Procedures for managing allegations against
staff/volunteers who work with the children
Scope
1 The
framework for managing cases set out in this guidance applies to a wider range
of allegations than those in which there is reasonable cause to believe a child
is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. It also caters for
cases of allegations that might indicate that the alleged perpetrator is
unsuitable to continue to work with children in his or her present position, or
in any capacity. It should be used in
respect of all cases in which it is alleged that a person who works with
children has:
·
behaved in a way that
has harmed, or may have harmed, a child
·
possibly committed a
criminal offence against, or related to, a child; or
·
behaved towards a
child or children in a way that indicates s/he is unsuitable to work with
children.
2 There may
be up to three strands in the consideration of an allegation:
·
a police investigation
of a possible criminal offence
·
enquiries and
assessment by children’s social care about whether a child is in need of
protection or in need of services consideration by an employer[1]46
of disciplinary action in respect of the individual.
Supporting those involved
3 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 (subject to paragraph 14
below).They should also be kept informed about the progress of the case, and
told the outcome where there is not a criminal prosecution. That includes the
outcome of any disciplinary process.
Note: the deliberations of a disciplinary hearing, and the
information taken into account in reaching a decision, cannot normally be
disclosed, but those concerned should be told the outcome.[2]
4 In cases
where a child may have suffered significant harm, or there may be a criminal
prosecution, children’s social care or the police, as appropriate, should
consider what support the child or children involved may need.
5 The
employer should also keep the person who is the subject of the allegations
informed of the progress of the case, and arrange to provide appropriate
support to the individual while the case is ongoing. (That support may be
provided via occupational health or employee welfare arrangements where those
exist.) If the person is suspended, the employer should also make arrangements
to keep the individual informed about developments in the workplace. As noted in
paragraph 15, if the person is a member of a union or professional association,
they should be advised to contact that body at the outset.
Confidentiality
6 Every
effort should be made to maintain confidentiality and guard against publicity while
an allegation is being investigated/considered.
In accordance with ACPO guidance, the police do 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 might depart from that rule –
e.g. an appeal to trace a suspect – the reasons should be documented and
partner agencies consulted beforehand.) The system of self-regulation, overseen
by the Press Complaints Commission, also provides safeguards against the
publication of inaccurate or misleading information.
Resignations and ‘compromise agreements’
7 The fact
that a person tenders his or her resignation, or ceases to provide their services,
must not prevent an allegation being followed up in accordance with these
procedures. 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 co-operate with the
process. Wherever possible, the
person should be given a full opportunity to answer the allegation and make
representations about it. The process of recording the allegation and
any supporting evidence, and reaching a judgement about whether it can be
regarded as substantiated on the basis of all the information available, should
continue, even if that cannot be done or the person does not co-operate. 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.
8 By the same
token, so-called ‘compromise agreements’ – by which a person agrees to resign,
the employer agrees not to pursue disciplinary action, and both parties agree a
form of words to be used in any future reference – must not be used in these
cases. In any event, such an agreement will not prevent a thorough police
investigation where appropriate, nor can it override an employer’s statutory
duty to make a referral to the Protection of Children Act List or DfES List 99
where circumstances require that (see paragraphs 12.29 and 12.33 respectively).
Record-keeping
9 It is
important that employers keep a clear and comprehensive summary of any
allegations made, details of how the allegations were followed up and resolved,
and of any action taken and decisions reached.
These should be kept in a person’s confidential personnel file and a
copy should be given to the individual.
Such information should be retained on file, including for people who
leave the organisation, at least until the person reaches normal retirement
age, or for 10 years if that is longer.
The purpose of the record is to enable accurate information to be given
in response to any future request for a reference. It will provide
clarification in cases where a future CRB Disclosure reveals information from
the police that an allegation was made but did not result in a prosecution or a
conviction. It will also prevent unnecessary re-investigation if, as sometimes
happens, allegations resurface after a period of time.
Timescales
10 It is in
everyone’s interest to resolve cases as quickly as possible, consistent with a
fair and thorough investigation. Every effort should be made to manage cases to
avoid any unnecessary delay. Indicative target timescales are shown for
different actions in the summary description of the process. These are not
performance indicators: the time taken to investigate and resolve individual
cases depends on a variety of factors, including the nature, seriousness and
complexity of the allegations, but they provide useful targets to aim for that
are achievable in many cases.
Oversight and monitoring
11 LSCB member
organisations, county-level and unitary local authorities and police forces
should each have officers who fill the roles described in paragraphs 6.23 and
6.24.
12 Other
employers’ procedures should identify a senior manager within the organisation
to whom allegations or concerns that a member of staff or volunteer may have
abused a child should be reported (Donna Frost Nursery Manager). Procedures
should make sure that all staff and volunteers know who that person is. The procedures should also identify an
alternative person to whom reports should be made in the absence of the named
senior manager (Aimee Lambe Deputy Manager or Chair of the committee Trevor Fine),
or in cases where that person is the subject of the allegation or concern. The procedures should include contact details
for the LA designated officer responsible for providing advice and liaison and
monitoring the progress of cases, to ensure that cases are dealt with as
quickly as possible, consistent with a fair and thorough process.
Anthony Goble is the LA designated officer
Contact details: 208563, Anthony.goble@torbay.gov.uk
Initial considerations
13 Procedures
need to be applied with common sense and judgement. Some allegations are so
serious as to require immediate referral to social care and the police for
investigation. Others are much less
serious, and at first sight may not seem to warrant consideration of a police
investigation or enquiries by children’s social care. However, it is important to ensure that even
apparently less serious allegations are seen to be followed up, and that they
are examined objectively by someone independent of the organization concerned.
Consequently, the LA designated officer should be informed of all allegations
that come to the employer’s attention and appear to meet the criteria in
paragraph 1, so that s/he can consult police and social care colleagues as
appropriate. The LA designated officer
should also be informed of any allegations that are made directly to the police
(which should be communicated via the police force’s designated officer) or to
children’s social care.
14 The LA
designated officer should first establish, in discussion with the employer,
that the allegation is within the scope of these procedures (see paragraph 1)
and may have some foundation. If the parents/carers of the child concerned are
not already aware of the allegation, the designated officer will also discuss
how and by whom they should be informed. In circumstances in which the police
or social care may need to be involved, the LA officer should consult those
colleagues about how best to inform parents.
However, in some circumstances an employer may need to advise parents of
an incident involving their child straight away – e.g. if the child has been
injured while in the organisation’s care and requires medical treatment.
15 The employer
should inform the accused person about the allegation as soon as possible after
consulting the LA designated officer. However, where a strategy discussion is
needed, or it is clear that police or children’s social care may need to be
involved, that should not be done until those agencies have been consulted and
have agreed what information can be disclosed to the person. If the person is a
member of a union or professional association, s/he should be advised to seek
support from that organisation.
16 If 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 paragraph
5.54. Note: in these cases the strategy
discussion should include a representative of the employer (unless there are
good reasons not to do that) and should take account of any information the
employer can provide about the circumstances or context of the allegation.
17 In cases
where a formal strategy discussion is not considered appropriate – because the
threshold of ‘significant harm’ is not reached – but a police investigation might
be needed, the LA designated officer should nevertheless conduct a similar
discussion with the police, the employer, and any other agencies involved with
the child to evaluate the allegation and decide how it should be dealt with.
(Note: the police must be consulted about any case in which
a criminal offence may have been committed.)
Like a strategy discussion, that initial evaluation may not need to be a
face-to-face meeting. It should share available information about the
allegation, the child and the person against whom the allegation has been made,
consider whether a police investigation is needed and, if so, agree the timing
and conduct of that. In cases where a police investigation is necessary, the
joint evaluation should also consider whether there are matters that can be
taken forward in a disciplinary process in parallel with the criminal process,
or whether any disciplinary action needs to wait for completion of the police
enquiries and/or prosecution.
18 If the
complaint or allegation is such that it is clear that investigations by police
and/or enquiries by social care are not necessary, or the strategy discussion
or initial evaluation decides that this is the case, the LA designated officer
should discuss next steps with the employer. In such circumstances, options
open to the employer range from taking no further action, to summary dismissal
or a decision not to use the person’s services in future. The nature and circumstances of the
allegation and the evidence and information available determine which of the
range of possible options is most appropriate.
19 In some
cases, further investigation is needed to enable a decision about how to
proceed. If so, the LA designated officer should discuss with the person’s
employer how and by whom the investigation will be undertaken. The investigation should normally be
undertaken by the employer. However, in
some circumstances appropriate resources may not be available in the employer’s
organisation, or the nature and complexity of the allegation might point to the
employer commissioning an independent investigation.
Suspension
20 The possible
risk of harm to children posed by an accused person needs to be evaluated and
managed effectively – in respect of the child(ren) involved in the allegations,
and any other children in the individual’s home, work or community life. In some cases this requires the employer to
consider suspending the person. Suspension should be considered in any case
where there is cause to suspect a child is at risk of significant harm, or the
allegation warrants investigation by the police, or is so serious that it might
be grounds for dismissal. People must not be suspended automatically or without
careful thought. Employers must consider carefully whether the circumstances of
a case warrant a person being suspended from contact with children until the
allegation is resolved.
Note: neither the LA, nor the police, nor children’s social
care can require an employer to suspend a member of staff or a volunteer. The power to suspend is vested in the
employer alone. However, where a strategy discussion or initial evaluation
discussion concludes that there should be enquiries by social care and/or an
investigation by the police, the LA designated officer should canvass police/social
care views about whether the accused member of staff needs to be suspended from
contact with children, to inform the employer’s consideration of suspension.
Monitoring progress
21 The LA
designated officer should regularly monitor the progress of cases, either via
review strategy discussions, or by liaising with the police and/or children’s
social care colleagues or the employer, as appropriate. Reviews should be conducted at fortnightly or
monthly intervals, depending on the complexity of the case.
22 If the
strategy discussion or initial evaluation decides that a police investigation
is required, the police should set a target date for reviewing the progress of
the investigation and consulting the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to
consider whether to charge the individual, continue to investigate, or close
the investigation. Wherever possible, that review should take place no later
than four weeks after the initial action meeting. Dates for subsequent
reviews, at fortnightly or monthly intervals, should be set at the meeting if
the investigation continues.
Information sharing
23 In the
initial consideration at a strategy discussion or joint evaluation, the
agencies concerned – including the employer – should share all relevant
information they have about the person who is the subject of the allegation and
about the alleged victim.
24 Wherever
possible, the police should obtain consent from the individuals concerned to
share the statements and evidence they obtain with the employer, and/or
regulatory body, for disciplinary purposes.
This should be done as the investigation proceeds rather than after it
is concluded, to enable the police and CPS to share relevant information
without delay at the conclusion of their investigation or any court case.
25 Children’s
social care should adopt a similar procedure when making enquiries to determine
whether the child or children named in the allegation are in need of protection
or services, so that any information obtained in the course of those enquiries
that is relevant to a disciplinary case can be passed to the employer or
regulatory body without delay.
Action following a criminal investigation or a prosecution
26 The police
or the CPS should inform the employer and LA designated officer straightaway
when a criminal investigation and any subsequent trial is complete, or if it is
decided to close an investigation
without charge, or not to prosecute after the person has been charged. In those
circumstances, the LA designated officer should discuss with the employer
whether any further action is appropriate and, if so, how to proceed. The information provided by the police and/or
children’s social care should inform that decision. Action by the employer,
including dismissal, is not ruled out in any of those circumstances. The range of options open depends on the
circumstances of the case, and the consideration needs to take into account the
result of the police investigation or trial, as well as the different standard
of proof required in disciplinary and criminal proceedings.
Action on conclusion of a case
27 If the
allegation is substantiated and the person is dismissed or the employer ceases
to use the person’s services, or the person resigns or otherwise ceases to
provide his/her services, the LA designated officer should discuss with the
employer whether a referral to the Protection of Children Act List or DfES List
99 is required or advisable, along with the form and content of a referral.
Also, if the person is subject to registration or regulation by a professional
body or regulator – e.g. by the General Social Care Council, General Medical
Council, OFSTED, etc. – the designated officer should advise on whether a
referral to that body is appropriate.
28 If it is
decided on conclusion of the case that a person who has been suspended can
return to work, the employer should consider how best to facilitate that. Most people will benefit from some help and
support to return to work after a very stressful experience. Depending on the
individual’s circumstances, a phased return and/or the provision of a mentor to
provide assistance and support in the short term may be appropriate. The employer should also consider how the
person’s contact with the child or children who made the allegation can best be
managed if they are still in the workplace.
Learning lessons
29 At the
conclusion of a case in which an allegation is substantiated, the employer
should review the circumstances of the case to determine whether there are any
improvements to be made to the organisation’s procedures or practice to help
prevent similar events in the future.
Action in respect of false or unfounded allegations
30 If an
allegation is determined to be unfounded, the employer should refer the matter
to children’s social care to determine whether the child concerned is in need
of services, or may have been abused by someone else. In the rare event that an
allegation is shown to have been deliberately invented or malicious, the police
should be asked to consider whether any action might be appropriate against the
person responsible.
Summary of process
Allegation made to employer
31 The
allegation should be reported to the senior manager identified in the
employer’s procedure immediately, unless that person is the subject of the
allegation, in which case it should be reported to the designated alternative.
32 If the
allegation meets any of the criteria set out in paragraph 1, the employer
should report it to the LA designated officer within one working day.
Allegation made to the police or children’s social care
33 If an
allegation is made to the police, the officer who receives it should report it
to the force’s designated liaison officer without delay, and the designated
liaison officer should, in turn, inform the LA designated officer straightaway.
Similarly, if the allegation is made to children’s social care, the person who
receives it should report it to the LA designated officer without delay.
Initial consideration
34 The LA
designated officer will discuss the matter with the employer and, where
necessary, obtain further details of the allegation and the circumstances in
which it was made. The discussion should
also consider whether there is evidence/information that establishes that the
allegation is false or unfounded.
35 If the
allegation is not patently false and there is cause to suspect that a child is
suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm, the LA designated officer
will immediately refer to children’s social care and ask for a strategy
discussion to be convened straightaway. In those circumstances, the strategy
discussion should include the LA designated officer and a representative of the
employer.
36 If there is
no cause to suspect that ‘significant harm’ is an issue, but a criminal offence
might have been committed, the LA designated officer should immediately inform
the police and convene a similar discussion to decide whether a police
investigation is needed.
That discussion should also involve the employer.
Action following initial consideration
37 Where the
initial evaluation decides that the allegation does not involve a possible
criminal offence, it is dealt with by the employer. In such cases, if the
nature of the allegation does not require formal disciplinary action, appropriate
action should be instituted 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.
38 Where
further investigation is required to inform consideration of disciplinary
action, the employer should discuss who will undertake that with the LA
designated officer. In some settings and circumstances, it may be appropriate
for the disciplinary investigation to be conducted by a person who is
independent of the employer or the person’s line management to ensure
objectivity. In any case, the
investigating officer should aim to provide a report to the employer within
10 working days.
39 On receipt
of the report of the disciplinary investigation, the employer should decide
whether a disciplinary hearing is needed within two working days, and if
a hearing is needed it should be held within 15 working days.
40 In any case
in which children’s social care has undertaken enquiries to determine whether
the child or children are in need of protection, the employer should take
account of any relevant information obtained in the course of those enquiries
when considering disciplinary action.
41 The LA
designated officer should continue to liaise with the employer to monitor
progress of the case and provide advice/support when required or requested.
Case subject to police investigation
42 If a
criminal investigation is required, the police will aim to complete their
enquiries as quickly as possible, consistent with a fair and thorough
investigation, and will keep the progress of the case under review. They should, at the outset, set a target date
for reviewing progress of the investigation and consulting the CPS about
whether to proceed with the investigation, charge the individual with an
offence, or close the case. Wherever
possible that review should take place no later than four weeks after
the initial evaluation, and if the decision is to continue to investigate the
allegation, dates for subsequent reviews should be set at that point. (It is
open to the police to consult the CPS about the evidence that will need to be
obtained in order to charge a person with an offence at any stage.)
43. If the police
and/or CPS decide not to charge the individual with an offence, or decide to
administer a caution, or the person is acquitted by a court, the police should
pass all information they have which may be relevant to a disciplinary case to
the employer without delay. In those circumstances the employer and the LA
designated officer should proceed as described in paragraphs 37–41.
44 If the
person is convicted of an offence, the police should also inform the employer
straightaway so that appropriate action can be taken.
Referral to PoCA list or regulatory body
45 If the
allegation is substantiated, and on conclusion of the case the employer
dismisses the person or ceases to use the person’s services, or the person
ceases to provide his/her services, the employer should consult the LA
designated officer about whether a referral to the PoCA list and/or to a
professional or regulatory body is required. If a referral is appropriate, the
report should be made within one month.
© 2010
[1] For convenience, the term ‘employer’ is
used throughout this guidance to refer to organisations that have a working
relationship with the individual against whom the allegation is made. This includes organisations that use the
services of volunteers or people who are self-employed, as well as service
providers, voluntary organisations, employment agencies or businesses,
contractors, fostering services, regulatory bodies such as Ofsted in the case
of childminders, and others that may not have a direct employment relationship
with the individual, but will need to consider whether to continue to use the
person’s services, or to provide the person for work with children in future,
or to deregister the individual.
Note: in some circumstances, the term ‘employer’ for these purposes encompasses more than one organisation – e.g. where staff providing services for children in an organisation are employed by a contractor, or where temporary staff are provided by an agency. In those circumstances, both the contractor or agency and the organisation in which the accused individual worked need to be involved in dealing with the allegation.
[2]
In deciding what information to disclose, careful
consideration should be given to duties under the Data Protection Act 1998, the
law of confidence and, where relev