegations with other governors (or anyone else) until you have discussed the matter with the LADO. (See point 20)
  • The GB has? a duty of care towards the person against whom the allegation has been made. There should be a named representative to keep them informed of the progress of the case, and if necessary, to offer support. (See points 3,?16 and 17)
  • If an allegation is made against a teacher the quick resolution of that allegation should be a clear priority to the benefit of all concerned. At any stage of consideration or investigation, all unnecessary delays should be eradicated.
  • In response to an allegation staff suspension should not be the default option. An individual should only be suspended if there is no reasonable alternative. If suspension is deemed appropriate, the reasons and justification should be recorded by the school and the individual notified of the reasons.
  • Allegations that are found to have been malicious should be removed from personnel records and any that are not substantiated, are unfounded or malicious should not be referred to in employer references.
  • Pupils that are found to have made malicious allegations are likely to have breached school behaviour policies. The school should therefore consider whether to apply an appropriate sanction, which could include temporary or permanent exclusion (as well as referral to the police if there are grounds for believing a criminal offence may have been committed).
  • All schools and FE colleges should have procedures for dealing with allegations. The procedures should make it clear that all allegations should be reported straight away, normally to the headteacher, principal or proprietor if it is an independent school. The procedures should also identify the person, often the chair of governors, to whom reports should be made in the absence of the headteacher or principal, or in cases where the headteacher or principal themselves are the subject of the allegation or concern. Procedures should also include contact details for the local authority designated officer (LADO) responsible for providing advice and monitoring cases.

Download the guidance here: http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/dealing%20with%20allegations%20of%20abuse%20october%202012.pdf

Extracts from the guidance include these notes:

DUTIES AS AN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE

3. Employers have a duty of care to their employees. They should ensure they provide effective support for anyone facing an allegation and provide the employee with a named contact if they are suspended.

4. This guidance is about managing cases of allegations that might indicate a person would pose a risk of harm if they continue to work in regular or close contact with children in their present position, or in any capacity. It should be used in respect of all cases in which it is alleged that a teacher or member of staff (including volunteers) in a school or FE college that provides education for children under 18 years of age has:

a. behaved in a way that has harmed a child, or may have harmed a child;

b. possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child; or

c. behaved towards a child or children in a way that indicates he or she would pose a risk of harm if they work regularly or closely with children.

5. It is essential that any allegation of abuse made against a teacher or other member of staff or volunteer in a school or FE college is dealt with very quickly, in a fair and consistent way that provides effective protection for the child and at the same time supports the person who is the subject of the allegation.

INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS

6. The procedures for dealing with allegations need to be applied with common sense and judgement. Many cases may well either not meet the criteria set out above, or may do so without warranting consideration of either a police investigation or enquiries by local authority children?s social care services. In these cases, local arrangements should be followed to resolve cases without delay.

7. Some rare allegations will be so serious they require immediate intervention by children?s social care services and/or police. The LADO should be informed of all allegations that come to a school or FE college?s attention and appear to meet the criteria so they can consult police and children?s social care services as appropriate.

8. The following definitions should be used when determining the outcome of allegation investigations:

  • a.?Substantiated: there is sufficient identifiable evidence to prove the allegation;
  • b.?False: there is sufficient evidence to disprove the allegation;
  • c.?Malicious: there is clear evidence to prove there has been a deliberate act to deceive and the allegation is entirely false;
  • d.?Unfounded: there is no evidence or proper basis which supports the allegation being made. It might also indicate that the person making the allegation misinterpreted the incident or was mistaken about what they saw. Alternatively they may not have been aware of all the circumstances;
  • e Unsubstantiated: this is not the same as a false allegation. It means that there is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation. The term, therefore, does not imply guilt or innocence.

9. In the first instance, the head teacher or principal, or chair of governors, chair of the management committee or proprietor of an independent school (the ?case manager?) should immediately discuss the allegation with the LADO. The purpose of an initial discussion is for the LADO and the case manager to consider the nature, content and context of the allegation and agree a course of action. The LADO may ask the case manager to provide or obtain relevant additional information, such as previous history, whether the child or their family have made similar allegations and the individual?s current contact with children. There may be situations when the case manager will want to involve the police?immediately, for example if the person is deemed to be an immediate risk to children or there is evidence of a criminal offence. Where there is no such evidence, the case manager should discuss the allegations with the LADO in order to help determine whether police involvement is necessary.

10.The initial sharing of information and evaluation may lead to a decision that no further action is to be taken in regard to the individual facing the allegation or concern; in which case this decision and a justification for it should be recorded by both the case manager and the LADO, and agreement reached on what information should be put in writing to the individual concerned and by whom. The case manager should then consider with the LADO what action should follow both in respect of the individual and those who made the initial allegation.

11.The case manager (ie the HT or Chair of Governors) should inform the accused person about the allegation as soon as possible after consulting the LADO. It is extremely important that the case manager provides them with as much information as possible at that time. However, where a strategy discussion is needed, or police or children?s social care services need to be involved, the case manager should not do that until those agencies have been consulted, and have agreed what information can be disclosed to the accused. Employers must consider carefully whether the circumstances of a case warrant a person being suspended from contact with children at the school or whether alternative arrangements can be put in place until the allegation or concern is resolved. All options to avoid suspension should be considered prior to taking that step. (Please see further information on suspension below).

12. If the allegation is not demonstrably false or unfounded, and there is cause to suspect a child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm, a strategy discussion should be convened in accordance with Working Together to Safeguard Children. If the allegation is about physical contact, the strategy discussion or initial evaluation with the police should take into account that teachers and other school and FE college staff are entitled to use reasonable force to control or restrain pupils in certain circumstances, including dealing with disruptive behaviour.

13.Where it is clear that an investigation by the police or children?s social care services is unnecessary, or the strategy discussion or initial evaluation decides that is the case, the LADO should discuss the next steps with the case manager. In those circumstances, the options open to the school or FE college depend on the nature and circumstances of the allegation and the evidence and information available. This will range from taking no further action to dismissal or a decision not to use the person?s services in future. Suspension should not be the default position: an individual should be suspended only if there is no reasonable alternative.

?..

SUPPORTING THOSE INVOLVED

16.Employers have a duty of care to their employees. They should act to manage and minimise the stress inherent in the allegations process. Support for the individual is key to fulfilling this duty. Individuals should be informed of concerns or allegations as soon as possible and given an explanation of the likely course of action, unless there is an objection by the children?s social care services or the police. The individual should be advised to contact their trade union representative, if they have one, or a colleague for support. They should also be given access to welfare counselling or medical advice where this is provided by the employer.

17.The case manager should appoint a named representative to keep the person who is the subject of the allegation informed of the progress of the case and consider what other support is appropriate for the individual. For staff in maintained schools, that may include support via the local authority occupational health or employee welfare arrangements. Particular care needs to be taken when employees are suspended to ensure that they are kept informed of both the progress of their case and current work-related issues. Social contact with colleagues and friends should not be prevented unless there is evidence to suggest that such contact is likely to be prejudicial to the gathering and presentation of evidence.

18.Parents or carers of a child or children involved should be told about the allegation as soon as possible if they do not already know of it. However, where a strategy discussion is required, or police or children?s social care services need to be involved, the case manager should not do so until those agencies have been consulted and have agreed what information can be disclosed to the parents or carers. Parent or carers should also be kept informed about the progress of the case, and told the outcome where there is not a criminal prosecution, including the outcome of any disciplinary process. The deliberations of a disciplinary hearing, and the information taken into account in reaching a decision, cannot normally be disclosed, but the parents or carers of the child should be told the outcome in confidence.

Parents and carers should also be made aware of the prohibition on reporting or publishing allegations about teachers in section 141F of the Education Act 2002 (see below). If parents or carers wish to apply to the court to have reporting restrictions removed, they should be told to seek legal advice.

19.In cases where a child may have suffered significant harm, or there may be a criminal prosecution, children?s social care services, or the police as appropriate, should consider what support the child or children involved may need.

CONFIDENTIALITY

20.It is extremely important that when an allegation is made, the school or FE college makes every effort to maintain confidentiality and guard against unwanted publicity while an allegation is being investigated or considered. The Education Act 2011 introduced reporting restrictions preventing the publication of any material that may lead to the identification of a teacher who has been accused by, or on behalf of, a pupil from the same school (where that identification would identify the teacher as the subject of the allegation). The reporting restrictions apply until the point that the accused person is charged with an offence, or until the Secretary of State or the General Teaching Council for Wales publishes information about an investigation or decision in a disciplinary case arising from the allegation. The reporting restrictions also cease to apply if the individual to whom the restrictions apply effectively waives their right to anonymity by going public themselves or by giving their written consent for another to do so or if a judge lifts restrictions in response to a request to do so. The provisions commence on 1 October 2012.

21.The legislation imposing restrictions makes clear that ?publication? of material that may lead to the identification of the teacher who is the subject of the allegation is prohibited. ?Publication? includes ?any speech, writing, relevant programme or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public?. This means that a parent who, for example, published details of the allegation on a social networking site would be in breach of the reporting restrictions (if what was published could lead to the identification of the teacher by members of the public).

22.In accordance with the Association of Chief Police Officers? (ACPO) guidance the police will not normally provide any information to the press or media that might identify an individual who is under investigation, unless and until the person is charged with a criminal offence. (In exceptional cases where the police would like to depart from that rule, e.g. an appeal to trace a suspect, they must apply to a?magistrates? court to request that reporting restrictions be lifted).

23.The case manager should take advice from the LADO, police and children?s social care services to agree the following:

? who needs to know and, importantly, exactly what information can be shared;

? how to manage speculation, leaks and gossip;

? what, if any information can be reasonably given to the wider community to reduce speculation; and

? how to manage press interest if and when it should arise.

RESIGNATIONS AND ?COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS?

24.If the accused person resigns, or ceases to provide their services, this should not prevent an allegation being followed up in accordance with this guidance. It is important that every effort is made to reach a conclusion in all cases of allegations bearing on the safety or welfare of children, including any in which the person concerned refuses to cooperate with the process. Wherever possible the accused should be given a full opportunity to answer the allegation and make representations about it. But the process of recording the allegation and any supporting evidence, and reaching a judgement about whether it can be substantiated on the basis of all the information available, should continue even if that cannot be done or the accused does not cooperate. It may be difficult to reach a conclusion in those circumstances, and it may not be possible to apply any disciplinary sanctions if a person?s period of notice expires before the process is complete, but it is important to reach and record a conclusion wherever possible.

25.So-called ?compromise agreements?, by which a person agrees to resign if the employer agrees not to pursue disciplinary action, and both parties agree a form of words to be used in any future reference, should not be used in these cases. Such an agreement will not prevent a thorough police investigation where that is appropriate. Nor can it override the statutory duty to make a referral to the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) (Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) from December 2012) where circumstances require that.

RECORD KEEPING

26.Details of allegations that are found to have been malicious should be removed from personnel records. However, for all other allegations, it is important that a clear and comprehensive summary of the allegation, details of how the allegation was followed up and resolved, and a note of any action taken and decisions reached, is kept on the confidential personnel file of the accused, and a copy provided to the person?concerned.

27.The purpose of the record is to enable accurate information to be given in response to any future request for a reference, where appropriate. It will provide clarification in cases where future DBS Disclosures reveal information from the police about an allegation that did not result in a criminal conviction and it will help to prevent unnecessary re-investigation if, as sometimes happens, an allegation re-surfaces after a period of time. The record should be retained at least until the accused has reached normal retirement age or for a period of 10 years from the date of the allegation if that is longer.

28.The Information Commissioner has published guidance on employment records in its Employment Practices Code and supplementary guidance, which provides some practical advice on employment retention.

REFERENCES

29.Cases in which an allegation was proven to be false, unsubstantiated, unfounded or malicious should not be included in employer references. A history of repeated concerns or allegations which have all been found to be unsubstantiated, malicious etc. should also not be included in any reference.

TIMESCALES

30.It is in everyone?s interest to resolve cases as quickly as possible consistent with a fair and thorough investigation. All allegations must be investigated as a priority to avoid any delay. Target timescales are shown below: the time taken to investigate and resolve individual cases depends on a variety of factors including the nature, seriousness and complexity of the allegation, but these targets should be achieved in all but truly exceptional cases. It is expected that 80 per cent of cases should be resolved within one month, 90 per cent within three months, and all but the most exceptional cases should be completed within 12 months.

31.For those cases where it is clear immediately that the allegation is unfounded or malicious, they should be resolved within one week. Where the initial consideration decides that the allegation does not involve a possible criminal offence it will be for the employer to deal with it, although if there are concerns about child protection, the employer should discuss with the LADO. In such cases, if the nature of the allegation does not require formal disciplinary action, the employer should institute appropriate action within three working days. If a disciplinary hearing is required and can be held without further investigation, the hearing should be held within 15 working days.

??

SUSPENSION

35.The possible risk of harm to children posed by an accused person should be evaluated and managed in respect of the child(ren) involved in the allegations. In some rare cases that will require the case manager to consider suspending the accused until the case is resolved. Suspension must not be an automatic response when an allegation is reported; all options to avoid suspension should be considered prior to taking that step. If the case manager is concerned about the welfare of other children in the community or the teacher?s family, those concerns should be reported to the LADO or police. But suspension is highly unlikely to be justified on the basis of such concerns alone.

36.Suspension should be considered only in a case where there is cause to suspect a child or other children at the school or FE college is/are at risk of significant harm or the case is so serious that it might be grounds for dismissal. However, a person should not be suspended automatically: the case manager must consider carefully whether the?circumstances warrant suspension from contact with children at the school or FE college or until the allegation is resolved, and may wish to seek advice from their personnel adviser and the LADO.

37.The case manager should also consider whether the result that would be achieved by immediate suspension could be obtained by alternative arrangements. In many cases an investigation can be resolved quickly and without the need for suspension. If the LADO, police and children?s social care services have no objections to the member of staff continuing to work during the investigation, the case manager should be as inventive as possible to avoid suspension. Based on assessment of risk, the following alternatives should be considered by the case manager before suspending a member of staff:

? redeployment within the school or college so that the individual does not have direct contact with the child or children concerned;

? providing an assistant to be present when the individual has contact with children;

? redeploying to alternative work in the school or college so the individual does not have unsupervised access to children;

? moving the child or children to classes where they will not come into contact with the member of staff, making it clear that this is not a punishment and parents have been consulted; or

? temporarily redeploying the member of staff to another role in a different location, for example to an alternative school or college or work for the local authority or academy trust.

38.These alternatives allow time for an informed decision regarding the suspension and possibly reduce the initial impact of the allegation. This will, however, depend upon the nature of the allegation. The case manager should consider the potential permanent professional reputational damage to employees that can result from suspension where an allegation is later found to be unsubstantiated, unfounded or maliciously intended.

39.If immediate suspension is considered necessary, the rationale and justification for such a course of action should be agreed and recorded by both the case manager and the LADO. This should also include what alternatives to suspension have been considered and why they were rejected.

40.Where it has been deemed appropriate to suspend the person, written confirmation should be dispatched within one working day, giving as much detail as appropriate for the reasons for the suspension. It is not acceptable for an employer to leave a person who has been suspended without any support. The person should be informed at the point of their suspension who their named contact is within the organisation and provided with their contact details.

??.

ACTION IN RESPECT OF UNFOUNDED OR MALICIOUS ALLEGATIONS

51.If an allegation is determined to be unfounded or malicious, the LADO should refer the matter to the children?s social care services to determine whether the child concerned is in need of services, or may have been abused by someone else. If an allegation is shown to be deliberately invented or malicious, the headteacher, principal or proprietor should consider whether any disciplinary action is appropriate against the pupil who made it; or whether the police should be asked to consider if action might be appropriate against the person responsible, even if he or she was not a pupil. In September 2010 the Crown Prosecution Service published guidance for the police on harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Access the complete document here: http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/dealing%20with%20allegations%20of%20abuse%20october%202012.pdf

For information about the new law giving the right of anonymity to staff accused of abuse, see also: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/teachermisconduct/a00214891/anonymity-teachers-accused-

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Like this:

Be the first to like this.

Source: http://clerktogovernors.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/dealing-with-allegations-of-abuse-against-teachers-and-other-staff/

the curious case of benjamin button secret service prostitute rich ross april 20 jennifer love hewitt secret service prostitution 4 20

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.